Bitcoin Forum
December 11, 2017, 07:25:30 PM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.15.1  [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Poll
Question: Will you support Gavin's new block size limit hard fork of 8MB by January 1, 2016 then doubling every 2 years?
1.  yes
2.  no

Pages: « 1 ... 1188 1189 1190 1191 1192 1193 1194 1195 1196 1197 1198 1199 1200 1201 1202 1203 1204 1205 1206 1207 1208 1209 1210 1211 1212 1213 1214 1215 1216 1217 1218 1219 1220 1221 1222 1223 1224 1225 1226 1227 1228 1229 1230 1231 1232 1233 1234 1235 1236 1237 [1238] 1239 1240 1241 1242 1243 1244 1245 1246 1247 1248 1249 1250 1251 1252 1253 1254 1255 1256 1257 1258 1259 1260 1261 1262 1263 1264 1265 1266 1267 1268 1269 1270 1271 1272 1273 1274 1275 1276 1277 1278 1279 1280 1281 1282 1283 1284 1285 1286 1287 1288 ... 1558 »
  Print  
Author Topic: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.  (Read 2022031 times)
smooth
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1624



View Profile
May 21, 2015, 08:00:17 PM
 #24741

He's changing the original plan as stated on their website. Their website says in big bold words:

"We've developed a chip for embedded bitcoin mining."

But this guy is talking about distributed apps - eg turing complete computation. Those are two different and mutually exclusive things. So I don't know who's correct here.

My read on it was that the guy on the call, if he works for them at all, is more on the IoT side of their business and not directly involved with the mining (portion of the) chip.
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1513020330
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1513020330

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1513020330
Reply with quote  #2

1513020330
Report to moderator
Erdogan
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 840


View Profile
May 21, 2015, 08:10:41 PM
 #24742

The loss leading principle is known and works, for phones that could be as simple as a subsidized phone and paying more for minutes. Or the opposite, paying extra for the phone and free calls for two years (loss trailer...). Both are well known marketing strategies. The mining thing - why bother?

In addition to the public being the victims of scamming in case of the hidden mining, the planned victims could also be future investors. This is also not a very new thing, as we all know.

jmw74
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 236


View Profile
May 21, 2015, 08:14:47 PM
 #24743


did you listen to the above audio?  it doesn't necessarily have to make money for the OEM.  they stand to profit from other ways.

So I listened to most of it. I don't really care whether OEM's profit or how, I want to know why regular people would have any interest in this at all.

He's changing the original plan as stated on their website. Their website says in big bold words:

"We've developed a chip for embedded bitcoin mining."

But this guy is talking about distributed apps - eg turing complete computation. Those are two different and mutually exclusive things. So I don't know who's correct here.

Let's say the audio guy is correct and they're embedding distributed app computation into all your devices. The guy says "oh you'll get *slightly* higher priority for stuff because your device spent energy on someone else's computation". This still makes no sense. If I want the 1 cent of electricity I burned to get me slightly higher chance of getting a parking space, why can't I just spend money directly?

He still doesn't address why it's beneficial for devices to sell their computing power, breaking even or at a loss, vs just using money that the device's owner earned, for example, from their job.


in the audio they explain that they want to automate those tx's as opposed to having humans make them.  from what i could glean, an app would allow you to preset your preferences to allow, for instance, an Amazon drone to fly over your garage as opposed to your kids sandbox.  the drone center would have this info in their controlling servers which could then pre-compute a flight path over your house.  or the other example they gave was 2 Google driverless cars arriving at an open parking spot at the same time requiring an immediate decision/negotiation to take place determining which car gets the space.  the audio emphasized the "immediacy" of a decision making process enabled by essentially a bidding process somewhere out on some ethereal exchange which would determine who gets what first. humans arguing in a public garage won't cut it.  in order for these types of decision making tx's to take place, "cycles" (or Satoshi's i guess) need to be on the phone ready to be utilized.  the only way to ensure that these are in place ready to go is to have the phone itself mine them continuosly.  if you depend on someone to get a paycheck, go out onto an exchange to buy Satoshi's, pay the exchange fee, and then send them to their phone to enable this whole process, it will never happen.

Yeah, I get all that.

First of all, the use cases are nonsensical, are these the best they can think of?

It presumes a world where there is demand to make digital payments of very tiny amounts that don't exist today, but no demand to make payment of larger everyday amounts. That seems highly unlikely.

The car example doesn't even require money at all. It depends on the cars cooperating anyway - a non-cooperating car can always refuse to yield. So they might as well play a digital form of rock-paper-scissors. No mining or special hardware required.

In general, a device does not need money to communicate or "make decisions".  They already do that today.

The real driverless car use case is the car paying automatically for a paid parking spot. There's no way mining would yield enough for that. The real solution here is payment channels - between your main wallet and your devices, and devices amongst themselves.

There is no special hardware required. This is a world where people are going to have to have digital cash anyway.

sickpig
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1232


View Profile
May 21, 2015, 08:18:38 PM
 #24744



https://twitter.com/jgarzik/status/601447310535458816


Bitcoin is a participatory system which ought to respect the right of self determinism of all of its users - Gregory Maxwell.
smooth
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1624



View Profile
May 21, 2015, 08:21:50 PM
 #24745

In addition to the public being the victims of scamming in case of the hidden mining, the planned victims could also be future investors. This is also not a very new thing, as we all know.

It's not scamming or "hidden" mining, necessarily. In their white paper-isn thing they describe it as financing the phone via power bills. Let's assume people are actually told the power bill will be higher. Maybe that is seen as a way to offer financing in markets that don't really have the infrastructure for traditional credit, or where the handset maker doesn't want to (or can't for whatever reason) get in bed with the carriers. Instead of needing to collect payments or get a subsidy from the carrier, the phone itself makes the payments via mining. Even if the mining is somewhat unprofitable, as a credit-substitute there might be value there.

Erdogan
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 840


View Profile
May 21, 2015, 08:26:58 PM
 #24746

In addition to the public being the victims of scamming in case of the hidden mining, the planned victims could also be future investors. This is also not a very new thing, as we all know.

It's not scamming or "hidden" mining, necessarily. In their white paper-isn thing they describe it as financing the phone via power bills. Let's assume people are actually told the power bill will be higher. Maybe that is seen as a way to offer financing in markets that don't really have the infrastructure for traditional credit, or where the handset maker doesn't want to (or can't for whatever reason) get in bed with the carriers. Instead of needing to collect payments or get a subsidy from the carrier, the phone itself makes the payments via mining. Even if the mining is somewhat unprofitable, as a credit-substitute there might be value there.


Rather stretched idea, but ok it is possible that they think along those lines. I see other, simpler, cheaper  and more direct ways to have the phone cost on the electric bill, but maybe that is only me.

smooth
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1624



View Profile
May 21, 2015, 08:36:40 PM
 #24747

In addition to the public being the victims of scamming in case of the hidden mining, the planned victims could also be future investors. This is also not a very new thing, as we all know.

It's not scamming or "hidden" mining, necessarily. In their white paper-isn thing they describe it as financing the phone via power bills. Let's assume people are actually told the power bill will be higher. Maybe that is seen as a way to offer financing in markets that don't really have the infrastructure for traditional credit, or where the handset maker doesn't want to (or can't for whatever reason) get in bed with the carriers. Instead of needing to collect payments or get a subsidy from the carrier, the phone itself makes the payments via mining. Even if the mining is somewhat unprofitable, as a credit-substitute there might be value there.


Rather stretched idea, but ok it is possible that they think along those lines.

Well they said exactly that. Go look in their paper.

Quote
I see other, simpler, cheaper and more direct ways to have the phone cost on the electric bill, but maybe that is only me.

Really how?
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
May 21, 2015, 08:41:57 PM
 #24748


did you listen to the above audio?  it doesn't necessarily have to make money for the OEM.  they stand to profit from other ways.

So I listened to most of it. I don't really care whether OEM's profit or how, I want to know why regular people would have any interest in this at all.

He's changing the original plan as stated on their website. Their website says in big bold words:

"We've developed a chip for embedded bitcoin mining."

But this guy is talking about distributed apps - eg turing complete computation. Those are two different and mutually exclusive things. So I don't know who's correct here.

Let's say the audio guy is correct and they're embedding distributed app computation into all your devices. The guy says "oh you'll get *slightly* higher priority for stuff because your device spent energy on someone else's computation". This still makes no sense. If I want the 1 cent of electricity I burned to get me slightly higher chance of getting a parking space, why can't I just spend money directly?

He still doesn't address why it's beneficial for devices to sell their computing power, breaking even or at a loss, vs just using money that the device's owner earned, for example, from their job.


in the audio they explain that they want to automate those tx's as opposed to having humans make them.  from what i could glean, an app would allow you to preset your preferences to allow, for instance, an Amazon drone to fly over your garage as opposed to your kids sandbox.  the drone center would have this info in their controlling servers which could then pre-compute a flight path over your house.  or the other example they gave was 2 Google driverless cars arriving at an open parking spot at the same time requiring an immediate decision/negotiation to take place determining which car gets the space.  the audio emphasized the "immediacy" of a decision making process enabled by essentially a bidding process somewhere out on some ethereal exchange which would determine who gets what first. humans arguing in a public garage won't cut it.  in order for these types of decision making tx's to take place, "cycles" (or Satoshi's i guess) need to be on the phone ready to be utilized.  the only way to ensure that these are in place ready to go is to have the phone itself mine them continuosly.  if you depend on someone to get a paycheck, go out onto an exchange to buy Satoshi's, pay the exchange fee, and then send them to their phone to enable this whole process, it will never happen.

Yeah, I get all that.

First of all, the use cases are nonsensical, are these the best they can think of?

It presumes a world where there is demand to make digital payments of very tiny amounts that don't exist today, but no demand to make payment of larger everyday amounts. That seems highly unlikely.

not exactly.  they will provide a hardware wallet as well for larger storage amts for larger tx's.
Quote


The car example doesn't even require money at all. It depends on the cars cooperating anyway - a non-cooperating car can always refuse to yield. So they might as well play a digital form of rock-paper-scissors. No mining or special hardware required.

In general, a device does not need money to communicate or "make decisions".  They already do that today.

i agree that the above examples are kinda far out there.  activities we can only imagine.  but they are building off of Mike Hearn's original driverless car visions.  not that that is a measuring stick or anything but just shows ppl have been thinking about how to do this for quite a while now. 
Quote

The real driverless car use case is the car paying automatically for a paid parking spot. There's no way mining would yield enough for that. The real solution here is payment channels - between your main wallet and your devices, and devices amongst themselves.

There is no special hardware required. This is a world where people are going to have to have digital cash anyway.



i agree completely altho we shouldn't discount micropayments completely.  esp for developing nations. 

as for mining, they do have the stated objective of trying to drive more decentralization of mining.  if that requires subsidies or riding on the coat tails of other use cases for these devices, so be it.  i think it's a worthy goal.
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
May 21, 2015, 08:49:49 PM
 #24749

totally expected up day to test the underbelly of what has now become resistance.  you have to be worried that it didn't get back over the top today.  in fact, this sets up tomorrow as a big "watch out" day:

Pruden
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 487

Spanish Bitcoin trader


View Profile
May 21, 2015, 10:09:16 PM
 #24750

totally expected up day to test the underbelly of what has now become resistance.  you have to be worried that it didn't get back over the top today.  in fact, this sets up tomorrow as a big "watch out" day:


Would you care to specify the last 5 occurrences of this non-confirmation? This way we could compare current market breadth (which is quite strong now) and a couple other indicators with the others. I can tell the last one, in 2012, was present almost the whole year and was followed by 2013 being the best year for stocks in quite a while.
Erdogan
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 840


View Profile
May 21, 2015, 10:14:20 PM
 #24751

In addition to the public being the victims of scamming in case of the hidden mining, the planned victims could also be future investors. This is also not a very new thing, as we all know.

It's not scamming or "hidden" mining, necessarily. In their white paper-isn thing they describe it as financing the phone via power bills. Let's assume people are actually told the power bill will be higher. Maybe that is seen as a way to offer financing in markets that don't really have the infrastructure for traditional credit, or where the handset maker doesn't want to (or can't for whatever reason) get in bed with the carriers. Instead of needing to collect payments or get a subsidy from the carrier, the phone itself makes the payments via mining. Even if the mining is somewhat unprofitable, as a credit-substitute there might be value there.


Rather stretched idea, but ok it is possible that they think along those lines.

Well they said exactly that. Go look in their paper.

Quote
I see other, simpler, cheaper and more direct ways to have the phone cost on the electric bill, but maybe that is only me.

Really how?

Choose us as power supplier - get a free phone!


smooth
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1624



View Profile
May 21, 2015, 10:29:29 PM
 #24752

In addition to the public being the victims of scamming in case of the hidden mining, the planned victims could also be future investors. This is also not a very new thing, as we all know.

It's not scamming or "hidden" mining, necessarily. In their white paper-isn thing they describe it as financing the phone via power bills. Let's assume people are actually told the power bill will be higher. Maybe that is seen as a way to offer financing in markets that don't really have the infrastructure for traditional credit, or where the handset maker doesn't want to (or can't for whatever reason) get in bed with the carriers. Instead of needing to collect payments or get a subsidy from the carrier, the phone itself makes the payments via mining. Even if the mining is somewhat unprofitable, as a credit-substitute there might be value there.


Rather stretched idea, but ok it is possible that they think along those lines.

Well they said exactly that. Go look in their paper.

Quote
I see other, simpler, cheaper and more direct ways to have the phone cost on the electric bill, but maybe that is only me.

Really how?

Choose us as power supplier - get a free phone!

Putting aside the question of monopoly power markets or other regulated markets that don't allow such promotions, or where the power supplier is bureaucratic and would take years to even negotiate such a deal, what would be the incentive of the power company to even do that?

I think you're reaching a bit to conclude the loss leader mining is obviously impractical.

Also, it isn't limited to phones. In their write up they mentioned internet-connected devices. That could include devices that don't normally include a paid service at all, for example dropcams, media players, wireless routers, WiFi-only tablets, really almost anything. The loss leader model where you pay back the up front cost with integrated mining still (possibly) makes sense.
Biodom
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1442


View Profile
May 21, 2015, 10:49:09 PM
 #24753

remember what's driving these Silicon Valley ppl.
You keep finding the exact areas where I am most concerned.

I've talked to people who from the Silicon Valley startup scene who've related their stories about the ties between the angel investors who funded their ventures and the CIA, including being subjected to a "aptitude evaluation" which was basically an IQ + (lack of) empathy test.

Remember this article? https://wikileaks.org/google-is-not-what-it-seems/

If you're betting on Silicon Valley to fight the Fed what you're betting on is the defection of crucial sections of the military-industrial complex of a magnitude equivalent to the dissolution of the USSR.

Personally, I do think a USSR-style breakup of the USA is in the cards, but I'm not at all sure about the timing.

Also, in the Soviet case their equivalent of the MIC were the holdouts who were the last to accept that the system could not continue and held a coup to attempt to keep it limping along.

USSR had very little in common with USA. US is very integrated, USSR was a quilt of very different cultures, especially on the periphery (-stans, etc.)
I don't think that what you suggest will happen in the foreseeable future.
tvbcof
Legendary
*
Online Online

Activity: 2338


View Profile
May 21, 2015, 11:20:38 PM
 #24754

I'm going with Rumsfeld, Cheney, et-al from their PNAC document on this one.  That is, the most likely end-game is a one-world government.  In that case I would expect the management strategies promulgated by the leadership to be in many ways almost indistinguishable from those employed by the Soviets and other totalitarian regimes, and I would hold near zero hope for anything resembling 'democracy' (though it may well be called that.)  The methods of control used would include austerity, surveillance, anonymous informants, etc.  Basically any structure which keeps individuals separate and suspicious of one another.

Of course they're going to try, but they can't pull it off.

They're a generation too late.

I think you have that almost exactly backward.  There is a strong push toward indoctrinating U.S. public school kids from an early age to being conducive to 'global citizenship' as one example of the necessary requirements.  Efforts in this direction have been going on since I was a kid in the 1970's but in fits and starts, and things like genuine individuality, healthy skepticism, and some degree of self sufficiency were still at least tolerated.  When the generation who are now in grade school matures, look out.


cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
May 21, 2015, 11:45:17 PM
 #24755

totally expected up day to test the underbelly of what has now become resistance.  you have to be worried that it didn't get back over the top today.  in fact, this sets up tomorrow as a big "watch out" day:


Would you care to specify the last 5 occurrences of this non-confirmation? This way we could compare current market breadth (which is quite strong now) and a couple other indicators with the others. I can tell the last one, in 2012, was present almost the whole year and was followed by 2013 being the best year for stocks in quite a while.

i don't want to get into it in detail here.  it's kinda complicated b/c everyone does it a little differently.  i'm a big believer in cycle theory as well and i use the weekly bottoms as a timing mechanism to help identify approximately where the secondary low points on the charts occur which are critical for Dow Theory.   that's what the "SL" stands for that i put up here.  these cycles are approximately 22 wks long.  once you can establish where the secondary low pts are, which tend to correlate with weekly cycle bottoms, you then look for both indices, the $DJI & $DJT, to make new secondary highs together compared to their previous secondary highs. if only one does, then you get the non-confirmation which is what we have now.  this all then gets mixed in with the 4yr cycles which typically represent major tops in the $DJI over the last 100 yrs.  this large, major long term cycle has been muddied greatly over the last 20 yrs b/c of central bank intervention which works to unpredictably prolong this mess.  however at these stretched 4 yr cycle tops a vast majority of them, like >90%, are associated with a Dow Theory non-conf.  this is why it can be a huge warning signing when it occurs.  like we have now. we are way overdue for a 4yr cycle top as this cycle has been way overstretched due to QE.  the payback should be devastating; perhaps even greater than 2008.  but then again, all this TA could be hogwash.  it's all pattern recognition and the human mind is great at fooling itself.  we'll just have to see.
TPTB_need_war
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 420


View Profile
May 21, 2015, 11:59:47 PM
 #24756

Since my last post on 21 Inc, other than posts from smooth and some of one of cypherdoc's post, all I read is delusional denial and irrational nonsense in the other comments about 21 Inc's business model.

You myopic idiots that are emphasizing that mining can't be profitable on phones, are entirely missing the point! The owners of the cell phone don't care about the electricity cost. They never pay attention to that. It is insignificant to them. All they care about is the discount on the device when they purchase it. And they are not going to throw away the phone after purchasing it. They will use it.

The point is that if you have a billion smartphones giving up $10+ a year in electricity to mining, then even if the phone ASIC is 10X or 100X less efficient as mining, the cartel's mining pool still has a huge hashrate.

One can assume phones will consume much more electricity than they do now while on the charger, because the phone discount has to be recovered by the electricity input (and efficiency of the mining ASIC in the phone) over the lifespan on the device. Bear in mind that phones are becoming more efficient over time, so the business model can cannibalize the user's expectation of electricity usage keeping that expectation constant. Yeah the developing world females (in fact most females every where) wouldn't know different. Many males also in the developing world.

Also smartphones are declining in cost (now $65 for basic Alcatel here in Philippines) thus the $10+ per year of unnoticed electricity usage, will become a greater proportion of the smartphone cost over time. The business model of 21 Inc is a 10 year plan.

The cartel isn't deprived of income if the phone is no longer profitable for mining, because they are getting the hashrate cycles for free after they recover the initial subsidy they provided for the discount on the purchase price of the phone.

And phones are upgraded often by users, so more opportunities to upgrade the efficiency of the ASICs in the mobile phones. (Add: and the used phones get handed down to relatives who don't have a smartphone so continue to generate mining for the cartel)

What they can also do is give some token amount of Bitcons to the user of the phone, to obtain ringtones and shit like that which girls love but doesn't really cost anything. Also they can do bundled deals with for example Facebook, Viber, and the telcom carriers giving free connectivity for basic low bandwidth services (e.g. messaging) in exchange for exclusivity and/or marketing access to this large base of users.

What you fail to understand is the cartel wants to own access to every person, so to gain access you have to be connected in the cartel. This is really about eliminating competition. And capturing holistic profit by controlling all access to markets.

Ok, I'll try again... why put that chip in the phone if you could just include it in the charger cable? Or charging pad for wireless charging?

Because the user might replace the charger and still use the phone. Chargers are lost all the time over here in the chaotic developing world with zillion people in and out of your house, but phones are guarded more carefully.

Also because you would have to duplicate all the radio, processing, etc that is  in the phone.

Duh!

For the people clambering on about phone mining, listen to this:

https://m.soundcloud.com/elux-1/21-inc-embedded-engineer-on-whaleclub-teamspeak

Thank you. Very interesting. Cool stuff. But...

It still sounds like just processing and relaying transactions. I don't see how these devices would ever find a block, or ever get paid out even if they did.

Doesn't sound like the block rewards are the goal though... Very interesting...
Yep, thats what i got from it.

Sounds like we have fast forwarded to the time we are approaching 21M bitcoins, and this stuff would be the answer to no more block rewards. No?


That's cleared everything up. IT'S NOT A MINER its a massively distributed transactional processing chip, not for making money.

 RAM for payments.

Nonsense all those comments! Also the guy clearly says they will use sidechains to the micropayments, exactly as I warned you this is a centralization of mining in every facet!

You all can keep denying that Bitcon is the NWOcoin, but your delusion won't help you avoid the fate coming.


justusranvier
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1400



View Profile WWW
May 22, 2015, 12:32:14 AM
 #24757

I think you have that almost exactly backward.  There is a strong push toward indoctrinating U.S. public school kids from an early age to being conducive to 'global citizenship' as one example of the necessary requirements.  Efforts in this direction have been going on since I was a kid in the 1970's but in fits and starts, and things like genuine individuality, healthy skepticism, and some degree of self sufficiency were still at least tolerated.  When the generation who are now in grade school matures, look out.
The tell is not the behaviour of schoolchildren that matters - it's the behaviour of the apparatchik.

When they start to believe the remaining lifetime of the regime is less than the expected duration of their employment + pension, some of them start patiently waiting for their expected windfall to arrive over the course of decades of career and retirement and start taking what they can get while they can.

These acts of internal looting have an effect of shortening the remaining lifetime of the regime which means it's a positive feedback loop. As the expected lifetime (as perceived by the apparatchik) shortens, the amount of internal looting increases.

That positive feedback cycle is why the end of a regime can arrive faster than anyone thinks possible with little outside warning.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/gsa-officials-wife-accompanied-him-on-trips-at-taxpayer-expense/2012/04/17/gIQAHdrEPT_story.html

Quote
He invited his staff to the gathering. According to the transcript reviewed by The Post, Neely said in an e-mail to a colleague: “I know I’m bad, but as Deb and I often say, why not enjoy it while we have it and while we can. Ain’t going to last forever.”

We now know in retrospect that internal looting was extremely rampant in the months and years prior to the dissolution of the USSR.

Another interesting observation we can make in retrospect is a connection with German reunification. I was fairly young when the Berlin wall came down, but I do remember being shocked that Moscow would allow it to happen. According to everything I'd ever been taught, the Communist Party had absolute control over everything that happened in the Soviet empire. Looking back on the event, that was an obvious sign they had lost control.

In my estimation, recent state-level marijuana legalization events are of equivalent magnitude to the fall of the Berlin wall in terms of what it means about Washington DC's internal control over the US, and probably means the US empire is approximately at the same point it its life cycle as the Soviet empire was in 1989.
TPTB_need_war
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 420


View Profile
May 22, 2015, 12:41:32 AM
 #24758

In my estimation, recent state-level marijuana legalization events are of equivalent magnitude to the fall of the Berlin wall in terms of what it means about Washington DC's internal control over the US, and probably means the US empire is approximately at the same point it its life cycle as the Soviet empire was in 1989.

And then most of Russia's resources were handed out to a few oligarchs who are beholden to the cartel. And do you know who was over there organizing that?

Larry Summers.

The same former US Treasury and World Bank official (also was nominated to replace Bernanke) involved with 21 Inc, who first floated the idea of negative interest rates and eliminating cash.

Do some research folks.

justusranvier
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1400



View Profile WWW
May 25, 2015, 05:28:45 PM
 #24759

In my estimation, recent state-level marijuana legalization events are of equivalent magnitude to the fall of the Berlin wall in terms of what it means about Washington DC's internal control over the US, and probably means the US empire is approximately at the same point it its life cycle as the Soviet empire was in 1989.

And then most of Russia's resources were handed out to a few oligarchs who are beholden to the cartel. And do you know who was over there organizing that?

Larry Summers.

The same former US Treasury and World Bank official (also was nominated to replace Bernanke) involved with 21 Inc, who first floated the idea of negative interest rates and eliminating cash.

Do some research folks.
The world needs a form of money that can resist corruption even by someone like Larry Summers.

It could be the case that we should interpret 21 as an attack on Bitcoin, in which case we'll find out of Bitcoin can be that money or not.
sickpig
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1232


View Profile
May 25, 2015, 07:48:20 PM
 #24760

Hi all, long time no see. I've just discovered I developed a sort of addiction to btctalk :-)

I just found out an hidden "gem" in the development section:

"Off-chain anonymous transactions by secure transfer of private keys"

I think the apparent lack of interest is due to the fact that OtherCoin doesn't claim (or is expected to have) a net effect on the Bitcoin price. Its intention is to simply make off-chain truly private transactions possible. As a side effect, it would also make any blockchain transaction analysis useless (since coins could exchange hands offline hundreds or thousands of times without any trace in the blockchain or anywhere else on the Internet). It also removes the one to one mapping between addresses and persons - in the current system, once you've identified who owns a particular address, you can safely assume that any past or future payments sent to that address belong to that person. With OtherCoin in place, an address could effectively be "owned" by hundreds of people, just at different moments in time.

Here the link for the updated white paper:

http://www.othercoin.com/OtherCoin.pdf

Bitcoin is a participatory system which ought to respect the right of self determinism of all of its users - Gregory Maxwell.
Pages: « 1 ... 1188 1189 1190 1191 1192 1193 1194 1195 1196 1197 1198 1199 1200 1201 1202 1203 1204 1205 1206 1207 1208 1209 1210 1211 1212 1213 1214 1215 1216 1217 1218 1219 1220 1221 1222 1223 1224 1225 1226 1227 1228 1229 1230 1231 1232 1233 1234 1235 1236 1237 [1238] 1239 1240 1241 1242 1243 1244 1245 1246 1247 1248 1249 1250 1251 1252 1253 1254 1255 1256 1257 1258 1259 1260 1261 1262 1263 1264 1265 1266 1267 1268 1269 1270 1271 1272 1273 1274 1275 1276 1277 1278 1279 1280 1281 1282 1283 1284 1285 1286 1287 1288 ... 1558 »
  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!