Post-2007 SecondLife (sans admins), here we come!

[Gyrsur]

Don't get too excited. Gavin has already promised a September surprise that is supposed to "create stability" in the bitcoin economy. We may yet be under the control of some authority to prevent this exploration. It's really sad to see him keep this secret from everyone and just spring it on us the way he plans on doing.

of course, the saint satoshi...  

[jbreher]

Couple observations:

Linden Lab is the central bank that issues $L. Bitcoin has no CB. Ergo, no step 8 is possible.

Linden Lab finanaces itself mostly through three routes. The first is in rental of server space or resources, in the form of virtual real estate. The second is in paid premium accounts. The last, and it is not an insignificant one, is in sale of $L for fiat to inworld residents and others. If they switched to BTC, thet would be abandoning this revenue source. IOW, don't expect SL to accept BTC any time soon.

I have done a few BTC transactions inworld. However, these are peeer-to-peer. The SL viewers have built-in support for $L. The friction of using BTC is orders of magnitude higher. Accordingly, it seems unlikely that BTC will ever achieve widespread use in SL.

There are a number of technically-similar virtual worlds. Most of these are open source at their core. These may be ideal for BTC adoption. Personally, I feel that what SL has that these other worlds do not is a real functioning currency. Integrating BTC into OpenLifeGrid may lead to the masses adopting that world in preference to SL.

[Raralith]

I hate to say this but this "unveiling of number 8" isn't always a good thing. So far in history there is a reason why the heavy hand of authority comes into play, and unsurprisingly after markets have been deregulated for a time period, and turned into a steaming pile of shit. I personally believe that human nature falls into two social categories - those that take advantage of people and those that are taken advantaged of. There will be other pirateat40's with get rich quick ponzi schemes, there will be other Matt's that make reckless bets and don't pay up, and there will be many other denizens that will be far worse than these two combined; at this point in time, it's a simple race to the bottom really.

So, what happens in a completely unregulated market? Is it all a house of cards and one blow away from oblivion because there is no trust? Do all the weak hands, and/or naive investors all leave? Will people finally wise up after being scammed (maybe numerous times) and understand that this isn't a game? You are right, we are going into an unknown, but no one really knows if this will be the end or beginning.

[the_thing]

I hate to say this but this "unveiling of number 8" isn't always a good thing. So far in history there is a reason why the heavy hand of authority comes into play, and unsurprisingly after markets have been deregulated for a time period, and turned into a steaming pile of shit. I personally believe that human nature falls into two social categories - those that take advantage of people and those that are taken advantaged of. There will be other pirateat40's with get rich quick ponzi schemes, there will be other Matt's that make reckless bets and don't pay up, and there will be many other denizens that will be far worse than these two combined; at this point in time, it's a simple race to the bottom really.

So, what happens in a completely unregulated market? Is it all a house of cards and one blow away from oblivion because there is no trust? Do all the weak hands, and/or naive investors all leave? Will people finally wise up after being scammed (maybe numerous times) and understand that this isn't a game? You are right, we are going into an unknown, but no one really knows if this will be good or bad.

Free market not only gives freedom to individuals. It also liberates society from burden of the weak members.
The weak must perish, so the strong may flourish.

[Raralith]

Free market not only gives freedom to individuals. It also liberates society from burden of the weak members.
The weak must perish, so the strong may flourish.

To a certain degree that could be true, but the world isn't a zero sum game. The majority of the world are the weak, they are the followers that take orders from the strong, but what happens if the weak leave (or are "liberated" as you eloquently put it)? You just end up with an empty sandbox, you end up with BitCoins that no one uses nor will use. There has to be a balance, harmony, somewhere, but a "dog eat dog world" certainly doesn't promote this. Bottom line, a 100% deregulated market is the same coin as a 100% regulated market as both are so far in the extremes they are right next to each other.

I do have a financial stake, as do a vast majority of people on these forums, and I hope it doesn't go down the drain. Looking at what has happened as of late, it doesn't look too good. BitCoin is a test, something that really hasn't been done in the past, but human nature has been put to the test numerous times, and it has almost always ended quite barbarically. If it ends well, we'll all be profit, and we can show the world that we as humans can "contain our animal urges and learn restraint." If it doesn't, it just goes to show that we are just wild (albiet refined) animals and that some regulation is better than no regulation.

[jbreher]

Free market not only gives freedom to individuals. It also liberates society from burden of the weak members.
The weak must perish, so the strong may flourish.

...There has to be a balance, harmony, somewhere, but a "dog eat dog world" certainly doesn't promote this. Bottom line, a 100% deregulated market is the same coin as a 100% regulated market as both are so far in the extremes they are right next to each other.

At some level, the only practical difference between a 100% regulated society and a 100% deregulated society, is that in the regulated case the big dogs can use the coercive power of the state to justify eating the little dogs.

[Raralith]

At some level, the only practical difference between a 100% regulated society and a 100% deregulated society, is that in the regulated case the big dogs can use the coercive power of the state to justify eating the little dogs.

Oh, I completely agree, it's two sides of the same coin; one ends with us killing each other, the other ends with a bigger entity killing us but either way, it's not a happy ending. What I saying though is that we shouldn't be allergic to any regulation, that rules put in place sometimes can be beneficial. A good example is the simple traffic light where a red light means we stop and a green light means we go. We give up the power to drive however we want, maniacally or safely, for the greater of society. Finding a good balance of regulation is important, but BitCoin lacks this safety net so the only choice we have is to hope to whatever deity we pray to that we stay on track and never fall in the first place. My post was simply for those cheerleaders waving their 100% deregulation pom poms that the grass is not always greener on the other side.

[Rassah]

At some level, the only practical difference between a 100% regulated society and a 100% deregulated society, is that in the regulated case the big dogs can use the coercive power of the state to justify eating the little dogs.

Oh, I completely agree, it's two sides of the same coin; one ends with us killing each other, the other ends with a bigger entity killing us but either way, it's not a happy ending. What I saying though is that we shouldn't be allergic to any regulation, that rules put in place sometimes can be beneficial. A good example is the simple traffic light where a red light means we stop and a green light means we go. We give up the power to drive however we want, maniacally or safely, for the greater of society. Finding a good balance of regulation is important, but BitCoin lacks this safety net so the only choice we have is to hope to whatever deity we pray to that we stay on track and never fall in the first place. My post was simply for those cheerleaders waving their 100% deregulation pom poms that the grass is not always greener on the other side.

Even if we don't have regulations, we can still have agreements everyone follows. And maybe after a while of some members causing too much havoc, without government regulations we'll simply, as a society, agree on being much more strict about that sort of thing. Maybe eventually it will be considered normal for many people to have some small bounties on them in the black market, and for people to keep track of how much they are pissing someone else off, lest it reaches high enough for someone to offer to work for said bounty. Who knows.
I'm not saying that whatever Bitcoin will have at the next stage will be good, or bad. We don't really have a clear answer to that, since it won't be anything like the typical Stage 8. I am saying that, to me, anyway, the next stage should be very interesting to watch.

[Gabi]

As far as i know Second Life doesn't have a real "economy". Yes you can buy linden dollars and give them to other ppl in exchange for something, but this isn't an economy, it's just "buy from linden labs, give to player"

If we consider the MMO world and we want a real Economy, then we must consider EVE Online. It even has scams. And the ingame money has a value because people will give you euro/dollar/bitcoins to get it to build fleets and armies, not just because linden labs says "it is worth xx"

[SgtSpike]

As far as i know Second Life doesn't have a real "economy". Yes you can buy linden dollars and give them to other ppl in exchange for something, but this isn't an economy, it's just "buy from linden labs, give to player"

If we consider the MMO world and we want a real Economy, then we must consider EVE Online. It even has scams. And the ingame money has a value because people will give you euro/dollar/bitcoins to get it to build fleets and armies, not just because linden labs says "it is worth xx"

Bad argument is bad.

Second Life and EVE currencies are almost identical, and I'm not sure why you are trying to separate the two.
- Both currencies can be exchanged for real-world fiat.
- Both currencies can be used to buy virtual in-game items.
- Both currencies have (or used to have) investment scams, HYIP's, and all the good stuff that goes along with unregulated monies.
- Both currencies have value.

[Gabi]

In Second Life you have fun in the different worlds and...that's all.

In EVE you fight. You fight for resources, for control of systems, for supremacy. You have thousands of players busy in different alliances to produce EVERYTHING they need, from the simplest frigate to the most complex super-capital ship and space stations. You must conquer and hold systems, exploit moons, get hundreds of different resources. And you can't do that alone, this is not World of Warcraft where you must go farm the instances to drop the super sword because it's "bind on pickup" and you can't buy it. Thousands of ppl specialize in different things. If you want a super capital ship you don't have to produce it yourself, you can just buy it. Who produce them don't have to mine the minerals, they just buy them, make the ship and sell it. And so on.

In my opinion this simulate much better the free market than second life. An alliance risk to disappear if the leaders are so fools to lose their money in a ponzi scheme. So not only they lose money but you see other alliances exploiting this to destroy them

[SgtSpike]

In Second Life you have fun in the different worlds and...that's all.

In EVE you fight. You fight for resources, for control of systems, for supremacy. You have thousands of players busy in different alliances to produce EVERYTHING they need, from the simplest frigate to the most complex super-capital ship and space stations. You must conquer and hold systems, exploit moons, get hundreds of different resources. And you can't do that alone, this is not World of Warcraft where you must go farm the instances to drop the super sword because it's "bind on pickup" and you can't buy it. Thousands of ppl specialize in different things. If you want a super capital ship you don't have to produce it yourself, you can just buy it. Who produce them don't have to mine the minerals, they just buy them, make the ship and sell it. And so on.

In my opinion this simulate much better the free market than second life. An alliance risk to disappear if the leaders are so fools to lose their money in a ponzi scheme. So not only they lose money but you see other alliances exploiting this to destroy them

Ok, I see what you're saying, and fair enough.  In second life, the activities are limited to only pacifist ones.  Eve gives more freedom and more activities, including those relating to warfare and clanship, which results in a better-simulated economy.  I can agree to that.

[Raralith]

Even if we don't have regulations, we can still have agreements everyone follows. And maybe after a while of some members causing too much havoc, without government regulations we'll simply, as a society, agree on being much more strict about that sort of thing. Maybe eventually it will be considered normal for many people to have some small bounties on them in the black market, and for people to keep track of how much they are pissing someone else off, lest it reaches high enough for someone to offer to work for said bounty. Who knows.
I'm not saying that whatever Bitcoin will have at the next stage will be good, or bad. We don't really have a clear answer to that, since it won't be anything like the typical Stage 8. I am saying that, to me, anyway, the next stage should be very interesting to watch.

Self regulation has just a sordid of history as everything else we've discussed. Without government regulation, there will always be people that say 7% WPR, and there will always be people more than willing to send an anonymous person with "solid forum reputation" their money. While the FCC doesn't have a 100% track record, a lot of these schemes done here are no where on the same level of sophistication as Madoff or Sanford, and would have never, ever pass the smell test. This whole idea of "getting the weak hands out," "the strong survive," and "we'll take care of it ourselves" is simply not good for business. I've read countless people say that what pirateat40 did was good for the BitCoin economy. No, it wasn't. Anytime someone gives up on BitCoins means that person is not going to accept or demand payment in BitCoin, one less person that will spread the word of how useful it is, one less consumer willing to spend with this currency. This is a numbers game, a sad state of mobocracy, but it is what it is; we can be the smartest people in the world with the best idea ever but if no one wants to play with us, we are doomed.

