because they were centrilized, like our loved banks
Well it seems like Bill Gates wants to get in the ecurrency bandwagon and im sure he's looking into a centralized solution. This guy is a tech leech. 
Topic: Why did precursors to Bitcoin Fail? (Read 1752 times)
Well, those things weren't decentralized. ...
That's what I was going to say. There really are no precursors of bitcoin. The examples you gave were attempts to make traditional systems work in a digital environment. Bitcoin is a digital native, and when combined with the lack of central authority it is truly different. It is a revolutionary development in the evolution of money.
This implies that the technology itself was not that important but rather the implementation and momentum.
Makes Bitcoin seem more fad than revolution with that narrative. For me I would rather hear that Bitcoin implemented something in the algorithm that was truly unique and revolutionary that until that point represented a fatal flaw that would not allow the distributed momentum to ever take hold.
the credit cards are the cheapest way and the "safest". BTC propaganda is spreading a lot of lies regarding to this thing. BTC is not free and not safe. a lot of hackings, a lot of problems.
BTC is unsafe only if you don't protect yourself online.
If you use all protection offered by Blockchain and other services, you will be fine.
In fact, I think that bitcoin security online is higher than security if you use credit card online.
I never had problems spending bitcoin online but had security problems using credit cards online.
In my opinion bTC is free and BTC is safe, but I can't say this for credit cards.
because they were centrilized, like our loved banks
Bitcoin solved the problem of double-spending, of course
Chaum's DigiCash solved the problem of double-spending. Bitcoin solved the problem of a distributed ledger run by mutually mistrustful parties. 
Surely not! But, maybe?: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barbara_Liskov
http://www.indiatechonline.com/it-happened-in-india.php?id=197
Quote
Top computer scientist, now in Bangalore says serious number crunching could be next app. for cloud computing.
An IndiaTechOnline special
Need a super computer for some seriously high performance computation task? You may not have to sit around twiddling your thumbs, till your organisation whistles up the million dollars or more that may be required to install one of those “Top 500” HPC platforms in your lab. The day is not far away when such computation-intensive tasks can be accomplished by a pay-by-user model, where common-use supercomputing resources join the ever growing list of applications that are available in what is called the ‘Cloud’ -- shared, Web-based computer services maintained for the benefit multiple users who don’t need to own the infrastructure; only pay for the time they use it.
This is the vision of Barbara Liskov, head of the Programming Methodology Group in the Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and a person who has revolutionised computer programming with her path breaking development of the tools that help create complex programme structures.
An IndiaTechOnline special
Need a super computer for some seriously high performance computation task? You may not have to sit around twiddling your thumbs, till your organisation whistles up the million dollars or more that may be required to install one of those “Top 500” HPC platforms in your lab. The day is not far away when such computation-intensive tasks can be accomplished by a pay-by-user model, where common-use supercomputing resources join the ever growing list of applications that are available in what is called the ‘Cloud’ -- shared, Web-based computer services maintained for the benefit multiple users who don’t need to own the infrastructure; only pay for the time they use it.
This is the vision of Barbara Liskov, head of the Programming Methodology Group in the Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and a person who has revolutionised computer programming with her path breaking development of the tools that help create complex programme structures.
What did Satoshi say about cloud mining?
the credit cards are the cheapest way and the "safest". BTC propaganda is spreading a lot of lies regarding to this thing. BTC is not free and not safe. a lot of hackings, a lot of problems.
Credit cards may appear "safe" and without additional charges compared to cash from the perspective of the consumer.
The cost of this system is directly paid for by the merchant, and indirectly passed on to non credit-card-using customers, due to the way that merchant contracts are written. Losses from fraud are socialized and passed on this way.
The act of using a credit card requires that you hand over your personal information to the merchant. The number of data breaches of merchants by hackers for the purposes of identity theft simply dwarfs the hackings of bitcoin services. Bitcoin is still in its infancy, and solutions will develop to secure personal bitcoins that involve securing private keys away from platforms like general purpose PCs that can be targeted by a hackers.
I dont think that projects was precursors to Bitcoin.
Lots of folks conclude that Satoshi's genius lay in herding several elements together that were already out there to create something new and unprecedented.
The history of systems with a central point of failure, ie some guy the authorities can nail, is unsurprising.
The history of systems with a central point of failure, ie some guy the authorities can nail, is unsurprising.
Well, those things weren't decentralized. ...
That's what I was going to say. There really are no precursors of bitcoin. The examples you gave were attempts to make traditional systems work in a digital environment. Bitcoin is a digital native, and when combined with the lack of central authority it is truly different. It is a revolutionary development in the evolution of money.
This implies that the technology itself was not that important but rather the implementation and momentum.
Makes Bitcoin seem more fad than revolution with that narrative. For me I would rather hear that Bitcoin implemented something in the algorithm that was truly unique and revolutionary that until that point represented a fatal flaw that would not allow the distributed momentum to ever take hold.
the credit cards are the cheapest way and the "safest". BTC propaganda is spreading a lot of lies regarding to this thing. BTC is not free and not safe. a lot of hackings, a lot of problems.
In Bitcoin, all of it was replaced by using mathematical calculations and cryptography.
Each transaction in bitcoin will be tested through a cryptographic system that is spread across a network peer-to-peer. It is estimated, there are tens of thousands of systems that also perform this test.
Bitcoin is not free from theft. However, any stolen bitcoin will remain recorded in the system so that when used for transactions were, in theory, will always be tracked.
Bitcoin decentralized system made many refer to it as the Internet for money. If the Internet is revolutionizing the way the global communications, Bitcoin is believed to change the way the world uses money.
bitcoin solved the problem of double-spending, of course
Well, those things weren't decentralized. ...
That's what I was going to say. There really are no precursors of bitcoin. The examples you gave were attempts to make traditional systems work in a digital environment. Bitcoin is a digital native, and when combined with the lack of central authority it is truly different. It is a revolutionary development in the evolution of money.
This implies that the technology itself was not that important but rather the implementation and momentum.
Makes Bitcoin seem more fad than revolution with that narrative. For me I would rather hear that Bitcoin implemented something in the algorithm that was truly unique and revolutionary that until that point represented a fatal flaw that would not allow the distributed momentum to ever take hold.
the credit cards are the cheapest way and the "safest". BTC propaganda is spreading a lot of lies regarding to this thing. BTC is not free and not safe. a lot of hackings, a lot of problems.
Well, those things weren't decentralized. ...
That's what I was going to say. There really are no precursors of bitcoin. The examples you gave were attempts to make traditional systems work in a digital environment. Bitcoin is a digital native, and when combined with the lack of central authority it is truly different. It is a revolutionary development in the evolution of money.
This implies that the technology itself was not that important but rather the implementation and momentum.
Makes Bitcoin seem more fad than revolution with that narrative. For me I would rather hear that Bitcoin implemented something in the algorithm that was truly unique and revolutionary that until that point represented a fatal flaw that would not allow the distributed momentum to ever take hold.
Pretty disappointing answers frankly......
Then you're not reading.
Likely decentralization, but wasn't the double spend an issue with the others and bitcoin solved that? I could be wrong about that though.
This. The others had a big target on their backs and could be taken down. And were.
Why did Napster fail while Bittorrent has not?
Well, those things weren't decentralized. ...
That's what I was going to say. There really are no precursors of bitcoin. The examples you gave were attempts to make traditional systems work in a digital environment. Bitcoin is a digital native, and when combined with the lack of central authority it is truly different. It is a revolutionary development in the evolution of money.
This implies that the technology itself was not that important but rather the implementation and momentum.
Makes Bitcoin seem more fad than revolution with that narrative. For me I would rather hear that Bitcoin implemented something in the algorithm that was truly unique and revolutionary that until that point represented a fatal flaw that would not allow the distributed momentum to ever take hold.
Well, those things weren't decentralized. ...
That's what I was going to say. There really are no precursors of bitcoin. The examples you gave were attempts to make traditional systems work in a digital environment. Bitcoin is a digital native, and when combined with the lack of central authority it is truly different. It is a revolutionary development in the evolution of money.
Well, those things weren't decentralized. They were merely vehicles build atop of another commodity (USD/Gold/etc.) Bitcoin on the other hand isn't controller by a single authority and can't be shut off or go bankrupt itself. It's just not possible. There was no incentive for people to buy the precursors, with Bitcoin people anticipate the price going up. Also, Bitcoin is open, everyone can go and create their own services, it invites people to participate, to mine, and to experience using Bitcoin.
1. Decentralized
Although its true, there is still people that thinks that its bad since no one can "protect" the market value of bitcoin.It atracts the attention of diferent people when compared to centralized solutions.
Probably its the idea of being decentralized. It was also definitely much better and flexible than any of the precursors.
So Bitcoin solved the Byzantine general problem...
It didn't. https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/who-solved-the-bizantine-generals-problem-934626
Satoshi implied that price of 1 BTC will be raising all the way to the moon. This made Bitcoin popular.
I read every newspaper say it solved this problem.
Jump to: