Bitcoin Forum
December 11, 2016, 06:20:53 AM *
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]  All
  Print  
Author Topic: Managing a medium of exchange  (Read 3841 times)
Jered Kenna (TradeHill)
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 420



View Profile WWW
April 09, 2011, 02:57:14 PM
 #21

Hmmm, was hoping Todd would reply.
Going to follow this to see what happens. I'm hoping he just had some misconceptions.
Talking about managed and bitcoin in the same sentence.

moneyandtech.com
@moneyandtech @jeredkenna
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1481437253
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481437253

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481437253
Reply with quote  #2

1481437253
Report to moderator
1481437253
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481437253

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481437253
Reply with quote  #2

1481437253
Report to moderator
markm
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1792



View Profile WWW
April 10, 2011, 12:57:52 AM
 #22

Maybe once you scale up / fast foward management might look less infeasible.

Imagine PolitCoin, an alternate blockchain different only in its initial starter block and the port number it uses and the IRC channel it uses, with all "major" nations and multinationals running full clients backed by mega custom-chip dedicated computing facilities.

Would they even need to operate as a friend to friend network in which only such powerful entities are "allowed" and few but their own intelligence services manage to "sneak into"? Maybe they would outcompute even the largest pools grass root bitcoin-type currencies including the original Bitcoin manage to put together? So much so that who cares if people play "mining" instead of playing national or state / region govt-run lotteries?

Maybe you could end up with about as many actually significant mining facilities as there are currently sovereign nations on Earth, and they could fight wars about how to manage it just like they have historically tended to do about almost any "significant" commodity / store of value / medium of exchange?

Just how hard *is* it for a coalition of superpowers to "manage" bitcoin{|-type currencies} if they choose to devote their military-industrial complexes to doing so?

Which would be harder, setting up inviolate private networks for their mining centers to use for Politcoin, or going with open networks allowing any tom dick or harry who might not even be a sovereign nation nor a multinational worth more than many sovereign nations?

(Part of the point here is that various features of the protocol might be just as handy between "individual nationstates / multinationals" as between actually-individual "individuals"...)

-MarkM-

P.S. I am actually tooling up to pseudo-simulate such ideas at http://galaxies.mygamesonline.org/ by equating a "nation or multinational (aka player)"'s block-processing capability to computer technology level multiplied by number of research labs...

Browser-launched Crossfire client now online (select CrossCiv server for Galactic  Milieu)
Free website hosting with PHP, MySQL etc: http://hosting.knotwork.com/
ffe
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 297



View Profile
April 10, 2011, 02:46:26 AM
 #23

Just how hard *is* it for a coalition of superpowers to "manage" bitcoin{|-type currencies} if they choose to devote their military-industrial complexes to doing so?

If their military and intelligence communities are involved they would target current bitcoin miners and shut them down as well as introduce their own mining capacity. This becomes easier as mining is handled by fewer and fewer entities on the p2p network.

As miners specialize further and expand they become more vulnerable to rules and regulations targeting bitcoin. A large miner with a big investment will comply with a law that dictates the use of a client that includes this or that special rule the powers that be want to introduce. The law would probably be backed by criminal provisions.
Gluskab
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 42


View Profile WWW
April 10, 2011, 03:13:32 AM
 #24

Just how hard *is* it for a coalition of superpowers to "manage" bitcoin{|-type currencies} if they choose to devote their military-industrial complexes to doing so?

If their military and intelligence communities are involved they would target current bitcoin miners and shut them down as well as introduce their own mining capacity. This becomes easier as mining is handled by fewer and fewer entities on the p2p network.

As miners specialize further and expand they become more vulnerable to rules and regulations targeting bitcoin. A large miner with a big investment will comply with a law that dictates the use of a client that includes this or that special rule the powers that be want to introduce. The law would probably be backed by criminal provisions.

I'm fairly new to understanding the exact technical nature of bitcoins, but if that happened then nobody would have to accept his blocks and someone else would just take his place, right?

http://www.twitter.com/EverydayAgorism/
Check out my blog on Bitcoin and Agorism! http://www.practicalagorism.com/
BTC : 173nD33C17211xUiViDArdLcriV6NSpaEP
rezin777
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 154


View Profile
April 10, 2011, 03:52:21 AM
 #25

Maybe once you scale up / fast foward management might look less infeasible.

Imagine PolitCoin, an alternate blockchain different only in its initial starter block and the port number it uses and the IRC channel it uses, with all "major" nations and multinationals running full clients backed by mega custom-chip dedicated computing facilities.

Would they even need to operate as a friend to friend network in which only such powerful entities are "allowed" and few but their own intelligence services manage to "sneak into"? Maybe they would outcompute even the largest pools grass root bitcoin-type currencies including the original Bitcoin manage to put together? So much so that who cares if people play "mining" instead of playing national or state / region govt-run lotteries?

Maybe you could end up with about as many actually significant mining facilities as there are currently sovereign nations on Earth, and they could fight wars about how to manage it just like they have historically tended to do about almost any "significant" commodity / store of value / medium of exchange?

Just how hard *is* it for a coalition of superpowers to "manage" bitcoin{|-type currencies} if they choose to devote their military-industrial complexes to doing so?

Which would be harder, setting up inviolate private networks for their mining centers to use for Politcoin, or going with open networks allowing any tom dick or harry who might not even be a sovereign nation nor a multinational worth more than many sovereign nations?

(Part of the point here is that various features of the protocol might be just as handy between "individual nationstates / multinationals" as between actually-individual "individuals"...)

-MarkM-

P.S. I am actually tooling up to pseudo-simulate such ideas at http://galaxies.mygamesonline.org/ by equating a "nation or multinational (aka player)"'s block-processing capability to computer technology level multiplied by number of research labs...


Why would the average person switch to the new coin when bitcoin is already established? The only reason I can come up with is force. Perhaps that's what you meant by "devote their military-industrial complexes to doing so", but if they are going to use force, why bother with the coin? Perhaps to give the illusion of freedom?
ffe
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 297



View Profile
April 10, 2011, 04:11:27 AM
 #26

Just how hard *is* it for a coalition of superpowers to "manage" bitcoin{|-type currencies} if they choose to devote their military-industrial complexes to doing so?

If their military and intelligence communities are involved they would target current bitcoin miners and shut them down as well as introduce their own mining capacity. This becomes easier as mining is handled by fewer and fewer entities on the p2p network.

As miners specialize further and expand they become more vulnerable to rules and regulations targeting bitcoin. A large miner with a big investment will comply with a law that dictates the use of a client that includes this or that special rule the powers that be want to introduce. The law would probably be backed by criminal provisions.

I'm fairly new to understanding the exact technical nature of bitcoins, but if that happened then nobody would have to accept his blocks and someone else would just take his place, right?

If they do it to the top n miners and (with the added capacity they can add)  they control 60% of the network capacity then they control the longest block chain and the rules that govern what a valid transaction is.

They would be subtle of course and only change things that would affect a minority so most users would not complain. (For example freezing the assets of a terrorist whose public keys they've identified.)
Gluskab
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 42


View Profile WWW
April 10, 2011, 04:21:57 AM
 #27

Just how hard *is* it for a coalition of superpowers to "manage" bitcoin{|-type currencies} if they choose to devote their military-industrial complexes to doing so?

If their military and intelligence communities are involved they would target current bitcoin miners and shut them down as well as introduce their own mining capacity. This becomes easier as mining is handled by fewer and fewer entities on the p2p network.

As miners specialize further and expand they become more vulnerable to rules and regulations targeting bitcoin. A large miner with a big investment will comply with a law that dictates the use of a client that includes this or that special rule the powers that be want to introduce. The law would probably be backed by criminal provisions.

I'm fairly new to understanding the exact technical nature of bitcoins, but if that happened then nobody would have to accept his blocks and someone else would just take his place, right?

If they do it to the top n miners and (with the added capacity they can add)  they control 60% of the network capacity then they control the longest block chain and the rules that govern what a valid transaction is.

They would be subtle of course and only change things that would affect a minority so most users would not complain. (For example freezing the assets of a terrorist whose public keys they've identified.)

Do you mean, "if you've got nothing to hide, you should never be worried?"

“Attempts to undermine the legitimate currency of this country are simply a unique form of domestic terrorism.  While these forms of anti-government activities do not involve violence, they are every bit as insidious and represent a clear and present danger to the economic stability of this country.  We are determined to meet these threats through infiltration, disruption, and dismantling of organizations which seek to challenge the legitimacy of our democratic form of government.”

http://www.twitter.com/EverydayAgorism/
Check out my blog on Bitcoin and Agorism! http://www.practicalagorism.com/
BTC : 173nD33C17211xUiViDArdLcriV6NSpaEP
ffe
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 297



View Profile
April 10, 2011, 04:24:15 AM
 #28

Just how hard *is* it for a coalition of superpowers to "manage" bitcoin{|-type currencies} if they choose to devote their military-industrial complexes to doing so?

If their military and intelligence communities are involved they would target current bitcoin miners and shut them down as well as introduce their own mining capacity. This becomes easier as mining is handled by fewer and fewer entities on the p2p network.

As miners specialize further and expand they become more vulnerable to rules and regulations targeting bitcoin. A large miner with a big investment will comply with a law that dictates the use of a client that includes this or that special rule the powers that be want to introduce. The law would probably be backed by criminal provisions.

I'm fairly new to understanding the exact technical nature of bitcoins, but if that happened then nobody would have to accept his blocks and someone else would just take his place, right?

If they do it to the top n miners and (with the added capacity they can add)  they control 60% of the network capacity then they control the longest block chain and the rules that govern what a valid transaction is.

They would be subtle of course and only change things that would affect a minority so most users would not complain. (For example freezing the assets of a terrorist whose public keys they've identified.)

Do you mean, "if you've got nothing to hide, you should never be worried?"

“Attempts to undermine the legitimate currency of this country are simply a unique form of domestic terrorism.  While these forms of anti-government activities do not involve violence, they are every bit as insidious and represent a clear and present danger to the economic stability of this country.  We are determined to meet these threats through infiltration, disruption, and dismantling of organizations which seek to challenge the legitimacy of our democratic form of government.”

Yeah. What he said!!
eMansipater
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 294



View Profile WWW
April 10, 2011, 04:28:54 AM
 #29

 Roll Eyes You americans always think everything is about you.  Why an international project on the internet would be considered an attack on american currency is beyond me.

If you found my post helpful, feel free to send a small tip to 1QGukeKbBQbXHtV6LgkQa977LJ3YHXXW8B
Visit the BitCoin Q&A Site to ask questions or share knowledge.
0.009 BTC too confusing?  Use mBTC instead!  Details at www.em-bit.org or visit the project thread to help make Bitcoin prices more human-friendly.
Gluskab
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 42


View Profile WWW
April 10, 2011, 04:31:23 AM
 #30

Roll Eyes You americans always think everything is about you.  Why an international project on the internet would be considered an attack on american currency is beyond me.

You could have said the same about a sovereign nation trying to sell oil in euros instead of dollars; that doesn't mean the US gov't won't stick its nose in and look for scapegoats anytime something goes wrong.  The same can be said for any other gov't, but the US gov't just tends to be most 'vocal' about it.

http://www.twitter.com/EverydayAgorism/
Check out my blog on Bitcoin and Agorism! http://www.practicalagorism.com/
BTC : 173nD33C17211xUiViDArdLcriV6NSpaEP
NghtRppr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 476


View Profile
April 10, 2011, 04:34:29 AM
 #31

You americans always think everything is about you.

That's ignorant and prejudiced.
deadlizard
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 112



View Profile
April 10, 2011, 05:04:47 AM
 #32

You americans always think everything is about you.

That's ignorant and prejudiced.
and true

btc address:1MEyKbVbmMVzVxLdLmt4Zf1SZHFgj56aqg
gpg fingerprint:DD1AB28F8043D0837C86A4CA7D6367953C6FE9DC

MoonShadow
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1666



View Profile
April 10, 2011, 05:09:00 AM
 #33

Roll Eyes You americans always think everything is about you.


It usually is, in my experience.

Quote

  Why an international project on the internet would be considered an attack on american currency is beyond me.

For starters, because the US $ is the international reserve currency by both treaty and defacto results of the second world war.  And because Satoshi has personally made allusions to this intent, not the smallest of which is encoded permanently into the genesis block.

Take a look for yourself.  Just because Americans always assume that everything is about them doesn't logicly lead to the conclusion that they are generally wrong.

"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'
markm
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1792



View Profile WWW
April 10, 2011, 06:59:25 AM
 #34

Re 777's "Why would the average person switch to the new coin when bitcoin is already established? The only reason I can come up with is force. Perhaps that's what you meant by "devote their military-industrial complexes to doing so", but if they are going to use force, why bother with the coin? Perhaps to give the illusion of freedom?"...

Oh sorry, did I say Politcoin? Silly me, I meant, of course, Federal Reserve Bits...

-MarkM- (New? Nonsense! Federal Reserve Bits have always been good, whether printed on paper or encoded in a blockchain! Wink)

Browser-launched Crossfire client now online (select CrossCiv server for Galactic  Milieu)
Free website hosting with PHP, MySQL etc: http://hosting.knotwork.com/
Jered Kenna (TradeHill)
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 420



View Profile WWW
April 10, 2011, 05:47:33 PM
 #35

Roll Eyes You americans always think everything is about you.  Why an international project on the internet would be considered an attack on american currency is beyond me.

You honestly think the US government won't consider it an attack on their currency if it hurts it? They're going to use the Child Porn, Terrorist, Drug Dealer and Money Launderer labels too.

Can Bitcoin survive an outright attack on the US? Sort of.

What if the US says "Anyone with Bitcoin connections is a terrorist" and freezes all their bank accounts.
They already did that with Hwalla after 9/11 and it wouldn't surprise me at all.
All the legitimate world partners would most likely abandon bitcoin.

Honestly I'd love to see how it happens if Bitcoin is big enough, if it happened too early it wouldn't be nearly as exciting.

moneyandtech.com
@moneyandtech @jeredkenna
QuantPlus
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 280



View Profile
April 10, 2011, 06:37:20 PM
 #36

What if the US says "Anyone with Bitcoin connections is a terrorist" and freezes all their bank accounts.
They already did that with Hwalla after 9/11 and it wouldn't surprise me at all.
All the legitimate world partners would most likely abandon bitcoin.

BitCoin could be rendered de facto illegal in the USA...
By one senator slipping in one paragraph into a 5,000 page bill...
In the dead of night before the Christmas Holidays.

That's how online poker became de facto illegal in America.

BitCoin is probably technically illegal in Russia, etc...
Places where virtually all enterprise-grade encryption is illegal.

But virtual, decentralized, crypto currencies are a Game Changer...
You can expect to see a Global Shadow Economy spring up...
Centered on MANY such crypto-currencies that will be easily convertible...
Because there will be Market Makers...
Some will come, so will go... but THIS IDEA is here to stay.

Todd, are you OK?
eMansipater
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 294



View Profile WWW
April 10, 2011, 08:48:06 PM
 #37

Todd kind of got all jumped on.  I don't know if he'll be back.

For the rest of you, if a rolling eyes smiley face can't introduce some jocularity the whole internet is in trouble Wink  Let's try again.

 Roll Eyes You americans have no sense of humour about yourselves.  Always so serious Undecided .

If you found my post helpful, feel free to send a small tip to 1QGukeKbBQbXHtV6LgkQa977LJ3YHXXW8B
Visit the BitCoin Q&A Site to ask questions or share knowledge.
0.009 BTC too confusing?  Use mBTC instead!  Details at www.em-bit.org or visit the project thread to help make Bitcoin prices more human-friendly.
MoonShadow
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1666



View Profile
April 11, 2011, 04:54:10 AM
 #38


 Roll Eyes You americans have no sense of humour about yourselves.  Always so serious Undecided .

What can I say?  This is serious business.

"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'
Pages: « 1 [2]  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!