Within 5 years you will be able to get a 1 TH/s USB stick that is also a hardware wallet for $5.
This would be sweet, indeed!
That would be sweet indeed, but try 10 years LOL. No technology has advanced that fast.
Topic: What I think Bitcoin's MAIN problem is, and how to fix it (Read 3293 times)
Within 5 years you will be able to get a 1 TH/s USB stick that is also a hardware wallet for $5.
This would be sweet, indeed!
That would be sweet indeed, but try 10 years LOL. No technology has advanced that fast.
Within 5 years you will be able to get a 1 TH/s USB stick that is also a hardware wallet for $5.
This would be sweet, indeed!
I know bitcoin depends on finding the solution, but imagine the whole world is a mining pool.
Seems that businesses like ASICminer are the mining pools of the future, where anyone can simply own a piece of a mining operation.
@ 800 over petaflops its not just hard - its pretty damn impossible for a 51% attack.
Then you don't understand the hardware industry. ---- Glad to hear your explanation. But please remember, in the design, mining is a zero-sum game. So low-level ASICs have no way out.
Ordinary people are not supposed to mine. Mining is a professional industry. and as such requires special skills to do efficiently. Do you refuse to use a credit card because VISA won't let you process transactions yourself? Well with bitcoin you always have the option, but if you don't have the skills you will be wasting time and money ---- VISA is not a mining agency. It's just a card organization. And you can not process the transactions yourself. VISA is a centralize system but Bitcoin is a peer-to-peer system. They are not the same. My point is it is hard for people to experience the whole Bitcoin process. and it will be harder for people to acquire bitcoin by fiat money as the gov will close the doors.
Ordinary people are not supposed to mine. Mining is a professional industry. and as such requires special skills to do efficiently. Do you refuse to use a credit card because VISA won't let you process transactions yourself? Well with bitcoin you always have the option, but if you don't have the skills you will be wasting time and money ---- VISA is not a mining agency. It's just a card organization. And you can not process the transactions yourself. VISA is a centralize system but Bitcoin is a peer-to-peer system. They are not the same. My point is it is hard for people to experience the whole Bitcoin process. and it will be harder for people to acquire bitcoin by fiat money as the gov will close the doors.
And my point is bitcoin isn't about mining. Mining is just something some people do to keep bitcoin running. But you seem to believe Bitcoin is pointless unless everybody can mine.
Of course, Bitcoin is not about mining. My point is, if more people can mine, it will be easier for them to join in the game, and the whole system will be healthy. Imagine some organizations to control the money supply in bitcoin society because they have super ASICs.
Decentralization does not mean everybody is equal. Yes, one entity controlling most of the mining power is a threat to bitcoin. However, the current reality of the ASIC market doesn't leave much room for that possibility.
Then you don't understand the hardware industry. ---- Glad to hear your explanation. But please remember, in the design, mining is a zero-sum game. So low-level ASICs have no way out.
Ordinary people are not supposed to mine. Mining is a professional industry. and as such requires special skills to do efficiently. Do you refuse to use a credit card because VISA won't let you process transactions yourself? Well with bitcoin you always have the option, but if you don't have the skills you will be wasting time and money ---- VISA is not a mining agency. It's just a card organization. And you can not process the transactions yourself. VISA is a centralize system but Bitcoin is a peer-to-peer system. They are not the same. My point is it is hard for people to experience the whole Bitcoin process. and it will be harder for people to acquire bitcoin by fiat money as the gov will close the doors.
Ordinary people are not supposed to mine. Mining is a professional industry. and as such requires special skills to do efficiently. Do you refuse to use a credit card because VISA won't let you process transactions yourself? Well with bitcoin you always have the option, but if you don't have the skills you will be wasting time and money ---- VISA is not a mining agency. It's just a card organization. And you can not process the transactions yourself. VISA is a centralize system but Bitcoin is a peer-to-peer system. They are not the same. My point is it is hard for people to experience the whole Bitcoin process. and it will be harder for people to acquire bitcoin by fiat money as the gov will close the doors.
And my point is bitcoin isn't about mining. Mining is just something some people do to keep bitcoin running. But you seem to believe Bitcoin is pointless unless everybody can mine.
Of course, Bitcoin is not about mining. My point is, if more people can mine, it will be easier for them to join in the game, and the whole system will be healthy. Imagine some organizations to control the money supply in bitcoin society because they have super ASICs.
IF ASIC can be used to play computer games, I think it is OK. But it can ONLY be used to mining, which creates a barrier for most people.
This isnt much of an issue at all really. ASICs cant do anything but Bitcoin. GPUs were just what people had at the time to mine Bitcoins. Now we have ASICs. If you really look at it, once these companies are in check, ASICs will be cheaper than any GPU rig, and easy to maintain. To get 30 Gh/s before, you needed $40000 in graphics cards. Now you only need $1300.
Yes, you are right about the price. But an ASIC with 30Gh/s will soon lose its competitive advantage as mining in Bitcoin is a zero-sum game. You always have to be the best to get the block.
IF ASIC can be used to play computer games, I think it is OK. But it can ONLY be used to mining, which creates a barrier for most people.
This isnt much of an issue at all really. ASICs cant do anything but Bitcoin. GPUs were just what people had at the time to mine Bitcoins. Now we have ASICs. If you really look at it, once these companies are in check, ASICs will be cheaper than any GPU rig, and easy to maintain. To get 30 Gh/s before, you needed $40000 in graphics cards. Now you only need $1300.
Then you don't understand the hardware industry. ---- Glad to hear your explanation. But please remember, in the design, mining is a zero-sum game. So low-level ASICs have no way out.
Ordinary people are not supposed to mine. Mining is a professional industry. and as such requires special skills to do efficiently. Do you refuse to use a credit card because VISA won't let you process transactions yourself? Well with bitcoin you always have the option, but if you don't have the skills you will be wasting time and money ---- VISA is not a mining agency. It's just a card organization. And you can not process the transactions yourself. VISA is a centralize system but Bitcoin is a peer-to-peer system. They are not the same. My point is it is hard for people to experience the whole Bitcoin process. and it will be harder for people to acquire bitcoin by fiat money as the gov will close the doors.
Ordinary people are not supposed to mine. Mining is a professional industry. and as such requires special skills to do efficiently. Do you refuse to use a credit card because VISA won't let you process transactions yourself? Well with bitcoin you always have the option, but if you don't have the skills you will be wasting time and money ---- VISA is not a mining agency. It's just a card organization. And you can not process the transactions yourself. VISA is a centralize system but Bitcoin is a peer-to-peer system. They are not the same. My point is it is hard for people to experience the whole Bitcoin process. and it will be harder for people to acquire bitcoin by fiat money as the gov will close the doors.
And my point is bitcoin isn't about mining. Mining is just something some people do to keep bitcoin running. But you seem to believe Bitcoin is pointless unless everybody can mine.
got it, silly me forgetting what the word "harder" means
it will be harder for people to acquire bitcoin by fiat money as the gov will close the doors.
Wait I dont understand this...How can the government stop me from taking cash out of my ATM and buying bitcoin from someone on the bitcointalk marketplace? or depositing money to my paypall account and buying coins directly from a miner. They can talk all they want about stopping bitcoin but at the end of the day can they stop me from sending money to a friend without saying what for? or spending cash on whatever the hell I want?
Well, I mean, "Harder", which is a comparison between different scenarios. Liberty Reserve is closed. MT.GOX account is frozen. Small online exchange places may be forced to close. This is "harder". Bitcoin's success is you can never stop a p2p network.
When you do business without a exchange center, you have to pay more effort to get a reasonable price.
IF ASIC can be used to play computer games, I think it is OK. But it can ONLY be used to mining, which creates a barrier for most people.
it will be harder for people to acquire bitcoin by fiat money as the gov will close the doors.
Wait I dont understand this...How can the government stop me from taking cash out of my ATM and buying bitcoin from someone on the bitcointalk marketplace? or depositing money to my paypall account and buying coins directly from a miner. They can talk all they want about stopping bitcoin but at the end of the day can they stop me from sending money to a friend without saying what for? or spending cash on whatever the hell I want?
Don't get mad at ASICs. Just imagine what is was like for the CPU miners when GPUs started jumping aboard. It's just progression of technology. People who wanted Bitcoin last year had to buy a GPU. People now will have to buy an ASIC. It's no issue.
Then you don't understand the hardware industry. ---- Glad to hear your explanation. But please remember, in the design, mining is a zero-sum game. So low-level ASICs have no way out.
Ordinary people are not supposed to mine. Mining is a professional industry. and as such requires special skills to do efficiently. Do you refuse to use a credit card because VISA won't let you process transactions yourself? Well with bitcoin you always have the option, but if you don't have the skills you will be wasting time and money ---- VISA is not a mining agency. It's just a card organization. And you can not process the transactions yourself. VISA is a centralize system but Bitcoin is a peer-to-peer system. They are not the same. My point is it is hard for people to experience the whole Bitcoin process. and it will be harder for people to acquire bitcoin by fiat money as the gov will close the doors.
Ordinary people are not supposed to mine. Mining is a professional industry. and as such requires special skills to do efficiently. Do you refuse to use a credit card because VISA won't let you process transactions yourself? Well with bitcoin you always have the option, but if you don't have the skills you will be wasting time and money ---- VISA is not a mining agency. It's just a card organization. And you can not process the transactions yourself. VISA is a centralize system but Bitcoin is a peer-to-peer system. They are not the same. My point is it is hard for people to experience the whole Bitcoin process. and it will be harder for people to acquire bitcoin by fiat money as the gov will close the doors.
I don't agree. I think ASICs are a big problem. It raises the entrance level much too high. If someone wants to try BTC, they can only get it by buying with fiat money. But as LR is shutdown, Mt account is locked, it is not so easy to transfer fiat money into BTCs. What's more, ASICs are designed only for mining and are worthless in other areas. More and more powerful ASICs are joining the battle everyday, making it an arms race.
I must have imagined those times I earned bitcoin for my labor.
If you don't have a skill that can be done over the internet, perhaps you could offer goods for sale. Reliance on fiat is an assumption you are making that doesn't hold if you get a little creative.
You are right there is an arms race at the moment, but within 2 years bitcoin ASICs will catch up to the top of the line transistor sizes and after that we will have the steady 18 month doubling that is seen in CPUs and GPUs. At this point, ASIC hardware prices will fall through the floor and mining will once again have a very low barrier to entry. In the mean time, a small portion of people taking the risk of buying now will come out ahead. The rest will be lucky to break even and many will take a loss. Once the technology stabilizes, most of the risk will be gone and anybody who want to will able to earn a very small margin.
Well, I do not see an end of the arms race.
Quote
And, I do not think ordinary people will buy ASIC machines to convert cash into BTC. It is hard for them to accept BTC, let alone buying the ASIC. Buying an ASIC is always an investment for professionals / geeks as ASIC is expensive and can only be used in mining.
Ordinary people are not supposed to mine. Mining is a professional industry. and as such requires special skills to do efficiently. Do you refuse to use a credit card because VISA won't let you process transactions yourself? Well with bitcoin you always have the option, but if you don't have the skills you will be wasting time and money.Quote
ASIC hardware prices may fall to the ground, but those kinds of ASIC will not be break-even. Why? In an arms race, entry level serves as cannon fodder - Only the top ones can be break-even or profitable. You can see the hash rate in BTC now. I wonder how many of ASIC owners can really get their money back.
I agree that many current ASIC investors will lose much of their investment. I still don't see how any of this is a problem for bitcoin since you can easily acquire bitcoins other ways besides mining. Over half of the bitcoins have already been mined and eventually miners will only get paid transaction fees. Pulling bitcoins out of the air isn't the endgame, it's just the only way to get the currency bootstrapped. I don't agree. I think ASICs are a big problem. It raises the entrance level much too high. If someone wants to try BTC, they can only get it by buying with fiat money. But as LR is shutdown, Mt account is locked, it is not so easy to transfer fiat money into BTCs. What's more, ASICs are designed only for mining and are worthless in other areas. More and more powerful ASICs are joining the battle everyday, making it an arms race.
I must have imagined those times I earned bitcoin for my labor.
If you don't have a skill that can be done over the internet, perhaps you could offer goods for sale. Reliance on fiat is an assumption you are making that doesn't hold if you get a little creative.
You are right there is an arms race at the moment, but within 2 years bitcoin ASICs will catch up to the top of the line transistor sizes and after that we will have the steady 18 month doubling that is seen in CPUs and GPUs. At this point, ASIC hardware prices will fall through the floor and mining will once again have a very low barrier to entry. In the mean time, a small portion of people taking the risk of buying now will come out ahead. The rest will be lucky to break even and many will take a loss. Once the technology stabilizes, most of the risk will be gone and anybody who want to will able to earn a very small margin.
Well, I do not see an end of the arms race. And, I do not think ordinary people will buy ASIC machines to convert cash into BTC. It is hard for them to accept BTC, let alone buying the ASIC. Buying an ASIC is always an investment for professionals / geeks as ASIC is expensive and can only be used in mining. ASIC hardware prices may fall to the ground, but those kinds of ASIC will not be break-even. Why? In an arms race, entry level serves as cannon fodder - Only the top ones can be break-even or profitable. You can see the hash rate in BTC now. I wonder how many of ASIC owners can really get their money back.