Honestly, at this point, there's not much we can do but hope for the best. We set our path, placed our bets based off of what we thought, and tossed the dice some time ago. However the dice may land, let's just hope we bet right.

[mc_lovin]

good read, if not epic post!

[Tuxavant]

Hmmm. Imagine an open source virtual world protocol with no central authority? I might never leave the computer!

This and similar properties are what make Bitcoin so exciting to me. There are several firsts for humanity to explore: truly deflationary currency, ability to recover money from disaster (backups), non-seizable, money stored in your brain - just to name a few. These things have never been experienced by humanity before and we get to watch it play out for history.

[markm]

Hmmm. Imagine an open source virtual world protocol with no central authority?

That is what Open Simulator is. You can run it yourself on your own machine, I can run it myself on my own machine, we can visit each other's "worlds". No central authority, if you want me to be able to manipulate your world you can let me, if I want you to be able to manipulate mine I can let you. There is no need to just imagine it, you can run it, visit it, it already exists.

-MarkM-

[jbreher]

That is what Open Simulator is.

It is more than that. And sadly, it is also less. OpenSim sims do not have a common currency. Accordingly, no real functioning economy.

The centralized control that LL has over SL allows for common asset servers that let you carry your identity across sim boundaries. This allows for portable assets. This in turn allows for a system of commerce.

Last I looked OSGrid had no expectation of an av carrying their inventory and being able to rez it in any arbitrary region. At least and hope that it is discernible in its true form by others. Is my impression outdated?

[grondilu]

Not sure I get the exact point of this thread, but it makes me think of this idea I red once, according to which the Internet itself is a MMORPG.

[jbreher]

The client is open source, you can pay someone to add whatever you want to it.  I talked to a dev about adding support last year and he said he could do it.

Adding BTC support integrated into the viewer would be a solid step in the right direction. This would liklely bring a number of new people into the Bitcoin world overnight.

OTOH, there is still the asset server problem. How is a random viewer used by a random av in a random region supposed to know how to render UUID 762354-9834598-8734 without common asset servers?

[edmundedgar]

Since the discussion has moved onto Bitcoin / OpenSim, I thought I'd post an update on the work I've been doing to integrate them.

This is my money server, which just about works, but not yet securely:
https://github.com/edmundedgar/Mod-FreeMoney

I'll post another announcement when it's finished enough for people to install on a non-experimental basis.

It's based on a module originally designed to do PayPal transactions, and I've kept the PayPal functionality in there (you can turn it on or off in config). I'm hoping this will make it more attractive to grid admins who don't know enough about Bitcoin yet to bet the farm on it.

It doesn't handle any of the user's money - it just keeps a list of addresses for avatars, prompts them to pay the appropriate address and delivers their inventory when the payment is complete. It has functionality built in to use www.coinapult.com to pay people who don't have a Bitcoin address registered yet, but that's not currently usable because whoever did Coinapult has dropped off the face of the earth and won't issue an API key.

I think this will be quite useful, but there's still a bit of friction in the payment process - you have to click "Buy" in the viewer, then follow an open URL link, then pay an address either using a bitcoin:// URL or by copy-pasting into your client / e-wallet.

Taking the friction out of the process completely involves hacking the viewer (a bit tricky) then getting everyone to install it (potentially very tricky). But I think this should be the ultimate goal. If anyone can help with this, please let me know.

What I'd like to do for now is to take out _most_ of the friction by making it possible to authorize the money server to tell your wallet to make payments, for a limited time, up to a maximum amount you can specify. My current thinking is to make a hacked version of a client like Electrum and build that feature in. It could also be done with a separate bit of software in the middle to bridge your Bitcoin client and your viewer. Likewise, if anyone can help with this (say hacking Electrum to make an "Electrum OpenSim Wallet" version) please get in touch.