Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.

[cypherdoc]

Awesom,  awesome, awesome;

[molecular]

molecular:

can the Trezor ppl see our balances and tx's while the Trezor is logged into myTrezor.com?

yes, unfortunately. At least they're not using your xpub key to transfer addresses to watch, so they don't know your future keys (except the 5 or so per account they scan ahead).

you mean xpub key as it applies to an HD wallet (master public key)?  what do you mean "except the 5 or so per account they scan ahead"?

yes, exactly, the hd wallet master public key.

instead they send indidvidual addresses for watching to the server (not 100% sure, but I think that's what slush told me some time ago). Since the wallet doesn't know which addresses you gave out, it has to watch a couple of addresses that come after the last one that has received money. Maybe myTrezor watches all addresses it has displayed to the user or something along those lines, I'm not sure.

That's my biggest criticism with myTrezor and it's why I switched to electrum as soon as the development code had trezor working. It's not perfect with electrum, either, but better (I don't know exactly what, but they do some stuff to increase privacy towards server operators).

why would electrum be better in terms of privacy?

I've been meaning to research this. I'll let you know when I've come around to it.

I went to the hassle of running my own electrum server (public, of course, so I can hide in the masses when broadcasting transactions). Feel free to use it (electrum.0x0000.de), I'm not logging anything or looking at the traffic in any way.

how does one use electrum with the Trezor?

Use the electrum 2.0 beta, it has a trezor plugin. You will see the same wallet you see with myTrezor, both wallets can be used in parallel if you desire that.

[molecular]

Did you guys see the Lenovo blow up today, this is on the order of Sony's rootkit fiasco.

yes, it's truly sickening.

[marcus_of_augustus]

Did you guys see the Lenovo blow up today, this is on the order of Sony's rootkit fiasco.

yes, it's truly sickening.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/11424248/GCHQs-mass-Internet-surveillance-ruled-unlawful.html

most of this was criminal behaviour at the time it happened, which explains the panic to rush through a lot of the more draconian and intrusive surveillance laws after the fact. Now if only we could find someone with enough moral fortitude to start prosecuting criminal behaviour of the spy agencies?

[Wekkel]

Smart People weighing in: http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-02-19/guest-post-bitcoin-effete-act-rebellion

Unfortunately still missing the essence. It will take more time.

[marcus_of_augustus]

Smart People weighing in: http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-02-19/guest-post-bitcoin-effete-act-rebellion

Unfortunately still missing the essence. It will take more time.

unbelievable how slow zerohedgers have been to grok bitcoin ... at least it wasn't buried in a cacophony of monkey-rattling cages, eventually they'll get it.

[billyjoeallen]

Smart People weighing in: http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-02-19/guest-post-bitcoin-effete-act-rebellion

Unfortunately still missing the essence. It will take more time.

unbelievable how slow zerohedgers have been to grok bitcoin ... at least it wasn't buried in a cacophony of monkey-rattling cages, eventually they'll get it.

When/if the bull market returns, Zerohegers will be claiming to be early advocates even after dissing Bitcoin kind of like Stefan Molyneaux did. Gold bugs have a problem with Bitcoin being intangible because they have limited capacity for abstract thought. They also get some monetary theory wrong. They think money derives its unit of account and medium of exchange properties from it's store of value property. They get it backwards. Think about why we value dollars (absent the legal tender mandate) and this becomes obvious.

[ErisDiscordia]

Smart People weighing in: http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-02-19/guest-post-bitcoin-effete-act-rebellion

Unfortunately still missing the essence. It will take more time.

unbelievable how slow zerohedgers have been to grok bitcoin ... at least it wasn't buried in a cacophony of monkey-rattling cages, eventually they'll get it.

When/if the bull market returns, Zerohegers will be claiming to be early advocates even after dissing Bitcoin kind of like Stefan Molyneaux did. Gold bugs have a problem with Bitcoin being intangible because they have limited capacity for abstract thought. They also get some monetary theory wrong. They think money derives its unit of account and medium of exchange properties from it's store of value property. They get it backwards. Think about why we value dollars (absent the legal tender mandate) and this becomes obvious.

"It is too risky for regular people. Too complicated to learn to use and secure properly." - this argument gets thrown around a lot and all I can think of when I hear it is:

"Something which forces people to turn on their brains, learn a new skill and take responsibility for some part of their lives? How is that a bad thing?"

Do we sit here and bemoan our opinion that "regular" people are too stupid? Or do we applaud the fact, that technology is forcing people to acquire new skills and evolve, as it has always done?

"Using Bitcoin will make you smarter" - there's a new meme for you

[Wekkel]

Still, it is not an invalid point. How will a large institution safeguard an enormous pile of Bitcoin value If all depends on a private key. Pointing this out as a negative will start the thinking about a positive: a solution.

It needs some more infrastructure, that's all.

[ErisDiscordia]

Still, it is not an invalid point. How will a large institution safeguard an enormous pile of Bitcoin value If all depends on a private key. Pointing this out as a negative will start the thinking about a positive: a solution.

It needs some more infrastructure, that's all.

To me, this is a wonderful example of new technology forcing intelligence into beneficial action. I agree, the point is valid - I just disagree with the conclusions the author of the zero hedge piece derived from it.

[picolo]

Still, it is not an invalid point. How will a large institution safeguard an enormous pile of Bitcoin value If all depends on a private key. Pointing this out as a negative will start the thinking about a positive: a solution.

It needs some more infrastructure, that's all.

I think you can secure it well dividing the bitcoins in a few addresses and using cold storage, bank safe, multi sig signature.
Nothing is 100% safe; big banks were just robbed 300 millions last week.

[uki]

"It is too risky for regular people. Too complicated to learn to use and secure properly." - this argument gets thrown around a lot and all I can think of when I hear it is:

"Something which forces people to turn on their brains, learn a new skill and take responsibility for some part of their lives? How is that a bad thing?"

Do we sit here and bemoan our opinion that "regular" people are too stupid? Or do we applaud the fact, that technology is forcing people to acquire new skills and evolve, as it has always done?

"Using Bitcoin will make you smarter" - there's a new meme for you

Agree with you, but there are also people in this world who are maybe not computer-illiterate, but very close to it. Be it because of their age, social status, whatever else  comes to mind. They are used to use fiat money and have absolutely no interest in changing that, because for them such a change means an unnecessary effort they have to do that makes their everyday life more complex than it is today. And I think that is quite considerable group of people that shouldn't be underestimated.

[ErisDiscordia]

"It is too risky for regular people. Too complicated to learn to use and secure properly." - this argument gets thrown around a lot and all I can think of when I hear it is:

"Something which forces people to turn on their brains, learn a new skill and take responsibility for some part of their lives? How is that a bad thing?"

Do we sit here and bemoan our opinion that "regular" people are too stupid? Or do we applaud the fact, that technology is forcing people to acquire new skills and evolve, as it has always done?

"Using Bitcoin will make you smarter" - there's a new meme for you

Agree with you, but there are also people in this world who are maybe not computer-illiterate, but very close to it. Be it because of their age, social status, whatever else  comes to mind.

Absolutely, there they are and there are many of them. The question in my mind is how did they get like that and do we want to keep them that way? But I think this is getting too far off-topic now.

[NotLambchop]

...
"Something which forces people to turn on their brains, learn a new skill and take responsibility for some part of their lives? How is that a bad thing?"

"Using your brain" means finding simpler, quicker, "smarter" way to do things.
Learning the most complicated, convoluted & hilariously error-prone way of reaching the same ends is just plain stupid.*

*Unless you're Rube Goldberg.

[Wekkel]

People do not necessarily have to change (I am still not using Linux, but my Internet content is served for 80% or more by Linux servers). The average person only needs a solution that works.

Execution, baby.

[Bagatell]

People do not necessarily have to change (I am still not using Linux, but my Internet content is served for 80% or more by Linux servers). The average person only needs a solution that works.

Execution, baby.

A lot of people are, whether they know it or not.

Research company Canalys estimated in the second quarter of 2009 that Android had a 2.8% share of worldwide smartphone shipments.[209] By the fourth quarter of 2010 this had grown to 33% of the market, becoming the top-selling smartphone platform,[210] overtaking Symbian.[211] By the third quarter of 2011 Gartner estimated that more than half (52.5%) of the smartphone sales belonged to Android.[212] By the third quarter of 2012 Android had a 75% share of the global smartphone market according to the research firm IDC.[213]

In July 2011, Google said that 550,000 new Android devices were being activated every day,[214] up from 400,000 per day in May,[215] and more than 100 million devices had been activated[216] with 4.4% growth per week.[214] In September 2012, 500 million devices had been activated with 1.3 million activations per day.[217][218] In May 2013, at Google I/O, Sundar Pichai announced that 900 million Android devices had been activated.[219]

[uki]

People do not necessarily have to change (I am still not using Linux, but my Internet content is served for 80% or more by Linux servers). The average person only needs a solution that works.

Execution, baby.

Now, tell that your grandmother/grandfather.

[msin]

http://www.dougengelbart.org/about/engelbarts-law.html

[Adrian-x]

Still, it is not an invalid point. How will a large institution safeguard an enormous pile of Bitcoin value If all depends on a private key. Pointing this out as a negative will start the thinking about a positive: a solution.

It needs some more infrastructure, that's all.

I think you can secure it well dividing the bitcoins in a few addresses and using cold storage, bank safe, multi sig signature.
Nothing is 100% safe; big banks were just robbed 300 millions last week.

Unlike Gox they write it off and carry on with there fractional reserves.

The point discussed is valid, it reminded me of Dos in the 80's I used computer programs and learned the system OS so I could optimize my operating efficiency, while computers are a lot faster they are only marginally more efficient for the tasks I use.

The problem being they have been dumbed down so I don't need to know how to optimize the core OS. In reality my computer is so smart at being dumb I just have to adapt.

I hope Bitcoin's fate isn't the same as the command prompt in computing.

[okthen]

http://www.dougengelbart.org/about/engelbarts-law.html

A quite good summary, but I loled at "would cause a disruptive ripple effect in society".
My brain is like "Ripple, nooooo!"