I don't agree. I think ASICs are a big problem. It raises the entrance level much too high. If someone wants to try BTC, they can only get it by buying with fiat money. But as LR is shutdown, Mt account is locked, it is not so easy to transfer fiat money into BTCs. What's more, ASICs are designed only for mining and are worthless in other areas. More and more powerful ASICs are joining the battle everyday, making it an arms race.
I must have imagined those times I earned bitcoin for my labor.
If you don't have a skill that can be done over the internet, perhaps you could offer goods for sale. Reliance on fiat is an assumption you are making that doesn't hold if you get a little creative.
You are right there is an arms race at the moment, but within 2 years bitcoin ASICs will catch up to the top of the line transistor sizes and after that we will have the steady 18 month doubling that is seen in CPUs and GPUs. At this point, ASIC hardware prices will fall through the floor and mining will once again have a very low barrier to entry. In the mean time, a small portion of people taking the risk of buying now will come out ahead. The rest will be lucky to break even and many will take a loss. Once the technology stabilizes, most of the risk will be gone and anybody who want to will able to earn a very small margin.
If you would like to make more people to have bitcoin, you can design a new method by using CPU only. and you can set the distribution method by sorting the whole hashing power and giving the people in different segmentation the same reward, which means, for example, to the top 5% people they will enjoy the same reward.
I know bitcoin depends on finding the solution, but imagine the whole world is a mining pool. I am not a technical guy but I think this may solve the arms race problem in bitcoin now and involve more people.
I know bitcoin depends on finding the solution, but imagine the whole world is a mining pool. I am not a technical guy but I think this may solve the arms race problem in bitcoin now and involve more people.
Build a PPLNS mining system into people's wallets might be the solution to your proposition.
Right. The mining pool infrastructure is already built out and p2pool is also available for those who want to mine on their own node. Reenabling CPU mining in the client would be fairly simple. The problem is that it will take you 100 watts-hours to compute the same hashes as what a ASIC miner can compute in 1/100th of a watt-hour.
Yes. That's why I hope there would be a algorithms that only allows CPU to compute. Nowadays, Video card is worthless in bitcoin mining.
BTW, IT seems that LTC has solved ASIC problems.
LTC is a different algorithm that requires a more robust memory system. GPUs still blow away CPUs for LTC. ASICs can be made for LTC, although they will be slightly more complicated.
Regardless, I don't see ASICs as a problem. Within 5 years you will be able to get a 1 TH/s USB stick that is also a hardware wallet for $5.
I don't agree. I think ASICs are a big problem. It raises the entrance level much too high. If someone wants to try BTC, they can only get it by buying with fiat money. But as LR is shutdown, Mt account is locked, it is not so easy to transfer fiat money into BTCs. What's more, ASICs are designed only for mining and are worthless in other areas. More and more powerful ASICs are joining the battle everyday, making it an arms race.
If you would like to make more people to have bitcoin, you can design a new method by using CPU only. and you can set the distribution method by sorting the whole hashing power and giving the people in different segmentation the same reward, which means, for example, to the top 5% people they will enjoy the same reward.
I know bitcoin depends on finding the solution, but imagine the whole world is a mining pool. I am not a technical guy but I think this may solve the arms race problem in bitcoin now and involve more people.
I know bitcoin depends on finding the solution, but imagine the whole world is a mining pool. I am not a technical guy but I think this may solve the arms race problem in bitcoin now and involve more people.
Build a PPLNS mining system into people's wallets might be the solution to your proposition.
Right. The mining pool infrastructure is already built out and p2pool is also available for those who want to mine on their own node. Reenabling CPU mining in the client would be fairly simple. The problem is that it will take you 100 watts-hours to compute the same hashes as what a ASIC miner can compute in 1/100th of a watt-hour.
Yes. That's why I hope there would be a algorithms that only allows CPU to compute. Nowadays, Video card is worthless in bitcoin mining.
BTW, IT seems that LTC has solved ASIC problems.
LTC is a different algorithm that requires a more robust memory system. GPUs still blow away CPUs for LTC. ASICs can be made for LTC, although they will be slightly more complicated.
Regardless, I don't see ASICs as a problem. Within 5 years you will be able to get a 1 TH/s USB stick that is also a hardware wallet for $5.
If you would like to make more people to have bitcoin, you can design a new method by using CPU only. and you can set the distribution method by sorting the whole hashing power and giving the people in different segmentation the same reward, which means, for example, to the top 5% people they will enjoy the same reward.
I know bitcoin depends on finding the solution, but imagine the whole world is a mining pool. I am not a technical guy but I think this may solve the arms race problem in bitcoin now and involve more people.
I know bitcoin depends on finding the solution, but imagine the whole world is a mining pool. I am not a technical guy but I think this may solve the arms race problem in bitcoin now and involve more people.
Build a PPLNS mining system into people's wallets might be the solution to your proposition.
Right. The mining pool infrastructure is already built out and p2pool is also available for those who want to mine on their own node. Reenabling CPU mining in the client would be fairly simple. The problem is that it will take you 100 watts-hours to compute the same hashes as what a ASIC miner can compute in 1/100th of a watt-hour.
Yes. That's why I hope there would be a algorithms that only allows CPU to compute. Nowadays, Video card is worthless in bitcoin mining.
BTW, IT seems that LTC has solved ASIC problems.
If you would like to make more people to have bitcoin, you can design a new method by using CPU only. and you can set the distribution method by sorting the whole hashing power and giving the people in different segmentation the same reward, which means, for example, to the top 5% people they will enjoy the same reward.
I know bitcoin depends on finding the solution, but imagine the whole world is a mining pool. I am not a technical guy but I think this may solve the arms race problem in bitcoin now and involve more people.
I know bitcoin depends on finding the solution, but imagine the whole world is a mining pool. I am not a technical guy but I think this may solve the arms race problem in bitcoin now and involve more people.
Build a PPLNS mining system into people's wallets might be the solution to your proposition.
Right. The mining pool infrastructure is already built out and p2pool is also available for those who want to mine on their own node. Reenabling CPU mining in the client would be fairly simple. The problem is that it will take you 100 watts-hours to compute the same hashes as what a ASIC miner can compute in 1/100th of a watt-hour.
i think bitcoins main problem is too many people talking about and not enough spending it.
personally I just transfer my money into BTC and buy with that for most things I would have bought online anyway. I'm going to buy them anyway might as well do it with btc. This has the double impact of helping growth the BTC economy and also my BTC balance since most of the time I have to transfer in a little bit more than I need to make sure and cover transaction costs etc. I'll take the hit on transaction costs in exchange for adding to my balance and doing my small part to help BTC grow.
That's a good approach. In some cases, it may even save you money to do this. I've been eying buying a 16 GB RAM chip (my motherboard only has slots for two RAM chips), and the price of a 16 GB RAM chip on bitcoinstore.com is actually $40 cheaper than on Amazon.com.
Bitcoinstore has fantastic prices if you can find what you are looking for.
If you would like to make more people to have bitcoin, you can design a new method by using CPU only. and you can set the distribution method by sorting the whole hashing power and giving the people in different segmentation the same reward, which means, for example, to the top 5% people they will enjoy the same reward.
I know bitcoin depends on finding the solution, but imagine the whole world is a mining pool. I am not a technical guy but I think this may solve the arms race problem in bitcoin now and involve more people.
I know bitcoin depends on finding the solution, but imagine the whole world is a mining pool. I am not a technical guy but I think this may solve the arms race problem in bitcoin now and involve more people.
Build a PPLNS mining system into people's wallets might be the solution to your proposition.
If you would like to make more people to have bitcoin, you can design a new method by using CPU only. and you can set the distribution method by sorting the whole hashing power and giving the people in different segmentation the same reward, which means, for example, to the top 5% people they will enjoy the same reward.
I know bitcoin depends on finding the solution, but imagine the whole world is a mining pool. I am not a technical guy but I think this may solve the arms race problem in bitcoin now and involve more people.
I know bitcoin depends on finding the solution, but imagine the whole world is a mining pool. I am not a technical guy but I think this may solve the arms race problem in bitcoin now and involve more people.
i think bitcoins main problem is too many people talking about and not enough spending it.
personally I just transfer my money into BTC and buy with that for most things I would have bought online anyway. I'm going to buy them anyway might as well do it with btc. This has the double impact of helping growth the BTC economy and also my BTC balance since most of the time I have to transfer in a little bit more than I need to make sure and cover transaction costs etc. I'll take the hit on transaction costs in exchange for adding to my balance and doing my small part to help BTC grow.
That's a good approach. In some cases, it may even save you money to do this. I've been eying buying a 16 GB RAM chip (my motherboard only has slots for two RAM chips), and the price of a 16 GB RAM chip on bitcoinstore.com is actually $40 cheaper than on Amazon.com.
i think bitcoins main problem is too many people talking about and not enough spending it.
personally I just transfer my money into BTC and buy with that for most things I would have bought online anyway. I'm going to buy them anyway might as well do it with btc. This has the double impact of helping growth the BTC economy and also my BTC balance since most of the time I have to transfer in a little bit more than I need to make sure and cover transaction costs etc. I'll take the hit on transaction costs in exchange for adding to my balance and doing my small part to help BTC grow.
i think bitcoins main problem is too many people talking about and not enough spending it.
For the actual amount of people using Bitcoin, there is a very extremely large amount of merchants accepting Bitcoin in comparison to the userbase. The main issue is mass adoption of Bitcoin. We need more people.
i think bitcoins main problem is too many people talking about and not enough spending it.
You can earn bitcoins simply by providing goods or services which are valuable for other BTC owners.
If you want to take fiat out of equation, replace BTC owners with miners. (You can earn bitcoins simply by providing goods or services which are valuable for miners.) Then enlarge this set by everyone who sells something to the miners. Then enlarge this set by everyone who sells something to anyone mentioned in previous sentence. ... Repeat until you are happy.
Well said... concise and precise!
If you are still unhappy then I guess you ask and yearn for a system of some fair distribution of bitcoins not determined by individual egoisim and greed of above mentioned iteratively growing set (enlarged by people "rich" in fiat).
Or if you prefer the mothership, you start working on the vaccine against the GOLD 2.0 bug.
You can earn bitcoins simply by providing goods or services which are valuable for other BTC owners.
If you want to take fiat out of equation, replace BTC owners with miners. (You can earn bitcoins simply by providing goods or services which are valuable for miners.) Then enlarge this set by everyone who sells something to the miners. Then enlarge this set by everyone who sells something to anyone mentioned in previous sentence. ... Repeat until you are happy.
If you are still unhappy then I guess you ask and yearn for a system of some fair distribution of bitcoins not determined by individual egoisim and greed of above mentioned iteratively growing set (enlarged by people "rich" in fiat). I hope Bitcoin will never becomes such "fair" system, it will be its death.
What you ask for can be theoretically achieved by forking (cloning) Devcoin with "this time the right group of elites". If it can be indeed achieved practically in larger group than a community then Karel Marx was probably right.
Edit: Concerning your
As for democratic voting... I always wonder that (most) people understand that two wolves and a sheep can not democratically vote "What is for dinner?". But they do not understand that a horde of starving poor (underpayed, exploited, dying children, fairly deserving, etc.) and one rich hoarder of wheat can not democratically vote "What is for dinner?" either.
(I wonder if they understand that ten thousand wolves and one sheep can not democratically vote either.)
If you want to take fiat out of equation, replace BTC owners with miners. (You can earn bitcoins simply by providing goods or services which are valuable for miners.) Then enlarge this set by everyone who sells something to the miners. Then enlarge this set by everyone who sells something to anyone mentioned in previous sentence. ... Repeat until you are happy.
If you are still unhappy then I guess you ask and yearn for a system of some fair distribution of bitcoins not determined by individual egoisim and greed of above mentioned iteratively growing set (enlarged by people "rich" in fiat). I hope Bitcoin will never becomes such "fair" system, it will be its death.
What you ask for can be theoretically achieved by forking (cloning) Devcoin with "this time the right group of elites". If it can be indeed achieved practically in larger group than a community then Karel Marx was probably right.
Edit: Concerning your
Quote
script that judges how many shares something is worth, or if we need a script at all (Democratic voting)
No one have created a script, a program or even formulated an algorithm which would be able to judge worth of humans achievements. (Although philosophers are trying to formulate such principles for over 2000 years. And as cpt. Picard said, there is no greater challenge than study of philosophy. :-]) As for democratic voting... I always wonder that (most) people understand that two wolves and a sheep can not democratically vote "What is for dinner?". But they do not understand that a horde of starving poor (underpayed, exploited, dying children, fairly deserving, etc.) and one rich hoarder of wheat can not democratically vote "What is for dinner?" either.
(I wonder if they understand that ten thousand wolves and one sheep can not democratically vote either.)
"How can someone be paid fairly for sold products without relying on trust and the word of the merchant?"
img host
+1
"How can someone be paid fairly for sold products without relying on trust and the word of the merchant?"
img host
I must have imagined those times I earned bitcoin for my labor.
I also assume you run your own business. Most, if not all of the Bitcoin you earned was bought with Fiat money. My argument encircles the topic of removing Fiat from the equation.
Actually, very little to none of the Bitcoin I have earned was bought with fiat money. Most of the people I have worked for were early miners who are investing their proceeds into creating more services that utilize bitcoins.
The solution to not being able to earn Bitcoin is to go to the Marketplace subforum and offer your goods or services in exchange for Bitcoin. Quit trying to fix it, it's not broken. Some of us have been doing it for years.
Yep, this is one of the main problems - if not the main problem. (In my opinion, another big one that would deter non-techies is simply the size of the blockchain. I run a full client and it took me three days to download it, and that's back when it was "only" 7 GB. I know there are thin clients, but I don't think you can get the same functionality in Electrum as you can in Armory.)
As far as getting paid in bitcoin, there's already one company that pays its employees in bitcoin: the Internet Archive, archive.org. According to their website, they offered this option to their employees and a third of them said yes. Pretty substantial number, I'd say for a fairly new technology. Maybe we should get some people to talk to them and see how they do it, if more companies could jump on the train of paying employees in bitcoins (if the employees are okay with it), it would definitely go a long way towards advancing the currency.
As far as getting paid in bitcoin, there's already one company that pays its employees in bitcoin: the Internet Archive, archive.org. According to their website, they offered this option to their employees and a third of them said yes. Pretty substantial number, I'd say for a fairly new technology. Maybe we should get some people to talk to them and see how they do it, if more companies could jump on the train of paying employees in bitcoins (if the employees are okay with it), it would definitely go a long way towards advancing the currency.
Quote
Why do you disagree with my point? Provide some basis for your opinion. It is known that Bitcoin cannot be earned any other way other than mining.
You have conflated the term earning with generating. Basically you just said 'the only way to earn USD is to print it' which is obviously wrong.
Quote
and acquiring it will eventually become either more complex to near impossible, or very easy.
Why? What makes you think it won't just work like money?
I can provide more specific explanation if you have questions, but as far as I can tell you are missing some part of what Bitcoins actually are.
I strongly disagree with you.
What you are describing is functionally impossible in practice, and if it was somehow successfully implemented I wouldn't want to touch Bitcoin with a ten foot pole.
What you are describing is functionally impossible in practice, and if it was somehow successfully implemented I wouldn't want to touch Bitcoin with a ten foot pole.
Why do you disagree with my point? Provide some basis for your opinion. It is known that Bitcoin cannot be earned any other way other than mining, and acquiring it will eventually become either more complex to near impossible, or very easy. If it goes south, such a system has to be implemented. If you want $500 in Bitcoin, there would be a mountain of fees to pay just to purchase it. Or if you went the mining route, it would take months to get $500 worth of Bitcoin out of $500 worth of mining hardware.
I must have imagined those times I earned bitcoin for my labor.
I also assume you run your own business. Most, if not all of the Bitcoin you earned was bought with Fiat money. My argument encircles the topic of removing Fiat from the equation.
I must have imagined those times I earned bitcoin for my labor.
Also this. +1
I must have imagined those times I earned bitcoin for my labor.
I strongly disagree with you.
What you are describing is functionally impossible in practice, and if it was somehow successfully implemented I wouldn't want to touch Bitcoin with a ten foot pole.
What you are describing is functionally impossible in practice, and if it was somehow successfully implemented I wouldn't want to touch Bitcoin with a ten foot pole.
Ever heard of paragraphs?
They encourage people to read what you write.
They encourage people to read what you write.
I just briefly glanced at the mass I posted and see what you mean. I reformatted it.
Ever heard of paragraphs?
They encourage people to read what you write.
They encourage people to read what you write.
As we know, centralization allows us to receive Fiat money for whatever work we would like to do. That is one of the Pros of government. Our raw work converts into "money". With Bitcoin however, the only way for us to earn it is via Mining. While Mining in itself is great with keeping a solid inflation rate, it doesnt allow for public adoption. The main issue with Bitcoin is acquiring it. Difficulties surrounding converting fiat to Bitcoin (fiat has been described as having an umbilical cord to Bitcoin) are deemed to increase and grow. Unfortunately, changing this is very difficult.
However, another old coin unknown to most has semi-fixed this issue. Anyone heard of Devcoin? It's about as old as Bitcoin somewhat, and allows people to be paid via their "open-source work" and also by mining. Devcoin allows miners to make 10% of each block, while 90% of mining goes to people who actually work for it. The main "product" that people earn Devcoin for is writing, however other projects are available.
Unfortunately, Devcoin has two issues also, or to be more correctly defined, two imperfections. Only "open-source work" is paid, which essentially means that you cannot sell your work. Everyone has your work's core fundamentals. Under deeper inspection, this isn't a really big issue. You just can't continually make money off of one product. Also, you could have a very large project that you have finished, but the payment you can receive is essentially variable. Devcoin's second imperfection is that the payment system IS centralized. Devtome is what handles the payment system, and while payment for writing is automated, payment for projects is not.
You receive payment via a share system. Payments go out every "round" (essentially every 3000-5000 blocks). For writing, every 1,000 words equates to one share. The total amount of shares then allow proportional payment of each round to go out. Each round is roughly 180 million devcoins if my memory serves me right. However, with projects that don't involve words, SOMEBODY needs to determine and assign the number of shares that THEY believe is fair for the project. Due to the way Devtome is built, it can become decentralized. The whole issue is built upon how we go about creating a script that judges how many shares something is worth, or if we need a script at all (Democratic voting).
Something like this needs to be attempted to be added to Bitcoin. Yes, this would require a fork, so around 60% of the network would have to agree with the changes for it to be implemented correctly (theoretically 51% is the requirement, but there is the probability factor with block solving as well). If a system was implemented that would allow us to not only be paid using the share system for "open-source work", one that also allows us to be paid directly in Bitcoin by proof of sales of products would be nice as well. However, such a payment system without government is completely hinged off trust. That is why I have written this thread. We need to brainstorm a way for such a system to work. Essentially, the central question is: "How can someone be paid fairly for sold products without relying on trust and the word of the merchant?" Once such a solution is figured out, and if the network accepted such a change, Bitcoin would be set to go mainstream instantly. Mining alone cannot be the way Bitcoin works. Mining alone ties acquiring Bitcoin directly to Fiat money, which is what I believe personally to be the worst thing Bitcoin is facing right now.
However, another old coin unknown to most has semi-fixed this issue. Anyone heard of Devcoin? It's about as old as Bitcoin somewhat, and allows people to be paid via their "open-source work" and also by mining. Devcoin allows miners to make 10% of each block, while 90% of mining goes to people who actually work for it. The main "product" that people earn Devcoin for is writing, however other projects are available.
Unfortunately, Devcoin has two issues also, or to be more correctly defined, two imperfections. Only "open-source work" is paid, which essentially means that you cannot sell your work. Everyone has your work's core fundamentals. Under deeper inspection, this isn't a really big issue. You just can't continually make money off of one product. Also, you could have a very large project that you have finished, but the payment you can receive is essentially variable. Devcoin's second imperfection is that the payment system IS centralized. Devtome is what handles the payment system, and while payment for writing is automated, payment for projects is not.
You receive payment via a share system. Payments go out every "round" (essentially every 3000-5000 blocks). For writing, every 1,000 words equates to one share. The total amount of shares then allow proportional payment of each round to go out. Each round is roughly 180 million devcoins if my memory serves me right. However, with projects that don't involve words, SOMEBODY needs to determine and assign the number of shares that THEY believe is fair for the project. Due to the way Devtome is built, it can become decentralized. The whole issue is built upon how we go about creating a script that judges how many shares something is worth, or if we need a script at all (Democratic voting).
Something like this needs to be attempted to be added to Bitcoin. Yes, this would require a fork, so around 60% of the network would have to agree with the changes for it to be implemented correctly (theoretically 51% is the requirement, but there is the probability factor with block solving as well). If a system was implemented that would allow us to not only be paid using the share system for "open-source work", one that also allows us to be paid directly in Bitcoin by proof of sales of products would be nice as well. However, such a payment system without government is completely hinged off trust. That is why I have written this thread. We need to brainstorm a way for such a system to work. Essentially, the central question is: "How can someone be paid fairly for sold products without relying on trust and the word of the merchant?" Once such a solution is figured out, and if the network accepted such a change, Bitcoin would be set to go mainstream instantly. Mining alone cannot be the way Bitcoin works. Mining alone ties acquiring Bitcoin directly to Fiat money, which is what I believe personally to be the worst thing Bitcoin is facing right now.
Jump to: