Some guy called Eric just shot his bolt over how great MintChip is ....
http://envelopeeconomics.com/2012/04/11/canada-has-unveiled-the-bitcoin/
Small correction: digital Canadian dollars are traceable by design, therefore not fungible.
In the same light, until we see Mintchip showing up on SilkRoad as an acceptable means of payment you will know they are less fungible than Bitcoin. As much as society despises illicit or shady activities, they are the acid test for that most essential property of any money, fungibility. As it has been since time immemorable, yet somehow forgotten by modern monetary managers, when rolling out their meglomaniacal financial monitoring and tracking systems.
Topic: The Royal Canadian Mint just announced a new alternative to BitCoin - page 3. (Read 19978 times)
April 12, 2012, 01:29:47 AM
April 11, 2012, 03:43:56 AM
Quote
This is amazing. It looks like this whole system is designed for the very low transaction amounts of 1cent to $10, and for OFFLINE transactions from individual to individual.
Chargebacks come to mind. It'll be easilier and less painful to write off potential chargebacks for hundreds of ten dollar transactions then for hundreds, if not thousands (or tens of), of multiple hundred dollar transactions.
~Bruno~
April 11, 2012, 12:45:00 AM
This is amazing. It looks like this whole system is designed for the very low transaction amounts of 1cent to $10, and for OFFLINE transactions from individual to individual.
I really don't get why they are doing this. What can you even buy for ten bucks besides coffee and a muffin?
Obviously the important feature here is the ability to make transfers without access to a central clearing house. That's an advantage over Bitcoin. And it doesn't seem that useful in a first world country. I'm guessing this is designed for export, and will be aimed at developing countries with poor telecom/internet infrastructure.
If you can live as a tourist in India for less than $10/day, I would think that kind of transaction limit would be extremely useful to locals. The average sub-Saharan African, for instance, could live for a week on $10. Or perhaps I'm wrong and this is all aimed towards something like allowance for kids. Chip your kids...
April 10, 2012, 08:26:54 AM
I really don't get why they are doing this. What can you even buy for ten bucks besides coffee and a muffin? If you try to buy any physical goods online, you'll pay that much just in shipping and handling. About the only thing you can buy are mpegs. I have a feeling that they were hoping for more but had to compromise.
April 09, 2012, 05:43:12 PM
There is also a central authority which is the Royal Canadian Mint. Kudos to them for taking this effort unlike other mints around the world. But at this point I am skeptical.
Yes centralized
Normally I would recommend this but not with the current fed government here pushing for stronger snooping regulations
EDIt.. also seems like they are only interested in 'very low value transactions' according to the site, probably nothing over $5
Regardless lot's of opportunities for devs here to make money expanding and implementing this system, or destroying it's security using methods already implemented here years ago. Just make sure they pay you out in bitcoins or bullion not worthless mintcoins
April 09, 2012, 05:19:19 PM
If Canada or any other country did roll out a centralized dollar-backed Bitcoin chain, it would be great for Bitcoin because it would mean putting in place all of the infrastructure needed to run Bitcoin transactions.
And there are still a lot of advantages to a cryptographically secured digital currency even if it is dependent on a central trusted node that provides the currency backing.
And there are still a lot of advantages to a cryptographically secured digital currency even if it is dependent on a central trusted node that provides the currency backing.
I you've got a centralized system, what's the purpose of a blockchain?
It also takes the work out of setting up a central server and secure administration system. Just start up your version of bitcoin and set it free. Run a minimum amount of hashing operations yourself and hope that transaction fees lure more computers. The only thing you really need is someone (the Mint) that you can trust to always exchange these new bitcoins for Canadian dollars at 1:1.
Since they created the new blockchain, they have the power to give themselves a monopoly of all of the new bitcoins that will ever be created. And since they are the Mint, hopefully they have lots of Canadian dollars too. Everything else could work the same way as bitcoin does now. It would make Canadian dollars a great reserve currency because they would suddenly be extremely easy to get and move around.
hero member
Activity: 588
Merit: 500
Hero VIP ultra official trusted super staff puppet
April 09, 2012, 04:42:33 PM
If Canada or any other country did roll out a centralized dollar-backed Bitcoin chain, it would be great for Bitcoin because it would mean putting in place all of the infrastructure needed to run Bitcoin transactions.
And there are still a lot of advantages to a cryptographically secured digital currency even if it is dependent on a central trusted node that provides the currency backing.
And there are still a lot of advantages to a cryptographically secured digital currency even if it is dependent on a central trusted node that provides the currency backing.
I you've got a centralized system, what's the purpose of a blockchain?
http://iang.org/papers/triple_entry.html
April 09, 2012, 04:16:31 PM
If Canada or any other country did roll out a centralized dollar-backed Bitcoin chain, it would be great for Bitcoin because it would mean putting in place all of the infrastructure needed to run Bitcoin transactions.
And there are still a lot of advantages to a cryptographically secured digital currency even if it is dependent on a central trusted node that provides the currency backing.
And there are still a lot of advantages to a cryptographically secured digital currency even if it is dependent on a central trusted node that provides the currency backing.
I you've got a centralized system, what's the purpose of a blockchain?
April 09, 2012, 02:13:13 PM
If Canada or any other country did roll out a centralized dollar-backed Bitcoin chain, it would be great for Bitcoin because it would mean putting in place all of the infrastructure needed to run Bitcoin transactions.
And there are still a lot of advantages to a cryptographically secured digital currency even if it is dependent on a central trusted node that provides the currency backing.
And there are still a lot of advantages to a cryptographically secured digital currency even if it is dependent on a central trusted node that provides the currency backing.
April 09, 2012, 01:21:15 PM
This is a clear sign that Bitcoin is ahead of it's time
yup, way ahead i'm afraid. There will come lots of centralized versions of digital currencies by powerful players first that probably also have the resources to provide a strong network effect. People will have to get burnt time and time again until they learn the value of decentralization.
Agree, decentralization is imperative. I don't see any top down e-money system that can be immune to rampant fraud by the issuer. If money has value based on trust then ANY breach of the system's integrity will have immediate destabilizing effects.
April 08, 2012, 10:52:27 PM
The logical response to this is to buy some bitcoin and wait for someone else to make bitcoin succeed. If everyone waits simultaneously, then bitcoin fails. That is what is happening.
To get the ball rolling, you need to have an agency which is heavily invested in bitcoin (say to the tune of ten million USD) to spearhead and fund projects. They would have an incentive to do something professional because they could gain from currency appreciation. This needs to happen in order to get to the future where bitcoin can be big and profitable.
If an agency like this isn't created, bitcoin will continue to consist of hobby businesses. The profits from these businesses are so slim that even when they attract a reasonable amount of interest, the business owners often fail to maintain them. You certainly don't see them upgrading and becoming professional. That makes sense. There is no reason to invest money right now when there is no money to be made right now.
This post by cunicula is so on point.
Definitely saving this for later usage.
On the other hand, perhaps it's too early for getting the ball to roll, and Bitcoin still needs a sheltered, hobby status until some technical issues are hammered out (as evident from the recent fierce discussions about various BIPs) and clients and network overlays mature and get tested. Also, legal status will need to get clearer at least in the taxation domain.
I know this is a chicken-and-egg issue, but it seems to me that Bitcoin has grown quite dramatically in only a year, and I'm happy with the pace. I am neither a developer nor a businessman, but I do what I can - in my case by simply using Bitcoin in everyday life, thereby proving that it works, and works better than the alternatives.
But we went astray from the point of OP.
That said, I'm pretty sure that's why Max and Tony desire to gain only one million new users for 2012, as mentioned at the Prague conference. (this post is not meant to be snarkish toward Max or Tony)
~Bruno~
April 08, 2012, 10:25:06 PM
The logical response to this is to buy some bitcoin and wait for someone else to make bitcoin succeed. If everyone waits simultaneously, then bitcoin fails. That is what is happening.
To get the ball rolling, you need to have an agency which is heavily invested in bitcoin (say to the tune of ten million USD) to spearhead and fund projects. They would have an incentive to do something professional because they could gain from currency appreciation. This needs to happen in order to get to the future where bitcoin can be big and profitable.
If an agency like this isn't created, bitcoin will continue to consist of hobby businesses. The profits from these businesses are so slim that even when they attract a reasonable amount of interest, the business owners often fail to maintain them. You certainly don't see them upgrading and becoming professional. That makes sense. There is no reason to invest money right now when there is no money to be made right now.
This post by cunicula is so on point.
Definitely saving this for later usage.
On the other hand, perhaps it's too early for getting the ball to roll, and Bitcoin still needs a sheltered, hobby status until some technical issues are hammered out (as evident from the recent fierce discussions about various BIPs) and clients and network overlays mature and get tested. Also, legal status will need to get clearer at least in the taxation domain.
I know this is a chicken-and-egg issue, but it seems to me that Bitcoin has grown quite dramatically in only a year, and I'm happy with the pace. I am neither a developer nor a businessman, but I do what I can - in my case by simply using Bitcoin in everyday life, thereby proving that it works, and works better than the alternatives.
But we went astray from the point of OP.
April 08, 2012, 12:08:38 PM
You've kept this Mint Chip advertisement on page 1 for long enough anyway.
WTF dude, I posted the thread, and it shure isn't an advertisement.
I did it to watch people diss on MintChip, not to advertise it.
Sorry, didn't mean it to be interpreted that way. I guess my point would've been clearer if I'd worded it something along the lines of:
You've (cunicula) been using manipulating this thread to promote your saboteur-ish views for long enough anyway.
I concur with your fix
I don't have an alpaca in this race, but...
Quote
You've (cunicula) been manipulating this thread to promote your saboteur-ish views long enough anyway.
FTFY
~Bruno~
April 08, 2012, 11:55:49 AM
You've kept this Mint Chip advertisement on page 1 for long enough anyway.
WTF dude, I posted the thread, and it shure isn't an advertisement.
I did it to watch people diss on MintChip, not to advertise it.
Sorry, didn't mean it to be interpreted that way. I guess my point would've been clearer if I'd worded it something along the lines of:
You've (cunicula) been using manipulating this thread to promote your saboteur-ish views for long enough anyway.
I concur with your fix
April 08, 2012, 10:55:58 AM
You've kept this Mint Chip advertisement on page 1 for long enough anyway.
WTF dude, I posted the thread, and it shure isn't an advertisement.
I did it to watch people diss on MintChip, not to advertise it.
April 08, 2012, 07:42:58 AM
Your idea for a (superficially) Bitcoin-like currency with a corporate model is really a trojan horse to create a dictatorship.
If you are capable of logical reasoning (which I doubt), please provide a logical argument. Otherwise, please do not communicate with me or respond to my posts. You have nothing of value to say.
April 08, 2012, 04:49:11 AM
One thing from the last posts is very true: leaning back and waiting for others to do the work will not help.
I for one will stick with this experiement until it fails or succeeds and I will not be crying for outside help, either.
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/unregulated-corporation-cryptocurrency-75029
April 08, 2012, 03:29:34 AM
I don't subscribe to the necessity of a big money central player needing to commit to bitcoin for it to gain traction (in the sense of broad adotpion).
All we need is some time (in which we will work, not only babble about). Rick Falkvinge put it nicely in his talk at the conference in Prague: [quoting freely] A disruptive technology takes about 10 years to get from its inception to blossoming.
For bitcoin this means 2019.
One thing from the last posts is very true: leaning back and waiting for others to do the work will not help.
I for one will stick with this experiement until it fails or succeeds and I will not be crying for outside help, either. If it fails, it's either because the idea doesn't fit the current times or because we are reluctant or lazy. I don't think the latter is the case, too many brilliant and motivated people are commiting large parts of their lives to bitcoin for that to be true. I also don't think the former is true, but that's more of a gamble and only time will tell.
All we need is some time (in which we will work, not only babble about). Rick Falkvinge put it nicely in his talk at the conference in Prague: [quoting freely] A disruptive technology takes about 10 years to get from its inception to blossoming.
For bitcoin this means 2019.
One thing from the last posts is very true: leaning back and waiting for others to do the work will not help.
I for one will stick with this experiement until it fails or succeeds and I will not be crying for outside help, either. If it fails, it's either because the idea doesn't fit the current times or because we are reluctant or lazy. I don't think the latter is the case, too many brilliant and motivated people are commiting large parts of their lives to bitcoin for that to be true. I also don't think the former is true, but that's more of a gamble and only time will tell.
April 08, 2012, 03:09:02 AM
Actually, cunicula, you make a good point there. And it's one that I have considered a lot lately. Ultimately, though, I just don't think any type of centralized model is going to be compatible with Bitcoin. There is a need for more large institutions, and more cooperation, true. But it's like herding cats at this point. It will take a while.
Ultimately, we aren't the equivalent of Africans in the global market. That was my point. We are capable of defending our economy against raiders, large and small. And we can do so using superior technology in the hands of informed, self-interested individuals, the same way America has for the last 300 years. In the long run, we will be better off for it.
Ultimately, we aren't the equivalent of Africans in the global market. That was my point. We are capable of defending our economy against raiders, large and small. And we can do so using superior technology in the hands of informed, self-interested individuals, the same way America has for the last 300 years. In the long run, we will be better off for it.
April 07, 2012, 10:43:25 PM
This is the main basis for economic theories of why most countries in the world remain trapped in poverty, while others such as China, South Korea, Japan, etc. have grown rich under an authoritarian central state. You want bitcoin to look like Africa, then just let it be. If you want it to grow, then you will need a strong central authority to own and develop it.
I see you've left out a particular large, successful economic powerhouse from your false assertion...
Now, get back to breaking rocks before I call the overseer.
Jump to: