Bitcoin Forum
December 06, 2016, 08:07:25 PM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.13.1  [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 [2]  All
  Print  
Author Topic: Breakup will threaten us?  (Read 4193 times)
Anonymous
Guest

April 15, 2011, 01:02:36 AM
 #21

Imho they goofed when they started it they should have just given everyone 1000 coins on such and such date, then after that date no more bitcoin.

If you figure out a cheat-proof, distributed, fair way of doing that please let me know.  I need that magical solution for the Bitcoin Faucet.


Did you miss Toecoin? This is solved  Smiley

Epic concept is epic.

1481054845
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481054845

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481054845
Reply with quote  #2

1481054845
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1481054845
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481054845

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481054845
Reply with quote  #2

1481054845
Report to moderator
1481054845
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481054845

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481054845
Reply with quote  #2

1481054845
Report to moderator
1481054845
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481054845

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481054845
Reply with quote  #2

1481054845
Report to moderator
steelhouse
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 700


View Profile
April 15, 2011, 07:38:36 AM
 #22


If you figure out a cheat-proof, distributed, fair way of doing that please let me know.  I need that magical solution for the Bitcoin Faucet.


How about this.  You start with a Japan donations site say 10 people donate, one donates $5, the other $4, the third $1, ...
You take the total after 2 months deadline say total is $50.  Set the total bitcoins at $10 million BTC.  The guy that donated $4 gets 4/50*10000000 bitcoins.  Up to a maximum of 1%.  

All and all it is over and kind of fun the way you did it.  

Is it possible to freeze the number of gpu coins at the end of the year.  End that method.  Hold the Japan relief lotto for the rest of the year.  Then on New Years Eve distribute the rest of the bitcoin and then cap total bitcoins at $20 million BTC or $10 million BTC.  End the inflation.  It actually might increase interest.
QuantPlus
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 280



View Profile
April 17, 2011, 03:59:51 PM
 #23

I am beginner,
Bitcoin is good product for speculation but is risk:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tulip_mania
What is guarantee of coins? If will be invited new system, all coins lose in value to zero ?

This is a reasonable analogy.

Regardless of the merits of BTC...
Since probably 90% of transactions are miners/speculators...
With minimal actual commercial transactions...
That means BTC = BUBBLE.

All the orgasmic tech press you see day after day...
Is just gonna keep feeding the Bubble.

When commercial transactions start approaching some level...
Maybe 30-40-50% or higher...
One may be able to place a "fair value" on BTC...
Right now it's an almost pure speculative Bubble.

This is not a BAD THING... it's a normal process.


kiba
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 980


View Profile
April 17, 2011, 04:11:39 PM
 #24

I am beginner,
Bitcoin is good product for speculation but is risk:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tulip_mania
What is guarantee of coins? If will be invited new system, all coins lose in value to zero ?

This is a reasonable analogy.

Regardless of the merits of BTC...
Since probably 90% of transactions are miners/speculators...
With minimal actual commercial transactions...



7200 BTC generated by miners everyday is insignificant on mtgox. Plus the fact that most if not all speculative transactions occur internally on exchanges.

grondilu
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1134


View Profile
April 17, 2011, 07:53:53 PM
 #25

I am beginner,
Bitcoin is good product for speculation but is risk:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tulip_mania

If tulips could be sent via internet, if they could be divided like billions of times, if I could store them safely on my hard drive, etc...  then I would totally use them as money.
QuantPlus
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 280



View Profile
April 18, 2011, 12:44:11 PM
 #26


I do not think that is an entirely fair assessment. A speculative bubble means that there is no basis for arriving at the prices which an instrument is trading at. It is also not fair to lump miners with speculators.

As a quant, I'm just trying to reach a point...
Where I can place a "fair value" +/- 20% on BTC...
*** And this value is entirely unrelated to "mining cost" ***...
Except among miners = speculators (ALL MINERS ARE SPECULATORS)...
50 BTC every 10 minutes will be produced regardless of "mining cost".

Value tends to correlate highly with what real goods one can conveniently buy.

Since there is negligible commercial activity at this point...
And don't tell me I can buy a pizza somewhere in California (if I show a credit card)...
It's fair to view BTC, at this point, as a Bubble...
We are surrounded by Bubbles, it's a normal human speculative process...
Any Bubble can go up 100% and go down 50% in a flash...
And the posters in this thread show no understanding of Bubbles.

Did you know BTC price has a 0.65 correlation with Wikipedia "BitCoin" views...
Some high profile article come out... everything spikes.

Can I please hear an some economic arguments...
That specifically address the dearth of meaningful commerce.

Also...
By what economic mechanism does BTC in circulation go from $6 million to $60 million...
It's not via "mining cost"... and we don't like Bubble talk... so what is it Huh

QuantPlus
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 280



View Profile
April 18, 2011, 10:13:34 PM
 #27


I do not think that is an entirely fair assessment. A speculative bubble means that there is no basis for arriving at the prices which an instrument is trading at. It is also not fair to lump miners with speculators.

As a quant, I'm just trying to reach a point...
Where I can place a "fair value" +/- 20% on BTC...
*** And this value is entirely unrelated to "mining cost" ***...
Except among miners = speculators (ALL MINERS ARE SPECULATORS)...
50 BTC every 10 minutes will be produced regardless of "mining cost".

Value tends to correlate highly with what real goods one can conveniently buy.

Since there is negligible commercial activity at this point...
And don't tell me I can buy a pizza somewhere in California (if I show a credit card)...
It's fair to view BTC, at this point, as a Bubble...
We are surrounded by Bubbles, it's a normal human speculative process...
Any Bubble can go up 100% and go down 50% in a flash...
And the posters in this thread show no understanding of Bubbles.

Did you know BTC price has a 0.65 correlation with Wikipedia "BitCoin" views...
Some high profile article come out... everything spikes.

Can I please hear an some economic arguments...
That specifically address the dearth of meaningful commerce.

Also...
By what economic mechanism does BTC in circulation go from $6 million to $60 million...
It's not via "mining cost"... and we don't like Bubble talk... so what is it Huh

First, there is a problem with your unqualified assertion that there is a "dearth of meaningful commerce". Since there is no systematic reporting on Bitcion commerce such as there is in a managed economy this statement has no basis. I can only speak from an understanding of a mining operation as a business model... So, I can not buy electricity, rent, equipment directly in Bitcoins right now, the fact of using an exchange as an intermediate step in this process does no de-legitimize it as "meaningful commerce". To this extent your statement is ludicrous. To say that miners are speculators is like saying wheat farmers are speculators... They actually have a position in what underlies the market, and that informs their business decisions, unlike pure 'naked position' speculators which have an entirely derivative interest.

Given the current network hashing power there is an approximate equivalent of 1780 GPU cores, from that I can estimate a total equipment investment of about $71,000, or around 1% of BTC market value, which seems reasonable to me. But that capacity will be effectively rendered obsolete in a couple of years due to Moore's Law, just to stay current miners can be expected to replace equipment at a rate of $1,365 every two weeks. On top of that, to keep up with network growth another $56,100 investment is required every two weeks. The overhead in electric costs alone are on the order of $12,800 every two weeks. This gives us a baseline for investment + operating costs of around $70,300 every two weeks just to keep mining operations current to market conditions. But there are only 2016 BTC available every two weeks... At current market prices, about $2,300 to be generous. That is a volume multiplier of over 30 just for the economic activity of mining, but it is not fair to characterize it as 'speculation'.

If you are counting the measly $2,300 generated by mining activity against price then it is fair to say it could not affect price that much, but when you account for all the economic activity from mining operations it starts to look more meaningful. I think mining operations respond to market conditions, but this also feeds back into the market... The two are tightly coupled. This does not mean that all of the volume activity over and above what can be accounted for by mining is just speculating from naked positions. There is actually no accounting for the real-world economic activity connected to those trades aside from currency speculation. Just because you don't know what that is doesn't mean you can characterize it as a bubble. As long as there are no systematic reporting requirements for Bitcoin economic activity this will be the case. There will always be people calling market fluctuations 'bubbles', and people calling bullshit on that.

With all due respect... your post is devoid of useful information...
Though it lends credence to the idea that BitCoin is, first and foremost, a Cult.

BTC has popped 40-45% from the mid-March to mid-April average of about $0.80...
With no meaningful change in the "mining cost" of idealistic, hard-working "BTC farmers"...
Or any other measurable parameter... other than publicity.

And why are you seemingly hostile to measuring level of BTC commercial transactions...
When every other conceivable stat is endlessly trumpeted?

So, perhaps, to someone else interested in commercial levels...

Assuming I use Gavin's tools, etc to scan all transactions in the database...
What are potential ways to screen out mining and trading transactions...
So that a BTC Commercial Activity Index can be approximated.
 



BitterTea
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 294



View Profile
April 18, 2011, 10:56:49 PM
 #28

Assuming I use Gavin's tools, etc to scan all transactions in the database...
What are potential ways to screen out mining and trading transactions...
So that a BTC Commercial Activity Index can be approximated.

This is not possible. You can determine Coinbase transactions ("mining transactions"), but that is all. Every other transaction could be from one person to another, or one person to themselves, there is no way to tell.
markm
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1792



View Profile WWW
April 19, 2011, 03:45:20 PM
 #29

Apparently it is not necessary for "miners" to have insider information about blockchains they "mine" for, "mining" is a commodity that can be separated from the details/internals of blockchains by "black box" pools.

Basically a pool can hire miners, paying them in whatever currency miners choose to accept.

So for "mining" companies, a proliferation of blockchains should be a good thing, helping free them from "dependence" upon any one specific blockchain-based currency or application.

With "mining" in place like that as a "commodity", available to anyone who wishes to process a blockchain for any purpose, people interested in different ways of distributing digital coins/tokens can maybe separate themselves initially from the perceived-by-some "problem" of allowing any tom dick or harry to mint the coins. The coins can be distributed first and then once all of them (o any chosen number of them) have been issued the possibility of opening up the network can be revisited.

Such an approach allows coins to be issued with goods they can buy already in place, because it allows issuing of coins to be correlated with provision of goods for those coins to buy. The providers of the goods no longer have to worry that more coins might be issued than there are goods waiting to be bought.

For example a "General Mining Corp" can issue its own GMC coinage to people who deposit resources and redeem those same coins for almost that amount of resources (that amount minus operating costs of operating the storage / transaction / trading / delivery system).

By making an online game accessible to pretty much anyone with a browser, anyone can build "resource" collection or mining or synthesis facilities to obtain "resources" to sell for such coins, and by means of "merely a bunch of games" distribution of coins can take place in an open market that values not only currency inputs (people who want to buy World of Bitcurrency coins or facilities or characters or whatever) but also human time (people who actually play the games, creating virtual world scenarios and events and economies and markets and so on by their activities).

In some number of years anyone who does in fact prefer to get their coins "free" simply by puttering around at their computer playing games burning up hours they maybe cannot do not or have no desire to "sell" in other markets can have coins, distributed in a way that is based on human input and time and playing skills instead of GPU cycles.

At any time that it seems worthwhile to weigh it down with the cost of "hiring" GPU farms to "secure" the network, block box pools can be used to hire however much GPU power seems worth the cost of paying for it.

Each and every player can issued their own coinage if they wish, competing on the markets with any other coinages on the markets.

It might well turn out that many coinages will not consider the cost of employing GPU farms worthwhile until/unless trade values of trade in their coinage exceeds, in various negotiable valuables, the cost of getting into GPU-power-wars or simply the cost quoted by their local GPU farm for jacking up the difficulty of their blockchain.

(Many might even ask why jack up the difficulty at all? Just how much overhead cost *is* there in opening up one's currency to the pseudonymous public to fight GPU-power-wars with?)

-MarkM- (Build your virtual resource mines free at http://galaxies.mygamesonline.org/ ! Wink)


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

Activity: 2086



View Profile
April 20, 2011, 10:54:52 AM
 #30


Hmmm, a quant who wants in on bitcoin action gets nasty.

Bitcoin could be devasting for the quants. those fair-headed, glory-boyz straight out of the best tech. colleges in the world to pimp themselves programming for Wall St., just in time to for biggest credit crunch in history ... could suck big to miss the biggest Phoenix ride from the Ashes of all time.

Get mining quants, it's where it at!!!!! ... digital gold, sweat from your brow.

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!