Topic: bitcoin is not p2p - page 2. (Read 4316 times)

It's just that I was feeling like being in an hidden camera prank while reading this thread 

Hmm ok, but when Im alone, I cant do anything with it anyway. Lets go back to you buy something from me. You buy these keys, I get 50$. Now you have more (keys) and I have more (1050 now). If I understand you correctly: the next day you still have more (keys), but I dont (1000). So if I want to give you a gift I dont need this "money", why bother?

So you get something from my for free? Well unless I buy something else for 50$ teh same "online time"... Why should I give you lets say 50 keys TF2 for 50$ if the next day my 50$ are gone and my keys TF2 are gone.

If you believe that, I suggest you go back to your bitcoin intro tutorials

Not so sure, that is possible.


This. Bobos15 make a new coin. You dont have to write any code yet, just think clearly what this new coin would be and what properties it should have. If you want equal coins for everyone, how would you allow spending? etc. Maybe we just dont understand eachother because english isnt our native language. Maybe your idea is the new top coin, who knows.

Dude, you need to get back to the drawing board pronto

 
I could not understand your point...

Where is the camera?

Bitcoins are not the data you download. You download the Blockchain, the list of transactions. I have a complete copy of the Blockchain on my computer I share it everyone that runs bitcoin core and is conncted to me.

But if everyone has the same you can not give it away, because it would not be the same amount for everyone. Dont you understand that money only works if its possible for 2 people to have different amount of money? Money is the idea that I have something that I can trade for something else tomorrow or next week or next year. But with your "everyone has the same" idea, I can never trade it for anything and thus its not money.

Edit:

"the iron money could not be used anywhere else in Greece."

"It was now impossible to buy foreign goods and no cargo of merchandise would enter a Spartan harbor, no teacher of rhetoric trod Laconian soil, no begging seer, no pimp, no maker of gold and silver ornaments – because there was no coined money."

http://www.mikeanderson.biz/2009/06/lycurgus-spartan-monetary-system-and.html

Sounds like a stupid system

Why is the blockchain not a common good? You can download it for free. Anyone with an internetconnection can.

IF all coins where shared equally... I understand now that this is your problem... they would have no value. If there are 1000 people who have bitcoin and everyone of those 1000 has the same amount of bitcoins, whats the point? And if person 1001 comes along, does everyone give a part away? You could probably make a coin like this, but thats not a currency. I can not transfer value like this.

Ok, nice quote. Bitcoin fits perfectly. The blockchain is a common good, everyone can use it. Well not those without internet, but that is true for most p2p networks today. Bitcoin relies on social relations, on the people who mine and the people who use it as a currency to allocate resources. Every full node is equipotent. I still dont see your the point.

OP is mixing up the p2p and bitcoin

To be honest, OP's definition of p2p is kind of strange...

Anarchy as in greek anarchia which translates to "without rulers" this however does not mean that there are no rules. There is a big difference between a person or a group or persons setting rules (thus beeing rulers) or a mutual aceptance of a certain set of rules.
I disagree with Foxpup that this contradicts capitalism (as in you own what you own and can trade it to anyone you like).


It was far from ideal in Athens, mainly because only citizen could vote and thus the minority.

Perfect democracy (as in consensus not majority) is the same as perfect anarchy. If everyone has the same rights you dont have anyone above you and thus no ruler.

But lets get back to the topic, which is p2p not political systems if I remember correctly.


Everything of relevance has impact.


p2p itself is not against anything. If you think so, please explain why. Because the way you just say "its like this" we can not argue with you.


Thats refering to the bittorrent protocol I assume? What about them? They changed the way to music industry thinks about distrubuting music and the same downloads will revolutionize the film industry. The current distribution system is outdated. Why cant I pay x amount of currency to watch HBO from e.g. Jamaica? Or just the show I want to see? This makes no sense with the internet.


The blockchain is shared equially amoung all full nodes. The "coins" are allways in the blockchain you only hold a private key, which is the right to spend certain coins.


Which functions are not? Why are they not p2p? What do you think is p2p?

Democracy is not an economic system. It is a politic ideal. In fact it doesn't exist because it is too easy to corrupt in any system.
This ideal existed once for few years in Athens but it has been corrupted and we never got close to it since.

Today we use the term Democracy instead of Plutocracy (the actual system).



Yes p2p has indeed political and economic impact but we cannot say that it is an economic system in itself because it can fit in different system. It is flexible.

Bitcoin is a lot of things and it is easy to get confused. It is an idea, an invention, a p2p network, a payment system and to finish, a monetary unit.

It is all these things at the same time and you cannot take just one of them to define Bitcoin.

 

Bitcoin is literally peer to peer. It's one of its main benefits.

Can't tell if trolling, but just in case:

Bobos, you seem hopelessly confused about the meaning of certain words. Let me help you:
Anarchism is a political system without rulers, in which individuals govern themselves rather than be governed by others. Does not imply communism and is not incompatible with capitalism.
Bitcoins are units of currency. They are not data, though data may represent proof of ownership of a certain number of bitcoins by a particular person, or a transfer of bitcoins from one person to another. The amount of data needed to do so is in no way related to the number of bitcoins involved.
Capitalism is an economic system in property is privately owned and may be freely traded for other property or for money.
Communism is an economic system in which the means of production are publicly owned and the public has free access to the goods and services so produced. Does not imply anarchy.
Peer-to-peer is a decentralised computer network structure in which computers connect directly to other computers on the network rather than through a central server. Has nothing whatsoever to do with any political or economic ideology. Network resources are typically privately owned and funded, and are not necessarily shared freely.

None of what you're saying makes the least bit of sense.

Why do you keep saying communism and capitalism?
IMO, the p2p feature is not really related to that.

p2p means there is not central element, meaning peers are connected directly between itselves, which Bitcoin is