Bitcoin Forum
October 01, 2016, 01:31:00 AM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.13.0 (New!) [Torrent]. Make sure you verify it.
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: [1]
  Print  
Author Topic: technical update in non-technical terms  (Read 921 times)
mpkomara
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 180



View Profile
October 18, 2010, 09:35:51 PM
 #1

There's a small divide growing in the bitcoin community between the group of skilled developers who generate the majority of the coins and the rest of the users (like me).  I notice there's lots of talk about Tahoe-LAFS, but I'll be the first to admit I don't know what's really happening or how it might affect the future of bitcoin.  Anyone out there want to go over the latest in bitcoin tech talk but do it in simple language? 
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1475285460
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1475285460

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1475285460
Reply with quote  #2

1475285460
Report to moderator
MoonShadow
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1666



View Profile
October 19, 2010, 12:27:09 AM
 #2

There's a small divide growing in the bitcoin community between the group of skilled developers who generate the majority of the coins and the rest of the users (like me).  I notice there's lots of talk about Tahoe-LAFS, but I'll be the first to admit I don't know what's really happening or how it might affect the future of bitcoin.  Anyone out there want to go over the latest in bitcoin tech talk but do it in simple language? 

The Tahone-LAFS debate isn't about Bitcoin per se. 

Really, there are two topics that are related here...

First is the debate about establishing a Tahone-LAFS cloud among Bitcoin users for encrypted, off-site storage of their wallet.dat files.  Sort of like trading network shared drives on each other's machines; but using Tahone-LAFS would permit the participants to automaticly encrypt and trade with some RAID-like benefits.

And second, there is a discussion of using Bitcoin as part of a p2p filesharing system to pay for bandwidth consumption, etc., for the hosting machines instead of the more common upload/download ratio limitations. 

It's more complicated than that, but that's the basic idea.  Either way, it's not a debate that would affect Bitcoin development in any negative way.

"The powers of financial capitalism had another far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent meetings and conferences. The apex of the systems was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basel, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world's central banks which were themselves private corporations. Each central bank...sought to dominate its government by its ability to control Treasury loans, to manipulate foreign exchanges, to influence the level of economic activity in the country, and to influence cooperative politicians by subsequent economic rewards in the business world."

- Carroll Quigley, CFR member, mentor to Bill Clinton, from 'Tragedy And Hope'
Anonymous
Guest

October 19, 2010, 02:08:52 AM
 #3

I think it boils down to the fact unless you have a powerful computer or gpu it is pointless to generate. What is needed are more ways to earn btc for performing human actions. For instance Amazons Mechanical turk, The bitcoin Faucet, Pay it Forward and bitcoinmedia where you can earn btc for writing a blog post,making a video or creating a funny photoshop related to bitcoin.

Im a little surprised no one has taken the offer up yet....
Pages: [1]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!