matthewh3
Legendary
 Offline
Activity: 1372
Merit: 1003
|
 |
August 26, 2012, 12:24:12 AM |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TalkImg was created especially for hosting images on bitcointalk.org: try it next time you want to post an image
|
|
|
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Francesco
|
|
August 26, 2012, 12:45:58 AM |
|
This just boils down to
to have a cryptocurrency you need something that guarantees transactions are valid
little it matters who you phylosophically think should get the fresh coins: in order to go beyond the pure-fluff stage, you need to answer this question: what secures the network? Bitcoin accomplishes it with mining.
Create a client that reliably validates the transactions using a different method that pleases more your human heart, and you'll have something to propose a Bitcoin 2.0. Until then, we'll stick to big heartless machines, since they are the ones that do work at the moment.
|
|
|
|
|
laurencefass (OP)
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 10
Merit: 0
|
|
August 26, 2012, 06:31:06 AM |
|
this has less to do with pleasing a human heart than solving a growing problem of technological unemployment. is it not the case that human exchanges could be used to collectively "tick the network clock" so that the heartless machines can work only in proportion to the quantity of real exchanges occurring in real life?
there is a golden opportunity here to assign a new level of value to toward community exchange beyond local ledgers: the creation of real, tangible, single-spendable wealth.
|
|
|
|
|
laurencefass (OP)
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 10
Merit: 0
|
|
August 26, 2012, 06:33:18 AM |
|
@matthew: use LETS networks to create bitcoin descendents.
|
|
|
|
|
herzmeister
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1764
Merit: 1007
|
|
August 26, 2012, 08:42:29 AM |
|
technological unemployment
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=luddite+fallacyLook around you. Where are the flying cars promised 50 years ago and the so desperately needed new efficient and green technologies? Don't believe there's nothing to do. The problem is rather structural. It just lacks entrepreneurs taking up the risk to execute. This is also because there are not enough qualified people in certain areas. We software developers are the new worker class of the 21st century. Good ones are searched for desperately. They're currently trying to lower the barriers, make us more "assembly line" compatible and streamline our efficiency with methodologies like agile, scrum, kanban etc... |
|
|
|
|
Francesco
|
|
August 26, 2012, 10:07:15 AM |
|
this has less to do with pleasing a human heart than solving a growing problem of technological unemployment. is it not the case that human exchanges could be used to collectively "tick the network clock" so that the heartless machines can work only in proportion to the quantity of real exchanges occurring in real life?
there is a golden opportunity here to assign a new level of value to toward community exchange beyond local ledgers: the creation of real, tangible, single-spendable wealth.
I understand even less. Even assuming you can find a concrete way to design a currency working how you wish, what have you accomplished then? Technological unemployment is a big problem at least since steam engine in late '700, but in general is an unavoidable symptom of a growing society; more efficiency means less work. The solution is creating new efficient jobs for the ones that have lost their old one; another solution would be lower the number of hours worked per person, but apparently our society isn't ready yet for this. Sure the solution isn't creating money. I hope you realize anytime you create money, existing money loses a corresponding amount of value -since the total value of currencies is limited by the total value of goods that can be purchased. We bitcoiners have found a way to make a huge profit out of the shift from fiat currency to a different system (and to suffer proportionally huge losses if this process fails, ther's no free lunch); there will be a gain for the community, of course, if the new currency is better than the previous as a medium of exchange, but the money generation process is just a transfer of wealth, that lasts as long as the currency shift lasts, and doesn't solve anything. (also because, if the money is generated by trades, doesn't this mean the wealthiests, who can perform more trades, will also get more coins?) |
|
|
|
|
laurencefass (OP)
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 10
Merit: 0
|
|
August 27, 2012, 03:02:18 PM |
|
flying car? http://rt.com/news/hover-bike-star-wars-255/ (ok, its a bike) so now can we get on designing a genuine democratic currency to facilitate real and valuable exchanges and motivate the masses, and not end up as (just) another pyramid of wealth of early adopters (this is the bitcoin model isn't it? free of any kind ethics and morality as it is?). it's clear we have the technology to create "something as valuable as gold" in a digital form. only maybe - at this stage - there is no will within the first generation "gold rush" to share it. ps: scrum and agile are more efficient and democratic than any political, social or financial structure I have encountered to date. Our politicians and treasurers could do well to learn some lessons (if they could get their heads round it). |
|
|
|
|
DeathAndTaxes
Donator
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1218
Merit: 1079
Gerald Davis
|
|
August 27, 2012, 03:11:44 PM |
|
it's clear we have the technology to create "something as valuable as gold" in a digital form. only maybe - at this stage - there is no will within the first generation "gold rush" to share it. Um roughly 100K BTC change hands on the market everday and another 50K BTC or more are involved in transactions. There certainly is a very real will to share. Oh you mean just give them away? LOLZ. BTW Bitcoin is democratic. Miners vote on tx by hashing power. Nobody can be forced to accept a Bitcoin, nobody can be forced to sell a Bitcoin. The entire process is completely voluntary. Kinda hard to get more democratic than that. You seem to continually conflate wealth generation with minting. They aren't the same thing. If you want to mint coins well you need to be a miner however if you wish to store wealth in Bitcoins you simply need to trade something (anything) someone else may want for coins. There are even girls who trade naughty pics for Bitcoins. They certainly aren't miners but they have acquired coins. They are free to hold them, or trade them ("selling" Bitcoins for USD/EUR is simply another form of trade). The idea that a farmer, or lawyers, or architect couldn't participate in the Bitcoin economy without being a miner is simplistic. By that logic the only persons who got wealthy when currencies were in precious metals were miners, an obvious fallacy. |
|
|
|
|
fairgo
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 14
Merit: 0
|
|
August 27, 2012, 03:48:31 PM |
|
Humans make mistakes... Humans get corrupted... Humans get tempted.... Computers DONT!!! trusting a finite creation of currency based on hash solving is much more "trustable" to me...then any "human input... as soon as there is any human involvement I am gonna change my currency... just earn lotta bitcoin and donate to the needy...seems more efficient  |
|
|
|
|
laurencefass (OP)
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 10
Merit: 0
|
|
August 29, 2012, 03:17:12 PM |
|
"BTW Bitcoin is democratic". ok... i'm still following... "Miners vote on tx by hashing power".  and, um, what is the majority of the global population doing while this is going on? fighting austerity measures. i do agree "miners don't get rich". that's an absurd thought. mining companies do. |
|
|
|
|
DeathAndTaxes
Donator
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1218
Merit: 1079
Gerald Davis
|
|
August 29, 2012, 03:34:53 PM |
|
"mining companies do."
semantics. gold mining COMPANIES don't have 100% of the wealth in the world and they didn't even when all money was precious metals.
Minting =/= wealth generation. A concept that you seem to find completely baffling.
Strippers have acquired bitcoins and they didn't do it by mining. If they can figure it out so can you.
|
|
|
|
|
laurencefass (OP)
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 10
Merit: 0
|
|
September 03, 2012, 01:13:20 PM |
|
@death.
your pointless remarks about strippers and my lack of coherence are adding nothing to this conversation which i started with a good intention to see where cryptographic currencies may go next. please may i request you take your learned but limited opinion elsewhere as its not particularly valued here.
Its a simple and obvious historical fact that those who create currency or control mining commodities end up with huge concentrations of wealth. My interest is the evolution of this technology, not the next gold rush, nor to get caught up in the hype.
I think maybe you are blinkered by the technology and don't really have a grasp of the language your trusted currency is written in nor what it is capable of.
However, thank you for your time and opinions.
|
|
|
|
|
organofcorti
Donator
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2058
Merit: 1007
Poor impulse control.
|
|
September 03, 2012, 01:17:58 PM |
|
A defining part of a cryptocurrency is its security. If you could provide a step by step example of how you would secure your network it might help me follow what you mean.
|
|
|
|
|
Etlase2
|
|
September 03, 2012, 01:19:39 PM |
|
Its a simple and obvious historical fact that those who create currency or control mining commodities end up with huge concentrations of wealth. My interest is the evolution of this technology, not the next gold rush, nor to get caught up in the hype.
D&T is pretty heavily ingrained in the bitcoin sycophant army. Again I'll refer you to my sig for my proposal for Decrits. Miners don't control the currency because by them creating new currency, much more currency is given away freely to the network, so they are working against their own best interest unless it is profitable to mine. Interested coders are certainly welcome. |
|
|
|
organofcorti
Donator
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2058
Merit: 1007
Poor impulse control.
|
|
September 03, 2012, 01:28:37 PM |
|
Its a simple and obvious historical fact that those who create currency or control mining commodities end up with huge concentrations of wealth. My interest is the evolution of this technology, not the next gold rush, nor to get caught up in the hype.
D&T is pretty heavily ingrained in the bitcoin sycophant army. Again I'll refer you to my sig for my proposal for Decrits. Miners don't control the currency because by them creating new currency, much more currency is given away freely to the network, so they are working against their own best interest unless it is profitable to mine. Interested coders are certainly welcome. Doesn't this have an impact on network security? |
|
|
|
|
Etlase2
|
|
September 03, 2012, 02:05:34 PM |
|
Security is entirely provided by share holders and does not require massive amounts of energy or hardware.
|
|
|
|
|
firefop
|
|
September 03, 2012, 08:47:06 PM |
|
this has less to do with pleasing a human heart than solving a growing problem of technological unemployment. is it not the case that human exchanges could be used to collectively "tick the network clock" so that the heartless machines can work only in proportion to the quantity of real exchanges occurring in real life?
there is a golden opportunity here to assign a new level of value to toward community exchange beyond local ledgers: the creation of real, tangible, single-spendable wealth.
Sure for the price of a mining rig and about 20 human powered alternators attached to stationary bicycles... you could turn human labor into bitcions. But why would you want to? |
|
|
|
|
