This is not an endorsement of the idea, but you'll have to come up with a better solution than fingerprint scanning. There's no feasible way of making a deterministic hash of someone's fingerprint. Real fingerprint detectors (are fallible and) separate signal from noise; hash functions can't.
Genetic material is more doable because it's discrete, but there's no way to prevent someone from collecting samples from people they encounter and stealing their Satoshis.
Topic: A way to lessen inequality in Bitcoin - page 2. (Read 2756 times)
There is this saying, maybe some of you know it. Goes something like this: Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Give a man a fishing rod, and he will trade it for a fish! This is because man is lazy and will always have his hand out as long as there are hand-outs.
It wont solve the worlds problems, but it will at make Bitcoin mainstream. Who runs the fund? To who can we trust to distribute these hardship donations? I'm thinking along the lines of, no-one! Maybe these need to be super-localised, someone needs to step up in every locality that covers x thousand people. Kind of removes the temptation toward sticky fingered types.
There is this saying, maybe some of you know it. Goes something like this: Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Give a man a fishing rod, and he will trade it for a fish! This is because man is lazy and will always have his hand out as long as there are hand-outs.
It wont solve the worlds problems, but it will at make Bitcoin mainstream. Who runs the fund? To who can we trust to distribute these hardship donations? I'm thinking along the lines of, no-one! Maybe these need to be super-localised, someone needs to step up in every locality that covers x thousand people. Kind of removes the temptation toward sticky fingered types.
Put another way, when currencies in a fractional reserve system collapse, only the quickest will get any money out in time. What fraction of those quickest will get their money into hard currency before the real value becomes zero? Troubling to think how many people could be left with nothing. I will not be happy with that situation.
I think you might be equating wealth with money. Money makes up a small portion of the average persons wealth. Property, stocks, real estate, etc would still have value in a currency collapse.
No, not leaving that out of the scenario. I think you might be assuming that the average person has hard assets. The majority don't, all the more so after the consequences of the last 5 years. They're who I'm worried about.
There is this saying, maybe some of you know it. Goes something like this: Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Give a man a fishing rod, and he will trade it for a fish! This is because man is lazy and will always have his hand out as long as there are hand-outs.
It wont solve the worlds problems, but it will at make Bitcoin mainstream. Who runs the fund? To who can we trust to distribute these hardship donations? I'm thinking along the lines of, no-one! Maybe these need to be super-localised, someone needs to step up in every locality that covers x thousand people. Kind of removes the temptation toward sticky fingered types.
Put another way, when currencies in a fractional reserve system collapse, only the quickest will get any money out in time. What fraction of those quickest will get their money into hard currency before the real value becomes zero? Troubling to think how many people could be left with nothing. I will not be happy with that situation.
I think you might be equating wealth with money. Money makes up a small portion of the average persons wealth. Property, stocks, real estate, etc would still have value in a currency collapse.
Zombie welfare rioters. That's probably also why homeland security bought about 300 bullets/american. Fun times ahead.
A crash is rarely smooth. There WILL be problems.
A crash is rarely smooth. There WILL be problems.
I've said this elsewhere already, but if the transition to cryptocurrency is anything but smooth (and that's a seriously optimistic scenario), then there will be alot of people who end up losing all their saved money, even their pocket change, because no-one will sell them cryptocurrency in exchange for it. That number could be higher than we'd all be comfortable with, so there's got to be some contingency for how bad that kind of situation could be.
Put another way, when currencies in a fractional reserve system collapse, only the quickest will get any money out in time. What fraction of those quickest will get their money into hard currency before the real value becomes zero? Troubling to think how many people could be left with nothing. I will not be happy with that situation.
Put another way, when currencies in a fractional reserve system collapse, only the quickest will get any money out in time. What fraction of those quickest will get their money into hard currency before the real value becomes zero? Troubling to think how many people could be left with nothing. I will not be happy with that situation.
Well, most people in the world today already have basically nothing. Even in the United States the average person's net worth is less than 5,000 dollars and they live from paycheck to paycheck. When the fractional reserve system collapses, I believe the new economy will give more people a fair chance to accumulate money and eventually achieve a basic level of financial security.
I agree in principle, but what I'm worried about is the weeks and months immediately following some form of crash. That's a real flashpoint, where a future course can get entrenched for quite a while. What direction is taken at that point could mean the difference between a few years of economic recovery and a few decades. The fact that everyone will be better off in 20 years once the balance has evened out isn't going to make those 20 years much fun. Think zombie apocalypse movies! (that's why that genre started getting popular again...!)
There is this saying, maybe some of you know it. Goes something like this: Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Give a man a fishing rod, and he will trade it for a fish! This is because man is lazy and will always have his hand out as long as there are hand-outs.
It wont solve the worlds problems, but it will at make Bitcoin mainstream. I kind of think that concept can solve those problems, but I also agree with the thread's basic premise too.
We can't solve this issue sufficiently well in time for when cryptocurrency over-trumps fiat. Not in 2 years, 5 or 10. So something's gotta be done in the short term, however small. But we must change this dependency culture in the future, and I think the crypto-revolution in general will help to encourage that more than perhaps any awareness campaign ever could.
Next problem: who runs the fund? To who can we trust to distribute these hardship donations? I'm thinking along the lines of, no-one! Maybe these need to be super-localised, someone needs to step up in every locality that covers x thousand people. Kind of removes the temptation toward sticky fingered types.
Making such a fund will make bitcoin gain legitimacy as everyone has a stake. Once you have 70BTC every human can have a stake in Bitcoin. At least on paper until the fingerprint reading equipment thing is sorted out. It would be in every Bitcoiners best interest to donate a portion of their holdings to such a fund.
Edit: in fact every Bitcoin-holder would benefit from giving away Bitcoin until it hits a sweet spot of potential increase in BTC price and BTC-percentage given away.
Edit: in fact every Bitcoin-holder would benefit from giving away Bitcoin until it hits a sweet spot of potential increase in BTC price and BTC-percentage given away.
If you mean each person will have 70 btc, you may want to check the math. :-)
I totally agree. I do not have a very large number of bitcoins, but I offer to give free bitcoin to everyone I discuss bitcoin with. People who would otherwise laugh at the idea and never consider it seriously instead download a wallet, receive a few dollars worth of bitcoin, see how it works, and come away thinking that it is pretty cool. I also encourage them to tell their friends and invite them to come meet me. If everyone who owns more than 100 BTC (~10,000 people) decided to give away 0.01 BTC (1 BTC total) to 100 people, then there would be 1 million new bitcoin users. I believe that adding 1 million new people to the bitcoin economy would have an upward influence on price of much more than the 1 percent of BTC holdings that people would have given away.
If bitcoin needs to stoop to bribery to become mainstream instead of doing so on its own merits then it won't last and I want no part of it. No matter the form of money, once socialism sets in we will be right back where we were. Only without the ability to print money, which will make the system collapse that much faster. There can not be winners without losers, and everyone being equal means nobody is doing that great. Set up your own private soup kitchen if you want but don't try to drag the world along with it.
When ushering in a new system it makes sense to get everyone started with some satoshis to even the playing field a little.
I've said this elsewhere already, but if the transition to cryptocurrency is anything but smooth (and that's a seriously optimistic scenario), then there will be alot of people who end up losing all their saved money, even their pocket change, because no-one will sell them cryptocurrency in exchange for it. That number could be higher than we'd all be comfortable with, so there's got to be some contingency for how bad that kind of situation could be.
Put another way, when currencies in a fractional reserve system collapse, only the quickest will get any money out in time. What fraction of those quickest will get their money into hard currency before the real value becomes zero? Troubling to think how many people could be left with nothing. I will not be happy with that situation.
Put another way, when currencies in a fractional reserve system collapse, only the quickest will get any money out in time. What fraction of those quickest will get their money into hard currency before the real value becomes zero? Troubling to think how many people could be left with nothing. I will not be happy with that situation.
Well, most people in the world today already have basically nothing. Even in the United States the average person's net worth is less than 5,000 dollars and they live from paycheck to paycheck. When the fractional reserve system collapses, I believe the new economy will give more people a fair chance to accumulate money and eventually achieve a basic level of financial security.
In such a scenario, those too slow to convert dollars to bitcoin would lose their fiat-denominated assets, but many of those people have much greater fiat-denominated debt. I see a full-blown currency collapse and stampede into bitcoin as a great jubilee and as something beneficial for the average person (provided the transition is reasonably peaceful).
Fucking commies.
There is this saying, maybe some of you know it. Goes something like this: Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Give a man a fishing rod, and he will trade it for a fish! This is because man is lazy and will always have his hand out as long as there are hand-outs. Charity spreads weakness, it does not cure it.
There is this saying, maybe some of you know it. Goes something like this: Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Give a man a fishing rod, and he will trade it for a fish! This is because man is lazy and will always have his hand out as long as there are hand-outs. Charity spreads weakness, it does not cure it.
If bitcoin needs to stoop to bribery to become mainstream instead of doing so on its own merits then it won't last and I want no part of it. No matter the form of money, once socialism sets in we will be right back where we were. Only without the ability to print money, which will make the system collapse that much faster. There can not be winners without losers, and everyone being equal means nobody is doing that great. Set up your own private soup kitchen if you want but don't try to drag the world along with it.
These posts demonstrate a significant intellectual deficit. The original post described a system of voluntary charitable contributions, not communism. I cannot understand your hatred of what most normal people consider to be basic morality. I strongly suspect that you are a hypocrite because you have accepted kindness and generosity from others many times throughout your life. Clearly you have some serious psychological issues. Are you Michelle Bachmann?
If bitcoin needs to stoop to bribery to become mainstream instead of doing so on its own merits then it won't last and I want no part of it. No matter the form of money, once socialism sets in we will be right back where we were. Only without the ability to print money, which will make the system collapse that much faster. There can not be winners without losers, and everyone being equal means nobody is doing that great. Set up your own private soup kitchen if you want but don't try to drag the world along with it.
When ushering in a new system it makes sense to get everyone started with some satoshis to even the playing field a little.
Fucking commies.
There is this saying, maybe some of you know it. Goes something like this: Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Give a man a fishing rod, and he will trade it for a fish! This is because man is lazy and will always have his hand out as long as there are hand-outs. Charity spreads weakness, it does not cure it.
There is this saying, maybe some of you know it. Goes something like this: Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Give a man a fishing rod, and he will trade it for a fish! This is because man is lazy and will always have his hand out as long as there are hand-outs. Charity spreads weakness, it does not cure it.
If bitcoin needs to stoop to bribery to become mainstream instead of doing so on its own merits then it won't last and I want no part of it. No matter the form of money, once socialism sets in we will be right back where we were. Only without the ability to print money, which will make the system collapse that much faster. There can not be winners without losers, and everyone being equal means nobody is doing that great. Set up your own private soup kitchen if you want but don't try to drag the world along with it.
These posts demonstrate a significant intellectual deficit. The original post described a system of voluntary charitable contributions, not communism. I cannot understand your hatred of what most normal people consider to be basic morality. I strongly suspect that you are a hypocrite because you have accepted kindness and generosity from others many times throughout your life. Clearly you have some serious psychological issues. Are you Michelle Bachmann?
Making such a fund will make bitcoin gain legitimacy as everyone has a stake. Once you have 70BTC every human can have a stake in Bitcoin. At least on paper until the fingerprint reading equipment thing is sorted out. It would be in every Bitcoiners best interest to donate a portion of their holdings to such a fund.
Edit: in fact every Bitcoin-holder would benefit from giving away Bitcoin until it hits a sweet spot of potential increase in BTC price and BTC-percentage given away.
Edit: in fact every Bitcoin-holder would benefit from giving away Bitcoin until it hits a sweet spot of potential increase in BTC price and BTC-percentage given away.
If you mean each person will have 70 btc, you may want to check the math. :-)
I see. Thanks for clarifying!
I've said this elsewhere already, but if the transition to cryptocurrency is anything but smooth (and that's a seriously optimistic scenario), then there will be alot of people who end up losing all their saved money, even their pocket change, because no-one will sell them cryptocurrency in exchange for it. That number could be higher than we'd all be comfortable with, so there's got to be some contingency for how bad that kind of situation could be.
Put another way, when currencies in a fractional reserve system collapse, only the quickest will get any money out in time. What fraction of those quickest will get their money into hard currency before the real value becomes zero? Troubling to think how many people could be left with nothing. I will not be happy with that situation.
Put another way, when currencies in a fractional reserve system collapse, only the quickest will get any money out in time. What fraction of those quickest will get their money into hard currency before the real value becomes zero? Troubling to think how many people could be left with nothing. I will not be happy with that situation.
Well, most people in the world today already have basically nothing. Even in the United States the average person's net worth is less than 5,000 dollars and they live from paycheck to paycheck. When the fractional reserve system collapses, I believe the new economy will give more people a fair chance to accumulate money and eventually achieve a basic level of financial security.
Making such a fund will make bitcoin gain legitimacy as everyone has a stake. Once you have 70BTC every human can have a stake in Bitcoin. At least on paper until the fingerprint reading equipment thing is sorted out. It would be in every Bitcoiners best interest to donate a portion of their holdings to such a fund.
Edit: in fact every Bitcoin-holder would benefit from giving away Bitcoin until it hits a sweet spot of potential increase in BTC price and BTC-percentage given away.
Edit: in fact every Bitcoin-holder would benefit from giving away Bitcoin until it hits a sweet spot of potential increase in BTC price and BTC-percentage given away.
If you mean each person will have 70 btc, you may want to check the math. :-)
If bitcoin needs to stoop to bribery to become mainstream instead of doing so on its own merits then it won't last and I want no part of it. No matter the form of money, once socialism sets in we will be right back where we were. Only without the ability to print money, which will make the system collapse that much faster. There can not be winners without losers, and everyone being equal means nobody is doing that great. Set up your own private soup kitchen if you want but don't try to drag the world along with it.
There is this saying, maybe some of you know it. Goes something like this: Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Give a man a fishing rod, and he will trade it for a fish! This is because man is lazy and will always have his hand out as long as there are hand-outs.
It wont solve the worlds problems, but it will at make Bitcoin mainstream. Jump to: