Eric Schmidt talked about Bitcoin on MWC Keynote

apetersson

hero member

Activity: 668

Merit: 501

i doubt that they would retrofit existing systems to do mining. there are too many issues, plus google has enough cash to just build another data center dedicated to mining.

some issues (pulled out of thin air):

existing power grid and batteries for UPS would maybe be too weak.
heat management is already non-trivial and they planned their data centers for their target load. adding GPUs would also mean adding new cooling system.
cpu and network load is already a non-trivial issue for their map/reduce algos. spilling p2p traffic on top of that would not really help.
if they invested in hardware it would not be GPU but FPGA or even ASIC.

BkkCoins

hero member

Activity: 784

Merit: 1009

firstbits:1MinerQ

Quote from: memvola on March 02, 2012, 04:46:20 AM

Quote from: str4wm4n on March 01, 2012, 10:33:12 PM

What if Google starts mining with 50%+ hashing power?

I question Google's ability to do that. I suppose they could do it if they spend enough, but it would cost them millions. We could delay transactions until we have sufficient power to push back. Worst case scenario, we could fork the chain and move to a Google-unfriendly algorithm. But with the current atmosphere, I feel that it's more likely for such companies to quietly come to the rescue of Bitcoin rather than try and destroy it.

While I doubt Google would ever even entertain doing this they are theoretically well positioned for it. They have hundreds of thousands (or millions?) of low-end systems in open cage racks that could quite possibly handle one gpu each without much re-building. The cpu and traffic overhead on top of handling queries would be low. I suspect they also have heaps of systems being cycled out for newer ones and could easily assign the old Celerons to this purpose (assuming they even have PCIx slots). They also likely have lots of hw techs on staff already and I have no idea how busy they are. My guess is they spend a lot of them replacing hard disks.

memvola

hero member

Activity: 938

Merit: 1002

Quote from: str4wm4n on March 01, 2012, 10:33:12 PM

What if Google starts mining with 50%+ hashing power?

I question Google's ability to do that. I suppose they could do it if they spend enough, but it would cost them millions. We could delay transactions until we have sufficient power to push back. Worst case scenario, we could fork the chain and move to a Google-unfriendly algorithm. But with the current atmosphere, I feel that it's more likely for such companies to quietly come to the rescue of Bitcoin rather than try and destroy it.

str4wm4n

legendary

Activity: 1611

Merit: 1001

What if Google starts mining with 50%+ hashing power?

finway

hero member

Activity: 714

Merit: 500

Maybe Google is sato, who is shi & Naka & moto ?

cbeast

donator

Activity: 1736

Merit: 1006

Let's talk governance, lipstick, and pigs.

Quote from: ineededausername on February 29, 2012, 01:10:32 AM

Quote from: proudhon on February 28, 2012, 07:54:27 PM

Free advice for Eric Schmidt:

1. Buy a bunch of bitcoins.
2. Integrate bitcoin into Google Wallet.
3. Go to sleep.
4. Wake up.
5. Eat breakfast.
6. Check the price of bitcoin on MtGox.
7. Profit.
8. See step 7.
9. See step 8.
10. See step 9.

the first major existing company to adopt Bitcoins will definitely make immense profits.

Actually, I think the reason more people are not speculating on Bitcoin is because the rich are already too rich and the poor are too poor. The rich only need Blue Chip investments to stay rich. Bitcoin is a revolution, not an IPO.

apetersson

hero member

Activity: 668

Merit: 501

my comment from http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/qblwb/video_of_eric_schmidt_talking_briefly_about/

Quote

its interesting that Eric Schmidt came up with Bitcoin in this conversation.
Somehow I think Google, Amazon are sympathetic to it and are just waiting for Bitcoin become a little more mainstream before they endorse it.

The guy asking the question wanted to pitch faircash, a collection of ideas sketched out in his? 230 Page Dissertation.
I have scratched the surface of it. So far i can see that is a hardware-based crypto system with central PKI, but there is no prototype of it yet.
Furthermore i suspect double-spending is not solved, even theoretically, because transactions can occur in isolated (non-internet-connected) environments.

Raoul Duke

legendary

Activity: 1358

Merit: 1002

Quote from: Steve on February 29, 2012, 02:12:30 AM

I think Bitcoin is Google Bucks. And Larry and/or Sergey is Satoshi.

rjk

sr. member

Activity: 448

Merit: 250

1ngldh

Quote from: Wandering Albatross on February 29, 2012, 11:18:55 PM

Quote from: rjk

Tinfoil much? An SEC filing is a legal document, if it is substantially incorrect then Google would have some 'splainin to do, Lucy! and they would be paying some massive fines to the government.

Name calling, too funny. You probably believe in unicorns too. Yes the SEC would never lie nor would google. Believe what you'd like.
I'd bet you don't know too much about the current world financial events. If you did you'd find it hard to believe anything about the
stock market or wall street. What do you think is the motivation behind BTC? Don't answer that, it's rhetorical. Believe in any fantasy that you'd like
and like I said make sure and put all your data on google's servers like a good citizen.

State sponsored capitalism = facism

Well whatever you say, is there some other reason you don't agree that advertising couldn't possibly be 97% of their revenue? That is the root of this debate, after all. I mean seriously - you search for something, you don't pay them for that service, where does the money come from? Even the hardware they sell (phones) are at breakeven because they are used as targeted advertising platforms, and fulfill that role excellently.

Wandering Albatross

member

Activity: 70

Merit: 10

Quote from: rjk

Tinfoil much? An SEC filing is a legal document, if it is substantially incorrect then Google would have some 'splainin to do, Lucy! and they would be paying some massive fines to the government.

Name calling, too funny. You probably believe in unicorns too. Yes the SEC would never lie nor would google. Believe what you'd like.
I'd bet you don't know too much about the current world financial events. If you did you'd find it hard to believe anything about the
stock market or wall street. What do you think is the motivation behind BTC? Don't answer that, it's rhetorical. Believe in any fantasy that you'd like
and like I said make sure and put all your data on google's servers like a good citizen.

State sponsored capitalism = facism

memvola

hero member

Activity: 938

Merit: 1002

Quote from: Wandering Albatross on February 29, 2012, 02:04:43 PM

Trust those sources if you want and trust the bankers and the u.s. chamber of commerce while you're at it.
And trust google too.

It's not so much about trust, it's pretty plausible to believe that they make enough money through targeted advertisements to more than cover their expenditures. Targeted ads are powerful. That also justifies their accumulation of information. Nevertheless it's a good idea not to be spied on.

Another unrelated point: He's saying "pure" p2p currencies are illegal in most cases. It pretty much shows he has some experience on the subject.

rjk

sr. member

Activity: 448

Merit: 250

1ngldh

Quote from: Wandering Albatross on February 29, 2012, 02:04:43 PM

Quote from: rjk

SEC filing: http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1288776/000119312509150129/dex992.htm
Article of interest: http://gigaom.com/2009/07/17/where-does-google-get-97-of-its-revenue/

Trust those sources if you want and trust the bankers and the u.s. chamber of commerce while you're at it.
And trust google too.

Tinfoil much? An SEC filing is a legal document, if it is substantially incorrect then Google would have some 'splainin to do, Lucy! and they would be paying some massive fines to the government.

Wandering Albatross

member

Activity: 70

Merit: 10

Quote from: rjk

SEC filing: http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1288776/000119312509150129/dex992.htm
Article of interest: http://gigaom.com/2009/07/17/where-does-google-get-97-of-its-revenue/

Trust those sources if you want and trust the bankers and the u.s. chamber of commerce while you're at it.
And trust google too.

rjk

sr. member

Activity: 448

Merit: 250

1ngldh

Quote from: Wandering Albatross on February 29, 2012, 01:37:07 PM

Quote from: rjk

Advertising. En masse. It is 97% of their revenue, and making it targeted is in the interests of the advertisers.

Your source?

SEC filing: http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1288776/000119312509150129/dex992.htm
Article of interest: http://gigaom.com/2009/07/17/where-does-google-get-97-of-its-revenue/

Wandering Albatross

member

Activity: 70

Merit: 10

Quote from: rjk

Advertising. En masse. It is 97% of their revenue, and making it targeted is in the interests of the advertisers.

Your source?

Phinnaeus Gage

legendary

Activity: 1918

Merit: 1570

Bitcoin: An Idea Worth Spending

Quote from: cypherdoc on February 29, 2012, 01:18:16 PM

What does Schmidt say at one point, Bitcoin is "nuts"?

When I first heard it, I immediately translated the colloquialism "is nuts" as being a good thing, albeit he may have wanted to say, "Bitcoin is the nuts!"

Quote

Nuts:

The highest possible hand in poker. Playing Hold 'em, if you hold As, 3s and the board is Qs, 8s, Kd, 2s, 9c you are said to be holding "the nuts." The terminology is said to refer to the fact that poker is a partial information game, meaning that when you bet, you don't know if you're winning or losing. This being the case, you have to have "nuts" (as in testicles) to have the nerve to bet. The only case when you can bet in poker without "testicles" would be if you had the best possible hand and could not be beaten, hence the term "nuts"

Wandering Albatross

member

Activity: 70

Merit: 10

Quote from: herzmeister

yacy.net
www.seeks-project.info

Hadn't heard of these, definitely makes sense to do p2p. It seems p2p is the right model for all things. But anonymity is like randomness is like security. They are all hard to come by. If your bits are going over someone else's physical network then what stops them from sorting out who's who?

Quote from: herzmeister

google is not toasted yet tho Embarrassed

But p2p search is a good start.

rjk

sr. member

Activity: 448

Merit: 250

1ngldh

Quote from: D.H. on February 29, 2012, 01:20:07 PM

Quote from: Stephen Gornick on February 29, 2012, 12:47:44 PM

Quote from: Phinnaeus Gage on February 29, 2012, 12:35:53 PM

It's up now: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4DKLSO8wYzk

Here's were the Bitcoin discussion takes place: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=4DKLSO8wYzk#t=2048s

Thanks for that. The Bitcoin question starts at 0:34:10. Bitcoin got 90 seconds of prime time.
- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4DKLSO8wYzk#t=2050s

So did anyone read up on what this "faircash" is? Since the guy asking likes P2P payments but think that Bitcoin is nuts it would be interesting to know what his system is about. I found the web site but I haven't had time to read through the technical details yet.

I had a look at the site. The technology is absurd, requiring the use of a VPN to update a document that says the transfer has taken place. It is also patent pending, which makes me assume that they have invented some algorithm instead of using open source ones like Bitcoin, which are proven to be secure. Besides the fact that Bitcoin requires no trust.

cbeast

donator

Activity: 1736

Merit: 1006

Let's talk governance, lipstick, and pigs.