Bitcoin Forum
December 04, 2016, 10:37:04 PM *
News: To be able to use the next phase of the beta forum software, please ensure that your email address is correct/functional.
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 »  All
  Print  
Author Topic: Multicoin, Namecoin, Goldcoin, Silvercoin, OilCoin, 1971coin, backed by bitcoin!  (Read 11116 times)
dacoinminster
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1106


Rational Exuberance


View Profile WWW
July 22, 2011, 09:18:54 PM
 #1

This thread is now locked!

I have decided that I like morpheus' idea better than my own, so I am locking my threads about this stuff, and I encourage anyone interested in concepts like this to check out his thread:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=29135.0


==================================================


I've recently become aware of some of the work that is being done on alternate block chains, and I was pleasantly surprised. Apparently, there are already plans to make alternate block chains piggyback on the hashing power of the bitcoin network:

https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Alternative_Chains

I always assumed that alternate block chains would be doomed because no bitcoin users would want to use them since they would compete with bitcoins for hashing power and e-commerce acceptance. It turns out that is not necessarily true!

If I understand what is going on correctly, these alternate chains will piggyback on bitcoin acceptance and usage.

People are already putting these ideas into use:
http://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=24209.0
http://dot-bit.org/Merged_Mining

I predict that not only will we get alternate blockchains with pegged values, we will also get blockchains that are pegged to gold, silver, oil, google stock, and anything else you can think of. Sweet!!!

All you need is network rules for each chain which hold old-fashioned bitcoins in escrow, then pay them out in proportion to the movements of the commodity being tracked!

It's a bright future for bitcoin. Very bright.

If alternative block chains are created which are pegged to various commodities, and which get their value from bitcoin hashing and holding bitcoins in escrow, there will be bitcoin holders that are worth trillions of dollars, and I don't think that is an exaggeration at all. (Here's how I do the math: http://forum.bitcoin.org/?topic=7985.0)

Some people claim that a distributed currency with a pegged value is not possible. I believe it is possible, and I describe a possible way to implement it here: http://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=30741.msg387215#msg387215

edit: I think this is so important, I'm paying people to post in this thread. Read the rules and post your appalled comments about my forum abuse here: http://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=31057.0

There is now a second thread derived from this one ("The Second Bitcoin Whitepaper" http://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=31645.0). Posts in that thread are also eligible for payment.

Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1480891024
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480891024

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480891024
Reply with quote  #2

1480891024
Report to moderator
1480891024
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480891024

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480891024
Reply with quote  #2

1480891024
Report to moderator
dacoinminster
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1106


Rational Exuberance


View Profile WWW
July 22, 2011, 10:10:06 PM
 #2

Here's a conversation I recorded from the future:

Quote
Jimmy:   Gas is sure cheap right now. I wish I could buy all the gas I want at today's prices like the airlines do.
Joey:      You can!

Jimmy:   How? Commodity trading is so expensive . . .
Joey:      Just buy some Gascoins!

Jimmy:   Gascoins? Is that like bitcoins?
Joey:      Yup! In fact, Gascoins are backed by bitcoins, and each Gascoin is pegged to the value of a gallon of gas! Buy all you want now, and sell them later when gas is more expensive!

Jimmy:   Gee. That sounds pretty easy. I know how to get some bitcoins, but where do Gascoins come from?
Joey:      Just convert your bitcoins to Gascoins to buy however many of them you want. It's an advanced option in the program.

Jimmy:   OK, so who am I betting against?
Joey:      You are betting against anybody who holds AntiGascoins

Jimmy:   AntiGascoins?
Joey:      Yeah, it's like matter and antimatter. For every Gascoin, there is an AntiGascoin. They represent bitcoins held in escrow. That is why the Gascoin and AntiGascoin prices don't perfectly follow market prices all the time. They reach their own equilibrium, but they always converge with the current market price due to arbitrage.

Jimmy:   Wow, thanks! I'll try that.

Of course, the "bitcoins held in escrow" would actually have to be a price stabilized bitcoin such as the ones resulting from the 1971coin/hyperbitcoin pairing I suggested here: http://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=30741.0

Stephen Gornick
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1988



View Profile
July 23, 2011, 12:27:12 AM
 #3

You might wish to change the name of the title of this post as it is confusing.  Namecoin is not backed by bitcoin.

dacoinminster
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1106


Rational Exuberance


View Profile WWW
July 23, 2011, 12:31:03 AM
 #4

You might wish to change the name of the title of this post as it is confusing.  Namecoin is not backed by bitcoin.

According to their merged mining proposal I linked to in post #1 above, it IS backed by bitcoin (backed by bitcoin mining, specifically). I think their latest client actually implements the change.

marcus_of_augustus
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2086



View Profile
July 23, 2011, 01:39:03 AM
 #5


Anti-gascoins ... ? is that something like Mylanta? ... or a brother to Roger Gascoine maybe?

Zerbie
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 73


View Profile
July 23, 2011, 01:41:26 AM
 #6

Why create coins pegged to a particular commodities?  Instead, make a modified system of contract ownership that can be traded through a blockchain accounting system.  For instance, I issue a contract to ship 1 oz of silver to the holder of a contract I issue and then sell it for BitCoins through a block chain.  The owner of the contract can either trade it to someone else for a different type of contract or issue it back to me for redemption.  The block chain would use a similar accounting method to determine who the owner is along with added mechanisms to ensure trade takes place smoothly (e.g... one contract for another contract or BitCoins for the contract).
Stephen Gornick
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1988



View Profile
July 23, 2011, 02:07:29 AM
 #7

According to their merged mining proposal I linked to in post #1 above, it IS backed by bitcoin (backed by bitcoin mining, specifically). I think their latest client actually implements the change.

I don't believe you are using the term "backing" properly:

Quote
Today many private currencies are backed by a commodity to increase asset security and nullify inflation, which can be caused by an issuer increasing money supply.
- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Private_currency#Currency_backing

Though there are exchanges where I can convert namecoins to bitcoins and vice-versa, the values for both are free-floating.  There is no "backing" as far as ensuring that my 1 namecoin can be redeemed for a specific number of bitcoins.

As far as the upcoming change for Namecoin mining -- yes, those running the bitcoin+namecoin mining will mine for both currencies simultaneously.  Both gold and silver can come from the same hole in the ground, but that doesn't mean gold is backed by silver, or vice-versa.

Stephen Gornick
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1988



View Profile
July 23, 2011, 02:22:28 AM
 #8

Instead, make a modified system of contract ownership that can be traded through a blockchain accounting system.

Are you aware of Open Transactions?
 - http://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Open_Transactions
 - http://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=20425.0

Also:
 - http://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=28841.0

Olomana
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 18


View Profile
July 23, 2011, 04:20:32 AM
 #9

Consider gascoins / anti-gascoins.  The problem with pegging a gascoin to a gallon of gas like a futures contract is that the holder of the anti-gascoin (the person who is short one gascoin) has unlimited liability, and he can't place an infinite number of bitcoins into escrow.  (The price of gas can't go below zero, but there's no limit to how high it can go.)  There would have to be some way to manage risk, issue margin calls, etc.

An Intrade-style prediction contract might work better.  For example, a contract might settle at 1 BTC if the price of gas is $5 or greater at the end of the year, or settle at 0 BTC otherwise.  Contracts are created out of nothing whenever a buyer (long) and seller (short) agree on a price.  Maximum escrow is 1 BTC for the short.  Contracts are destroyed whenever a short buys back a contract, or at the time of expiration when all contracts are settled at 1 BTC or 0 BTC.

A small fee on each transaction could keep the miners going.
Zerbie
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 73


View Profile
July 23, 2011, 04:42:17 AM
 #10

Instead, make a modified system of contract ownership that can be traded through a blockchain accounting system.

Are you aware of Open Transactions?
 - http://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Open_Transactions
 - http://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=20425.0

Also:
 - http://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=28841.0


Yes.  Sorta like those.

I envision a tradeable contract.  For example... I create the following text and then sign it with my private key

-------------
Zerbie Contract #: 0000153

I promise to ship the owner of this contract $1 in 90% U.S. coins anywhere in the continental United States.

To redeem, contact me at:

<insert contact information here>

Signed...
PGP key for Zerbie@bitcoin.org
-------------

Now I do an md5sum and attach it to the block chain in one of my BinCoin wallets.  Note that it does not have the text, but simply shows that I own the thing that has the given md5sum.  (Add more checksums to be sure...)  Now I go and sell this contract to whomever trusts me enough to give me BTC for it.  If my reputation is good, I'll get a good price for the contract. 

When I find a buyer, the buyer will give me his email address and his BTC address.  I will send the text of the contract to him as well as opening my wallet and sending him the ownership of the md5sum I created to show the ownership.  The buyer can then do the same for successive buyers of the contract.

When the final owner wishes to redeem the contract, he contacts me, then sends me ownership of the md5sum to show that he owns it and is now redeeming it.  I then take his shipping address and send him the silver.

NOTE: A more advanced system would store the contract distributively so everyone can see the text of the contract and there is no need to ship the text via email.

If my reputation is world rewound, then my contracts will trade for a premium.  If my reputation is shaky, my contracts will trade for a discount, and will probably be redeemed quickly.
phillipsjk
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1008

Let the chips fall where they may.


View Profile WWW
July 23, 2011, 05:52:11 AM
 #11

Now I do an md5sum and attach it to the block chain in one of my BinCoin wallets.  Note that it does not have the text, but simply shows that I own the thing that has the given md5sum.  (Add more checksums to be sure...)  Now I go and sell this contract to whomever trusts me enough to give me BTC for it.  If my reputation is good, I'll get a good price for the contract. 

Please don't use MD5 as a cryptographic hash function anymore.

It is still useful for detecting random file corruption though, or converting random data into a 128 bit number.

James' OpenPGP public key fingerprint: EB14 9E5B F80C 1F2D 3EBE  0A2F B3DE 81FF 7B9D 5160
cunicula
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 756


Stack-overflow Guru


View Profile WWW
July 23, 2011, 12:27:23 PM
 #12

This is a good idea, but how is the infomation about exchange rates fed into the blockchain. You need I thinlk two items of third party data: the current USD exchange rate and the exchange rate between current USD and whatever commodity you are pegging value to. Presumably, humans need to supply this data. How do you incentivize the humans to supply honest data?

▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁
        AltCoinInternalExperts                Get Your Altcoin Promoted On Social Media       
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
jtimon
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1246


View Profile WWW
July 23, 2011, 07:08:47 PM
 #13

This is a good idea, but how is the infomation about exchange rates fed into the blockchain. You need I thinlk two items of third party data: the current USD exchange rate and the exchange rate between current USD and whatever commodity you are pegging value to. Presumably, humans need to supply this data. How do you incentivize the humans to supply honest data?

That's exaclty what I was going to ask.
How the block chain knows if prices of gas went up or down?

If you solve that problem, I have another proposal.

2 different forms of free-money: Freicoin (free of basic interest because it's perishable), Mutual credit (no interest because it's abundant)
Anonymous
Guest

July 24, 2011, 05:11:10 AM
 #14

The big mac blockchain pegged to the average price of a mcdonalds big mac ?

http://www.economist.com/node/16646178?story_id=16646178

 mcblockchain...
marcus_of_augustus
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2086



View Profile
July 24, 2011, 09:03:07 AM
 #15

McCoin

deslok
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 448


It's all about the game, and how you play it


View Profile
July 25, 2011, 02:10:59 AM
 #16

"Backing" bitcoins or any currency with a single resource is never a very good idea since any single comodity can be controled. if a single wealty enough individual wanted to they could inflate and deflate the vaule of bitcions at will. look at our market cap it's less than a hundred million dollars one or a group of sufficently rich people could control the entire market fincially. If bitcions were to be backed by any single comodity the same thing could happen right now however they are treated as a comodity themselves not so much as a currency.

"If we don't hang together, by Heavens we shall hang separately." - Benjamin Franklin

If you found that funny or something i said useful i always appreciate spare change
1PczDQHfEj3dJgp6wN3CXPft1bGB23TzTM
Desolator
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 392



View Profile
July 25, 2011, 04:02:44 AM
 #17

Backing bitcoin-like currencies with commodities seems like an insanely bad idea.  It will take everything wrong with systems like speculative investments in oil causing gas prices to go up and give it an alternate anonymous underbelly.  That's insane.  I still don't quite get the logic on how bitcoin can be merged with anything.  I don't get why they would do it or how they would mathematically make it work.  What's wrong with just having one currency to rule them all?  I know, I know, the main 2 problems are the finite number of bitcoins causing crazy pricing and sauron will declare war on middle earth using bitcoins  Tongue but neither of those should be a big problem for many years.  And wouldn't it be easier to just somehow expand the bitcoin pool with some sort of parallel block chains instead of 2 separate currencies to confuse the hell out of people and make vandors less inclined to accept them?  Can't someone just develop 10 structurally identical chains running in parallel and sharing info with each other but with the same difficulty ratings at all times?
jtimon
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1246


View Profile WWW
July 25, 2011, 06:35:26 AM
 #18

Backing bitcoin-like currencies with commodities seems like an insanely bad idea.

I think is impossible to "back" a currency without introducing centralization.
In this case, he want to use option contracts but I see a few problems.

1) As far as I know, option contracts are not fungible. I didn't get the Gascoin/antigascoin thing.

-Suppose oil is at 10 btc right now. How many btc to buy the oilcoin, a much for the antioilcoin?
dacoinminster, can you elaborate a little bit more on this?

2) If you could peg a chain currency to a commodity using contracts, the options market still needs an arbiter to determine what the price of the commodity is at a given moment. How do you make that arbiter decentralized?


And wouldn't it be easier to just somehow expand the bitcoin pool with some sort of parallel block chains instead of 2 separate currencies to confuse the hell out of people and make vandors less inclined to accept them?  Can't someone just develop 10 structurally identical chains running in parallel and sharing info with each other but with the same difficulty ratings at all times?

But for the bitcoin to go from one chain to another you have to modify the rules of acceptable block in the main bitcoin chain. If you're going to do it, you could just generate more coins within the first one instead of making new chains. But to change such a rule you need to convince more than 51% of the miners...


2 different forms of free-money: Freicoin (free of basic interest because it's perishable), Mutual credit (no interest because it's abundant)
dacoinminster
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1106


Rational Exuberance


View Profile WWW
July 25, 2011, 04:17:32 PM
 #19

Wow. This is great. Paying for posts on a topic that I am interested in is a really fun use for bitcoin.

I will try to be concise, but this will probably be tl;dr for some of you.


I read a bit about OT when it first came out, but I don't claim to understand it completely. At first blush it seems way too complicated for the average Joe to understand and use, and it is not clear to me who is being trusted. With bitcoins, I know I only have to trust an algorithm implemented in Open Source software.

What would be interesting to me would be the "marketing copy" for OT (like how WeUseCoins makes the case for bitcoin). I'd be interested in reading anybody's attempt at marketing copy for OT: a convincing story about who would use OT, under what circumstances, why they would trust it, the "killer app" that makes everyone start using it, how it could change the world, and most importantly (to me) how it could be used to create a black market for currencies, commodities, stocks, bonds, etc.

Consider gascoins / anti-gascoins.  The problem with pegging a gascoin to a gallon of gas like a futures contract is that the holder of the anti-gascoin (the person who is short one gascoin) has unlimited liability, and he can't place an infinite number of bitcoins into escrow.  (The price of gas can't go below zero, but there's no limit to how high it can go.)  There would have to be some way to manage risk, issue margin calls, etc.

An Intrade-style prediction contract might work better.  For example, a contract might settle at 1 BTC if the price of gas is $5 or greater at the end of the year, or settle at 0 BTC otherwise.  Contracts are created out of nothing whenever a buyer (long) and seller (short) agree on a price.  Maximum escrow is 1 BTC for the short.  Contracts are destroyed whenever a short buys back a contract, or at the time of expiration when all contracts are settled at 1 BTC or 0 BTC.

A small fee on each transaction could keep the miners going.

This is a very good summary of the biggest problem with my suggested coin/anticoin model: how to make sure there are enough bitcoins in escrow to cover all possible market actions. I will discuss this more below.

I would LOVE to see a "distributed intrade" powered by bitcoins. There would be a lot of technical challenges, but it may in fact be a better way to create a black/grey market for speculating on tons of different currencies, stocks, commodies, world events, etc than what I have posted about above. The only problem is you need a stabilized currency (otherwise your profits/losses from your bets will be dwarfed by your profits/losses from holding bitcoins to make those bets!)

IMHO, the next major step for bitcoin MUST start with a price-stabilized version of bitcoin, backed by bitcoin value, but providing a way to separate those who wish to hold bitcoin as a speculative investment from those who want to use it as an unvarying store of value for commerce, bets, etc. My guess at one way that might work is here: http://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=30741.0 which was an idea I then extended into this thread.

I am very, very interested in how a price-stabilized extrapolation of bitcoin might be created, with a very simple user experience, and the protocol working behind the scenes to match stabilized bitcoin holders to leveraged bitcoin speculators. This would not (and must not) be a bitcoin replacement, but would have to build on to the existing bitcoin infrastructure.

This is a good idea, but how is the infomation about exchange rates fed into the blockchain. You need I thinlk two items of third party data: the current USD exchange rate and the exchange rate between current USD and whatever commodity you are pegging value to. Presumably, humans need to supply this data. How do you incentivize the humans to supply honest data?

If you want a distributed currency pegged to ANYTHING, this is one of the biggest technological problems to solve. However, consider this: there are also attack vectors on bitcoin that involve fraudulent timestamps. Bitcoin uses a distributed timestamp protocol, where nodes reject timestamps that differ significantly from what they think the time is. I believe the same logic can be extended to exchange rates. If somebody lies about the exchange rate, other nodes will reject that block. Consequently, I consider the problem of distributed exchange rates a (mostly) solved problem.

This is a good idea, but how is the infomation about exchange rates fed into the blockchain. You need I thinlk two items of third party data: the current USD exchange rate and the exchange rate between current USD and whatever commodity you are pegging value to. Presumably, humans need to supply this data. How do you incentivize the humans to supply honest data?

That's exaclty what I was going to ask.
How the block chain knows if prices of gas went up or down?

If you solve that problem, I have another proposal.
Your link led me to this very related thread ("Achieving stable prices through a reference currency"): http://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=11614.0

"Backing" bitcoins or any currency with a single resource is never a very good idea since any single comodity can be controled. if a single wealty enough individual wanted to they could inflate and deflate the vaule of bitcions at will. look at our market cap it's less than a hundred million dollars one or a group of sufficently rich people could control the entire market fincially. If bitcions were to be backed by any single comodity the same thing could happen right now however they are treated as a comodity themselves not so much as a currency.
If bitcoin is successfully extrapolated to provide a stabilized version backed by bitcoins, and then is further extrapolated to allow distributed speculation on stocks, commodities, currencies, etc, the bitcoin black market will be massive. The only ones rich enough to influence it will be the early bitcoin adopters, who would be trillionaires (by USD valuation) Smiley


Backing bitcoin-like currencies with commodities seems like an insanely bad idea.  It will take everything wrong with systems like speculative investments in oil causing gas prices to go up and give it an alternate anonymous underbelly.  That's insane.  I still don't quite get the logic on how bitcoin can be merged with anything.  I don't get why they would do it or how they would mathematically make it work.  .  . .
Regardless of how insanely bad the idea may be, I also think it is inevitable. There is just too much money at stake for bitcoin holders to ignore this potential million-fold increase in bitcoin values (Here's how I do the math: http://forum.bitcoin.org/?topic=7985.0).

As for how it could be done, that is what this thread is about. Maybe it is not possible, but nobody would have thought bitcoin was possible a couple years ago. If it is possible, mark my words: someone will do it. Then all hell will break lose.

Backing bitcoin-like currencies with commodities seems like an insanely bad idea.

I think is impossible to "back" a currency without introducing centralization.
In this case, he want to use option contracts but I see a few problems.

1) As far as I know, option contracts are not fungible. I didn't get the Gascoin/antigascoin thing.

-Suppose oil is at 10 btc right now. How many btc to buy the oilcoin, a much for the antioilcoin?
dacoinminster, can you elaborate a little bit more on this?

2) If you could peg a chain currency to a commodity using contracts, the options market still needs an arbiter to determine what the price of the commodity is at a given moment. How do you make that arbiter decentralized?

For #2, see above my comments on distributed exchange rates above.

For #1, I am not sure that gascoin/antigascoin is the way to go. It is possible that an intrade-like system as discussed earlier might be a better way to do it.

I will say that I imagine gascoins/antigascoins would have to have some sophisticated rules to prevent the bitcoins held in escrow from running out. I'm guessing the rules might involve some of the following ideas:

1) All bitcoins held in escrow could be used as needed when payouts happen, not just the bitcoins from one coin/anticoin pair
2) Anticoins would be fungible. If you bought one, some of your bitcoins might go into escrow if that anticoin was last sold when the commodity had a lower price. Some bitcoins might come out of escrow (to the seller) if the commodity had a higher price at the last sale.
3) If an anticoin was in danger of going "in the red", the protocol might force a sale, similar to a margin call
4) In the event that all the entire escrow fund went "in the red" (like if there was a "run" on the funds similar to a bank run), bitcoins could be created "out of thin air". I recognize this would violate the 21M hard limit, and that would probably never fly with the community. Perhaps instead of real bitcoins, they could be some kind of "IOU" from the escrow fund, redeemable when the fund went back in the black.

Regardless of whether people are trading something that looks like a future's contract (coin/anticoin), something that looks like intrade, or something else entirely, the first problem to solve is how to create a stabilized extrapolation of bitcoin.


dacoinminster
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1106


Rational Exuberance


View Profile WWW
July 25, 2011, 04:25:11 PM
 #20

I think what is needed next is "The Second Bitcoin Whitepaper".

I'm not (necessarily) volunteering to write it, but it would be an ambitious extrapolation of the bitcoin protocol to allow it to create a stabilized currency backed by bitcoin value and hashing, but with the volatility risk offloaded onto leveraged speculators.

I'm sure there is somebody out there who wants to be a billionaire or trillionaire badly enough to make sure this happens.  Smiley

Once we have that, maybe there will be a "Third Bitcoin Whitepaper" which further extends the protocol to create a distributed betting system based on the stabilized coins.

Or perhaps all the black market betting will happen on hidden TOR services, like how the Silk Road operates. I don't really care how it happens, but I am confident that it will.

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 »  All
  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!