Topic: Bitcoin press hits, notable sources - page 90. (Read 430946 times)
And to be fair.. most of the bitcoin 'stories' coming out are just rehashes of things people have heard a bunch of times.
Seems that slashdotters are getting pretty irritated with the constant barrage of bitcoin news.
Slashdotters are irritated with anything that doesn't:
1) Reaffirm their own narrow worldview.
2) Give at least one of them a chance to receive backpatting from the rest of the monoculture by posting a dry, long-winded explanation of the topic at hand.
Personally, I'm irritated with seeing this baseless story repeated around the web. It's an account of a random IRC conversation that may or may not have happened. Laughable.
...It's an account of a random IRC conversation that may or may not have happened. Laughable.
I think this is a highly suspicious story. Can you even get a warrant based on nothing more than electricity use? I could see starting an investigation, but kicking in the doors with no evidence of a crime seems like a stretch. Seems that slashdotters are getting pretty irritated with the constant barrage of bitcoin news.
Slashdotters are irritated with anything that doesn't:
1) Reaffirm their own narrow worldview.
2) Give at least one of them a chance to receive backpatting from the rest of the monoculture by posting a dry, long-winded explanation of the topic at hand.
Personally, I'm irritated with seeing this baseless story repeated around the web. It's an account of a random IRC conversation that may or may not have happened. Laughable.
Seems that slashdotters are getting pretty irritated with the constant barrage of bitcoin news.
Same in Hacker News. There's alway a couple of oddballs who think bitcoin is the stupidest idea they ever heard.
http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2011/05/bitcoin-digital-currency-of-the-future/239449/
Bitcoin, Digital Currency of the Future?
Bitcoin, Digital Currency of the Future?
Seems that slashdotters are getting pretty irritated with the constant barrage of bitcoin news.
http://mybroadband.co.za/news/columns/20402-mobile-operator-integrate-Bitcoin-cryptocurrency.html
If this is true, then Callooh! Callay! WE'RE HERE TO STAY!
EDIT: I think this may just have been parsing of This Week in Startups. I'm not sure whether the author of this article had additional data.
If this is true, then Callooh! Callay! WE'RE HERE TO STAY!
EDIT: I think this may just have been parsing of This Week in Startups. I'm not sure whether the author of this article had additional data.
I was gonna post the NPR story as well. I think by the time Gavin speaks at the CIA meeting BTC will be in the headlines. I'm talking big propaganda station, NBC, FOX, CNN, BBC
MIT technology review
What Bitcoin Is, and Why It Matters
Can a booming "crypto-currency" really compete with conventional cash?
URL: http://www.technologyreview.com/computing/37619/page1/
Finally an article that's pretty accurate and not hyperbolic.
MIT technology review
What Bitcoin Is, and Why It Matters
Can a booming "crypto-currency" really compete with conventional cash?
URL: http://www.technologyreview.com/computing/37619/page1/
This just went up on Giz. Not exactly positive, but press, none the less.
http://gizmodo.com/5805254/mining-bitcoins-looks-like-growing-pot-to-the-police
http://gizmodo.com/5805254/mining-bitcoins-looks-like-growing-pot-to-the-police
Just about to post the npr story. I wish they wouldn't focus on the illegal uses of it. After all no one faults the, US Mint for printing money that is used in drug deals.
And the reporter said there's absolutely no record of the transaction, which isn't quite true.
http://help.npr.org/npr/includes/customer/npr/custforms/contactus.aspx
Submit a correction
I submitted a correction a few hours ago.
How's this?
A little harsh. Here are my edits:Your story tonight regarding Bitcoins was interesting and informative. However, I wanted to clarify that, while Bitcoin is designed for anonymity, you incorrectly stated that "no record of the transactions" exists. In fact, every legitimate bitcoin transaction exists on a record know as the blockchain, and everyone has access to it. Every user's Bitcoin client reviews the blockchain and that's how the system works to prevent fraud!
That said, the blockchain doesn't include users' names and IP addresses. You can use a site called http://blockexplorer.com/ to view every Bitcoin transaction, and see the path from one user to another. You cannot identify those users by name unless you happened to have transacted with a user, and that user happened to give you the same payment address as he gave to someone else.
Also, All Things Considered disappointed me with the undue weight it gave to potential illegal uses of Bitcoin. If you were doing a story on the US dollar or the euro, would you focus on that? Criminals use cash, of all kinds, illegally all the time. No news there.
The story here isn't that criminals have another currency. Rather, now EVERYONE can accept a form of cash over the Internet as easily and independently as they might in person.
I already emailed a correction to NPR, and CC'd the reporter.
Just about to post the npr story. I wish they wouldn't focus on the illegal uses of it. After all no one faults the, US Mint for printing money that is used in drug deals.
And the reporter said there's absolutely no record of the transaction, which isn't quite true.
http://help.npr.org/npr/includes/customer/npr/custforms/contactus.aspx
Submit a correction
How's this?
Your story tonight regarding Bitcoins was interesting and informative.
I wanted to clarify something though. While Bitcoins are designed for anonymity, to say that there is "no record of the transactions" is just plain wrong. In fact, *every* Bitcoin transaction since the beginning of time is recorded, and currently passed to *every* Bitcoin user that uses the current software. The Peer-to-Peer software passes the transaction log to every user, and that's how the system works to prevent fraud!
The part that is anonymous is that the user's name and IP address are not recorded. But the path of Bitcoins can be tracked forever. I can use the site called http://blockexplorer.com/ to view every Bitcoin that was ever spent, and see the path from one user to another. I cannot identify those users by name (unless I happened to have transacted with the user, and he or she happened to give me the same ID as he or she gave to someone else - which is not recommended). But clearly there is a record of every transaction.
The other item that was a bit of a disappointment was how All Things Considered focused on the potential illegal uses of Bitcoin. If you were doing a story on the Dollar currency or the Euro, would you focus on that? Remember, Bitcoins are like cash that you can push through a wire from person to person. Dollar Bills can be used by criminals, and they are every day.
The story here isn't that criminals have another currency. The story is that now EVERYONE can accept cash over the internet without fees.
Are you organizing a group gift for your boss in another state? Send an email out to your co-workers with your Bitcoin address, and each person can contribute to you electronically. THAT is the story. How did you miss it?
And the reporter said there's absolutely no record of the transaction, which isn't quite true.
There's a long answer and a short answer to the question "are bitcoin transactions anonymous?". The short answer: yes. The long answer: kind of...It was a short bit so I can't really blame them for going with the short answer.
Just about to post the npr story. I wish they wouldn't focus on the illegal uses of it. After all no one faults the, US Mint for printing money that is used in drug deals.
And the reporter said there's absolutely no record of the transaction, which isn't quite true.
http://help.npr.org/npr/includes/customer/npr/custforms/contactus.aspx
Submit a correction
Just about to post the npr story. I wish they wouldn't focus on the illegal uses of it. After all no one faults the, US Mint for printing money that is used in drug deals.
And the reporter said there's absolutely no record of the transaction, which isn't quite true.
Jump to: