Black crew socks Etsy

Why Hard Forking bitcoin is the biggest mistake possible.

The argument to Hard fork bitcoin is extremely misguided.
HF proponents will point to the price of ether and say ‘look, bitcoin can survive too, even in such extreme circumstances." However, with Ethereum, the matter of forking was one of technical problems only.
Ethereum is a nerd’s toy and mostly only nerds who knew the consequences were using ethereum or really cared about it. They haven’t left ethereum because they want it for its’ technical application, of which there really isn’t a good alternative to until Rootstock is ready.
Meanwhile, with Bitcoin, technical concerns of a hard fork are nothing next to the Economic concerns of forking the MONEY of bitcoin. Ether was never a money. Nobody spend millions of man hours building TRUST IN A CURRENCY by talking vendors and businesses into accepting ether for coffee and alpaca socks. It’s a completely different risk to destroy the trust in bitcoin as money than it was for ether as money.
As an example, imagine forking your fiat currency. What would be the economic impact if suddenly, with little warning, there are two USDs or EURs? What if each bill literally split into red and blue versions and the government’s best efforts couldn’t get them to re-combine? Would it have an impact on the price of milk at the grocery store? The savings in your bank account? How many bank accounts would you now have even, and can you access them all?
Nerd toys without people’s life savings at stake can of course survive the split. - Bitcoin’s moved far beyond that stage now and the bottom line is we can’t afford to risk all the Trust built up in the money of bitcoin, throwing away all the advantages we’ve gotten from the network effect and 8 years of growth in it.
submitted by Coinosphere to btc [link] [comments]

[megapost] NYANdeas

We've come a long ways and I'm at a point where I've decided I'm going to really pursue this with everything I've got in terms of energy and devotion. I've got a prior commitment hanging over my head towards the end of this month, but once I resolve that, I'm planning on spending a couple months really digging into NYAN and seeing what I can do. So far we've just chipped away at the edges, but already we've seen some pretty impressive results. Just a brief recap of our successes first and then I'll talk about my ideas.
We've gone from 1-3 satoshi to 10-30 satoshi prices. Not bad. We've got two new block explorers up in response to the previous one going down. We've got an irc channel and active community members both here and there. And we've got me, the crazy bastard who's locked up 25% of the available supply and is planning to do everything he can to build up NYAN to its proper greatness, and got tipnyan going and did a major giveaway with it. Oh, and we survived a dump of ~10% of the available supply quite comfortably. Probably other stuff I'm forgetting about right now.
So, what next? Well, a lot of stuff. This is just a huge dump of ideas for discussion and inspiration. It's not necessarily ordered, although I'll try to have it go roughly from simplest to most complex. These are by no means promises or guarantees. This is just stuff I think would be cool.
Some of this isn't a "implement this", it's more of a blog post prompt or general concept.
submitted by coinaday to nyancoins [link] [comments]

Open Letter to Forbes Peter Cohan

Sent to: [email protected]
I've read your article on Forbes about Bitcoin: http://blogs.forbes.com/petercohan/2011/06/28/can-bitcoin-survive-is-it-legal/
I think the article could be better, and I'll outline the reasons below.
Corrections
dropped from $17.50 to “pennies”
One exchange (out of several) experienced technical difficulties (related to being hacked) and suspended trading for a week. Other exchanges kept trading and held the exchange value between 14$-17$. It currently trades at 16.8$.
used to buy Alpaca wool socks and illegal drugs
There is a wide variety of goods&services that's growing daily that you can pay for with Bitcoins. Among them are PC-hardware, Coffee in NYC, IT Consulting, Programming, Webdesign, Web-Hosting and many more.
Comparision to other "e-currencies" not thought trough
have been many attempts at creating online currencies — including Digicash, Flooz, and Beenz.
It isn't exactly relevant to compare Bitcoin to these currencies.
Beenz and Flooz were value substitutes entirely controlled by a single party. They could only be exchanged by involving that party. Inevitably these parties fell on hard times at some point or another, and had to cease operating, at which point exchange became impossible. That makes them a bad comparision to Bitcoin which is guaranteed not to fall prey to central control and floundering businesses that'd make their exchange impossible.
Digicash may have been somewhat similar to Bitcoin, but there are two key differences. Digicash may have been anonymous and somewhat decentralized in exchange, yet the minting of new coins and the client software itself were in the control of a single party. Inevitably when Digicash failed (to run a sound business) Digicash (the currency) became impossible to trade.
Therefore the comparision of Bitcoin with these failed "e-currencies" is only insofar of interest as it provides ample evidence of what exactly Bitcoin did better, namely two things:
Small change is irrelevant to the discussion of Bitcoin
A historical look at currencies over the last 500 years reveals an interesting insight — a key limiting factor to adopting currencies has been the ability to make small change.
The smallest unit of bitcoins is 0.00000001 btc. (https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/FAQ#How_divisible_are_Bitcoins?). At currently traded (16.8$/btc) that would be 0.000000168$. Bitcoin payments can be specified down to that smallest unit, and there does not have to be any "change". Therefore both the numeration and the precision of payment argument is not relevant.
Marginal costs and benefits misconception
But they never caught on because their marginal costs to consumers and merchants exceeded their marginal benefits.
In order to understand the motivation behind bitcoin, it's important to understand the limitations (or costs) of CC and Paypal payment processors.
The Paypal issues
The CC in general issues
*What Bitcoin does better
In Summary
Repeated misleading allusions as to questionable legality
Is It Legal? as a way to pay anonymously for illegal drugs sold on Silk Road – is the one that has been referred to the U.S. Attorney General as a violation of money laundering statutes. Mann notes that Bitcoin’s ultimate ambition well might be illegal After all, he points out, there are federal statutes that make it illegal to produce a separate currency.
Two main thrusts are presented by you as to the legality of Bitcoins. First you question businesses that use them of being in violation of money laundering laws. Second you allude to the legality of alternative currencies. Both of these things are not issues for the following reasons:
Consumers and Merchants pickup
Unless consumers and merchants can be persuaded that adopting it will make them better off, it’s likely to go the way of other online currencies.
This is an astute observation and I applaud it for that.
However as a system Bitcoins do not depend (financially) on that pickup, and the speculative part of the Bitcoin economy will be able to live quite a while entirely without it. That being said, there is some pickup of bitcoin in genuine e-commerce and other fields.
Closing
Bitcoin has many desirable qualities, from an organizational, economic and technical point of view. Your article is not a very good representation of Bitcoin as it is, nor of what it can be, or what it's core issues really are.
I'd invite you to write a retraction and correction in your next article and consult a Bitcoin specialist for review and input. If against all "odds" Bitcoin should prove to be more successful then you thought, think of it as collateral for your journalistic integrity.
You can read comments about this open letter on the reddit post about it: http://www.reddit.com/Bitcoin/comments/ic92x/open_letter_to_forbes_peter_cohan/
Kind Regards, Florian Bösch
TL;DR Peter Cohan has a poor grasp of bitcoins and presents a number of fallacious arguments that are not relevant.
submitted by pyalot to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

My (Wordy) Bitcoin Story

Warning: wall of text, read only if you have nothing better to do.
I was originally introduced to Bitcoin in late 2010. Wrapping my head around the whole thing took some time and some reading, but I immediately became infatuated with it. At the time, I think the most exciting thing you could buy was alpaca socks. I remember seeing it around $0.50/BTC. I didn't have a whole lot of disposable income, so investing wasn't really an option, but I got a little bit of BTC from the original Bitcoin faucet and a fun pyramid scheme site (anyone remember that FXnet site?).
Flash forward... I watched as BTC hit parity with the dollar. I strongly believed (still do) in the principle of decentralized currency, and felt like I should support it. I PayPal'd $100 to someone in the IRC channel in exchange for 100 BTC. I'd like to have invested more, but that was all I really could do at the time. I figured I could lose it all, but even if that happened, it was capitalizing a good cause, and maybe the next e-currency would be successful. (In hindsight, should have sold a kidney for money to buy-in with.)
I experimented with trading on Mt. Gox, but only broke even. I didn't know what I was doing so I decided to just "buy and hold" and get in for the long run with my 100 BTC. I quit logging on to Mt. Gox and just watched the price. Not long afterwards, that nicely animated "What Is Bitcoin?" video came out, and Silk Road started getting some press.
BTC has just climbed and climbed. The more it climbs, the more excited I get. Over the years, I've watched my $100 buy-in become worth $1,000, then $10,000. And recently, as we all know, BTC hit $1,000. My $100 buy-in became worth $100,000. That is an absolutely inconceivable amount of money to me. I hate to use the term "life changing" in regards to money, but at this point $100k is.
I recently logged into my Mt. Gox account. Not to trade or anything, but just to look at it (still kind of in shock that I own a $100k asset). What I saw surprised me. I didn't have 100 BTC, I had $100 USD. Frantically, I went to my order history. Then I saw it. When I made that decision, years ago, not to trade anymore, I still had an open sell order. It executed a few days later. These last couple of years I've watched the prices, thinking I owned Bitcoin, but I had almost no stake in it at all.
I haven't been able to think or read about Bitcoin for the last week or so. The thought of it just makes me sick to my stomach. I can handle making the wrong buy/sell choice, but the fact that I lost $100,000 to a simple mistake just really makes me angry at myself.
Not much I can do about it now though. I'd like to have my 100 BTC back of course, but it's hindsight at this point. I found another wallet of mine and it had a bit less than one BTC in it, so I'll start there.
This is my first day back from completely avoiding the BTC community. Just needed to vent. Thanks.
TL;DR: Bought 100 BTC at $1 several years ago, grew to $100,000. Checked my balance and discovered I had accidentally sold them all in 2011.
submitted by 4C-BTC to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

11-18 21:12 - '[quote] No. What I'm saying, once again: / If one needs to buy bitcoins and has US dollars to spend, the choices are many. By going [here], for instance, one is offered 990 willing sellers, many of whom don't requi...' by /u/BitcoinistanRising removed from /r/Bitcoin within 321-326min

'''
you're basically saying that until everyone else jumps on board it's not worth the interest.
No. What I'm saying, once again:
If one needs to buy bitcoins and has US dollars to spend, the choices are many. By going [here]1 , for instance, one is offered 990 willing sellers, many of whom don't require your banking details and may be met in the meatspace -- a hipster cafe, a roadside McDonald's, a shithole motel room, or even a poorly-lit alleyway reeking of piss, behind a dumpster.
Adventure!
Or one may get bored with spy vs. spy bullshit, bite the bullet, and share one's highly private and very personal info with an actual exchange, the sort grownups use, and buy enough BTC for one's jenkem fix alpaca socks.
But if one absolutely, positively needs a jenkem fix alpaca socks to get one's BTC within a finite timeframe like, let's say a month? Don't go [here]2 . Because there's no BTC there. You'll have a better chance of scoring BTC at your local pig station.
'''
Context Link
Go1dfish undelete link
unreddit undelete link
Author: BitcoinistanRising
1: loc*lbitcoins***m*bu*-bit*oins*o*l*n*/usd/ 2: s*6.po*t*mg.*rg/*48lifa*1*Cap*ure*gif
Unknown links are censored to prevent spreading illicit content.
submitted by removalbot to removalbot [link] [comments]

Some thoughts on the economy of Bitcoin. BTC is fractional reserve and the US Gov has more control over it than you think.

I've given a lot of thought to the arguments and analysis surrounding Bitcoin and I'd like to know what you think about my take on it, and one of my concerns. Please pardon the clickbait-y title, I promise I'm not asking this to push a pro or anti-BTC agenda.
Part 1 theorizes that properties similar to "fractional reserve" are shared by most currencies including cryptocurrencies that aren't centrally managed.
Part 2 presents a question about liquidity and US government market-distortion power.
Part 1: Thoughts on the economic model of currency
So first, many of the arguments for BTC and against fiat focus on monetary ecosystem aspects that BTC and fiat actually seem to share. "Fractional banking" and "no intrinsic value/off the gold standard" are often criticisms of fiat money. As many here have already observed: Crypto and fiat both primarily derive their value based on the willingness of others to accept it in exchange. Neither carries any intrinsic utility value. USD black markets in Argentina and Venezuela (and possibly Cuba) are good examples of how governments can exercise enormous power over citizens through law, monetary supply manipulation aka money printing, official exchange rates and capital controls, but cannot prevent independent price discovery or market valuation of their currencies above their actual worth in exchange. The informal acceptance of Canadian Tire Money by Canadians and the acceptance of casino chips by Las Vegas cabbies is an example of how items other than currency (though to be fair, they are dollar-denominated and exchangeable) have organically come to be accepted as money substitutes despite lack of government decree.
As for fractional reserve and debt-based supply, those are just mechanisms - scalar multipliers - that allow a currency's admins to change the money supply. Fiat supply is controlled by board of admins. BTC has a fixed time schedule by which the supply is algorithmically controlled, but that doesn't mean its valuation in the market doesn't behave like a fiat currency.
The immediate value of the currency/stock unit is what it can buy right now. This is what most people focus on: how many dollars is cabbage corp stock worth, or how many Monopolycoins does it take to buy a cheeseburger. There's the supply: outstanding stock shares or monopolycoins issued. There's the amount of resources that the monetary supply can theoretically purchase - the market cap, or issued_monopoly_coins/cheeseburger_market_price. There's the amount of resources that the monetary supply can actually be exchanged for, or "access": the net worth of cabbage corp, or the actual number of cheeseburgers that can be made by the restaurant.
The supply of a stock or currency will always account for more resources than it is actually based on. The difference between the two, I'm told, is what controls liquidity. This is not necessarily bad. In the case of stocks it allows expected growth and investment returns to be priced in. In the case of currency, ideally it allows the amount and velocity of circulating currency to match the amount and velocity of circulating goods. Both USD and BTC share this property - can I call this ratio "fractional reserve liquidity"?
Please correct me if this theory is incorrect. I would like to postulate that the liquidity of currency and the currency price of goods reflects the amount of circulating currency, not the actual supply. Both goods and services derive demand from utility and scarcity, and scarcity refers to available units, not units in existence. That is, if 1000 units of Monopolycoin circulate in an market economy where 100 cheeseburgers are being traded (and nothing else), the cheeseburger will be 10 coins. If the circulating money supply increases to 2000 coins, the cheeseburger will soon increase to 20 coins. However, if 5000 Monopolycoins are were issued and being circulated around in some other country, cheeseburger prices will not reflect those coins until they begin to circulate among the hungry diners.
Part 2: The liquidity concern
A much better explanation of this issue is made by Stanislav here: http://www.loper-os.org/?p=1009
I have no disagreement per se withe fact that early miners, coin thieves, other large holders and possibly "Satoshi" have ownership of a large part of the Bitcoin economy.
Sure, a lot of people are jealous of those who struck it rich on Bitcoin, and a lot of people believe it's unfair for someone to obtain value without productively creating it. A sentiment I agree with, though in the case of Satoshi, I would say that Satoshi definitely deserves to gain millions from the brilliant creation of the theory and the well thought out software (things like choosing the longest chain by total difficulty and not the block height, network time based on 5 peer median excluding outliers past 70 minutes, safe mode, show a really mature product), and the early adopters who evangelized the system with things like faucets also deserve to benefit.
My concern is when you add in risky liquidity. There would be no unease if there were enough assets, meaning alpaca socks, US dollars, burgers and pizzas being transacted, that a large market action would not disrupt the Bitcoin economy. If there are 100,000 Monopolycoins minted and US $50,000 being traded around supporting a $1:1coin price, then it doesn't matter so much if 20k of those were stolen and 20k were pre-mined and hoarded by the creator, because a very healthy 50% reserve means that a 20k coin cashout won't take out too much capital. It's the fear of putting dollars, burgers, and development work into the ecosystem and having most of it sucked out by a few actors that has people screaming "ponzi".
Now, it's not Satoshi that I'm worried about - whoever Satoshi is would be smart enough to slowly and gradually sell off whatever coins they have to avoid affecting the price.
According to this article, the US FBI has the world's largest Bitcoin wallet: http://www.wired.com/wiredenterprise/2013/12/fbi_wallet/
About 1%, according to this list: http://bitcoinrichlist.com/top100
Keep in mind that while that $94 million number represents the worth of 1% of the outstanding coins, $94 million is a much higher percentage of the actual worth of the Bitcoin economy.
To disrupt Bitcoin, the U.S. government doesn't need to build supercomputers and run a 51% attack, or even try to attack it all. There's a good chance the FBI will sell the entire lot of seized coins at once, or within a short period. It's not like they care about market timing. Whether or not the Bitcoin economy is resilient to such an event depends on the amount of capital and confidence invested into the system at that time.
I wonder:
How much value (primarily foreign exchange reserves, some physical goods) is inside the Bitcoin economy? How much value (iPhones, oil exports, foreign reserves and so on) are in the U.S. Dollar economy? How do the exchangeable assets match up to the total market valuations for both currencies?
submitted by cayeno to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Learn How to Mine Bitcoin with Most Computers. Earn $100s Paid Out Weekly! One More Thing - YouTube Free Bitcoins

So as a rite of passage into the Bitcoin world, I had to buy some Alpaca socks! I will use it to demonstrate how to make a payment with the Bitcoin client. How to send a payment Buying Alpaca Socks I ordered some Alpaca Socks from Grass Hill Alpacas. After confirming the current price (including shipping) with the seller, I clicked on the "Send Coins" button at the top left, which brings up a ... Bitcoin Legal Countries - Free Bitcoin Wallet Online Bitcoin Legal Countries Alpaca Socks Bitcoin Reddit Bitcoin Miner App This happened back in 2014 when Bitcoin’s price wavered around USD 360 to USD 760. Meanwhile, Salmon was confident about his bet, stating how Bitcoin’s value will indeed increase but not because of its use but rather based on a speculative rise in value. He cited how those who bought Alpaca socks using Bitcoin would regret, noting the price increase, and would have preferred sitting on it ... Schau dir unsere Auswahl an black crew socks an, um die tollsten einzigartigen oder spezialgefertigten handgemachten Stücke aus unseren Shops für kleidung zu finden. ONE SIZE FITS ALL, 100% COTTON.

[index] [9569] [5527] [12256] [14410] [42105] [44310] [20079] [10405] [39581] [22881]

Learn How to Mine Bitcoin with Most Computers. Earn $100s Paid Out Weekly!

Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube. Marlou Volkerink inspireert haar volgers al jarenlang. In 2011 begon haar ondernemersavontuur met Follow Fashion. Daar kwam in 2015 Followfitgirls.com bij en... Das Portal für Systemhäuser, ITK-Händler und Distributoren: Business-Tipps, Technologie-Trends, Channel-News und strategische Ratgeber. Important Links from the Video: https://github.com/nicehash/NiceHashMiner/releases Digital Asset Exchange: https://www.poloniex.com/ Currency Exchange (Credi... One More Thing is de grootste Apple community in de Benelux. De website bestaat uit een redactionele nieuwspagina en een community met meer dan geregistreerd...

#