Topic: Bitcoin trades the inequity of dynastic power for the inequity of early adoption - page 9. (Read 11076 times)

So, unless you have 51% of the computing power, you can't decide which fork is the valid one.

That's a feature, not a bug.

Seriously, revans. Don't be a hypocrite. You have a lot of coins and btcbug and I don't have very many. I think it would be in the best interests of all for you to carve up your stake a bit and spread it around so that you don't get tempted to become one of the new elite that you've been talking about. It is only fair.

I also ask others in this thread to quote me and my signature with its respective address so that we can get a time stamp and watch this address. I am curious to see how many donations are sent to that address by those who cry foul with regards to inequality and people not sharing what they have. I have yet to see any donation to that address by anyone. They want to talk the talk, but not walk the walk.

Or support Litecoin, PPcoin or in your case Freicoin. I have no problem with any of them.

But someone had to be the founding fathers of cryptocurrency. If you have a problem with people being successful and getting rich stop looking for them to give you something and figure out how to get it the same way they did. Go invent a better coin.

Seriously you and several others have the attitude that Bitcoin is about giving free money. Yes it's far better than USD but you still gotta earn your money and either risk your life against extreme odds or work really hard or both.

It's never really a situation where you can just open your hand and expect digital gold to fall into it. Who are you to be entitled to that? Don't get me wrong, everyone should be entitled to enough Bitcoin to live and survive, but the life of having a lot of wealth is a responsibility and a curse. You're jealous because you don't understand what it's about.

If you're all in Bitcoin, willing to give up friendships, family, everything for Bitcoin then maybe I'd say you'd be someone who could be responsible enough. Most people who win the lottery aren't happy and aren't responsible, and don't have much philosophy about what they do or discipline, but some people do have the level of dedication, philosophical background and discipline. The purpose of making a Bitcoin early adopters elite is to protect Bitcoin from attack. The elite of Bitcoin exist as guardians (think Plato), who protect Bitcoin and the miners are protecting the network.

If you want coins get into mining, or buy them. If you can't do that then move onto Litecoin or PPcoin where you can be an early adopter for that. Stop complaining and whining out of jealousy and envy. I imagine if I were an early adopter I would hate seeing that attitude.

We are using the same context. And yes, beyond "wanting" everyone to be on the same block chain, it is a socially and economically mandatory. Their can never be a viable second fork.

For example notice again the wizards speaking here.
http://bitcoin.org/may15.html

I'm sure there was discussion among "actual peers" but there was no popular vote on the topic. Your node can't veto the decision. Nor can you decide to continue down the original fork by yourself.

I'm not saying this situation is a good thing or a bad thing. I'm just saying that's the way the bitcoin ecosystem works. You can trust the  "actual peers" or you can avoid bitcoin altogether. But you don't get to be a full peer just for showing up anymore.

I don't understand this "forked" thing either. An exchange is essentially an independent entity. Some people put BTC in, some USD and others other currencies then they exchange and then cash out or exchange again as desired. They need to be hooked into the Bitcoin protocol and the banking system (the latter appearing to be the "hard" part of being an exchange, an indication that Bitcoin is a superior solution, by the way). But any interaction between them would typically be done by third parties by way of arbitrage.

So the masses should come cap-in-hand to the Bitcoin Oligarchs and beg for digital crumbs?

People complaining about inequality just want free coins and are jealous.

People who have coins can invest in you if you have some bright idea or plan to make Bitcoin better but if you just feel entitled to free coins, no.

And I'm saying that as someone who only has a few coins and who is not rich. It should be that money is a tool to get things done or to save lives.

I'm not sure in what context you're using "forked." Don't we want all the exchanges (into which group I include the people selling bitcoins for other currencies on #bitcoin-otc, SR, and other darknet sites) all using the same blockchain?

Just an observation from the various writing styles I have seen in words attributed to him.

Well the way I understood your original post was that miners were essentially a cabal, and that you found the method of distributing coins unfair because a few early miners got to easily generate a stockpile, which would make them ridiculously rich in the future.

Now the way I see it, is that you, as an early adopter have been able to buy in fairly cheaply, which isn't unlike a miner who started mining three years ago. Myself or potential future participants weren't so lucky. We either didn't have the capital to invest early or perhaps didn't even have access to the internet. I view yourself as having an unfair advantage due to your circumstances and if you have 1000 coins you'll likely be quite wealthy in the future because of that.

What qualifies me as a good cause is that I was less fortunate than yourself or the early miners and by sending me a few coins you'd be lessening the inequality in distribution that you were concerned about.

Good we're on the same page!

But do you realize that the exchanges as a group CANNOT ever be forked from one another?

I mean hackers could physically try to isolate one from the rest of the network. But after 20 minutes or so the exchange must notice and stop trading before anything is confirmed. At that point it is not a coding problem. It's a humans figure out WTF is happening problem.

No exchange can ever willing decide to be permanently forked from the others.
Agreed?

I'm sure you have proof for such a claim. If so, you'll scoop every investigative reporter in the world.

They aren't now in 2013. But back in 2008-2009 when the project was unknown there would have been minimal to no consequences at all if Satoshi and others were arrested on ridiculous charges. They wouldn't necessarily be assassinated, but if enough people want to stop you in government then you get stopped and if enough people with enough money want to stop you in the private sector then you get stopped even faster and no there is no real justice about it.

I think in 2013 it's a different scenario, the developers are known and part of a community. Everyone knows about Bitcoin and if something happened then it would make big news. Back then if something happened it wouldn't have made news.

Of course but how naive are you to think that something like Bitcoin could be developed without any risk to the lives of the early adopters? Bitcoin was extremely high risk early on which is why myself and others did not get too involved with it. The people who decided to get that involved were risking everything and if they happened to be successful and now become rich thats a good thing. It's good because it encourages that kind of bravery for the next Bitcoin type project.

OK, you've got a point, MTGox is a central point in a supposedly decentralized network. I think that problem has been recognized, however, and is in the process of being remedied.

I would think TPTB love Bitcoin as it is priming people for an all digital global currency. It would be more in their interest to discredit Bitcoin and then offer people a state sanctioned alternative.

LMAO! I didn't do it! I've been gone for a couple of years.

I'm just the kid saying that guy over their in the Emperor's Clothes... He's the Emperor.
Why are you people naked?

I always just figured that he valued his privacy.

Then again, I also don't think "the government" or "the banks" are particularly interested in stamping out something like this, especially not enough to go for black-bag jobs and assassination back when it may not have even taken off. Maybe I'm naïve!

How gullible are you?

Satoshi is a composite identity, and that identity was disappeared once it has served its purpose; giving Bitcoin an air of mystery and intrigue and distancing certain people from the early mining bonanza.

And that would be why I wouldn't use MtGox if they were paying me.