|
On February 27 2014 23:38 MoonfireSpam wrote:
If I understand this right. If MtGox disappears and never fixes itself then all those bitcoins go poof?
Yup. Which is not a huge problem. The total amount of bitcoins is 21 million, but a bitcoin is divided into 100mln satoshi. If things were to go crazy they could even decide to split those up further later on. It's just that in this case, it's a significant portion of the total amount of bitcoins discovered, so it'll have a big impact.
|
On February 28 2014 00:01 aseq wrote:Show nested quote +On February 27 2014 23:38 MoonfireSpam wrote:
If I understand this right. If MtGox disappears and never fixes itself then all those bitcoins go poof? Yup. Which is not a huge problem. The total amount of bitcoins is 21 million, but a bitcoin is divided into 100mln satoshi. If things were to go crazy they could even decide to split those up further later on. It's just that in this case, it's a significant portion of the total amount of bitcoins discovered, so it'll have a big impact.
Not quite. While you can continue to "split" the coins, there is still the matter of deflationary pressure. The more there is, the less stable the currency. Another poster said it well earlier that much of the money in the market now is based on speculation, which elbows out people that use it as a real medium of exchange. Huge chunks of BTC disappearing (especially publicly) increases the propensity to hoard, discouraging people from putting more money into the system and/or spending the money they have.
|
GG coins on mtgox lol
Ah well my fault for leaving a few on there anyway. For some reason i didn't wanna hold the whole lot in my wallet lol
|
On February 28 2014 00:21 aksfjh wrote:Show nested quote +On February 28 2014 00:01 aseq wrote:On February 27 2014 23:38 MoonfireSpam wrote:
If I understand this right. If MtGox disappears and never fixes itself then all those bitcoins go poof? Yup. Which is not a huge problem. The total amount of bitcoins is 21 million, but a bitcoin is divided into 100mln satoshi. If things were to go crazy they could even decide to split those up further later on. It's just that in this case, it's a significant portion of the total amount of bitcoins discovered, so it'll have a big impact. Not quite. While you can continue to "split" the coins, there is still the matter of deflationary pressure. The more there is, the less stable the currency. Another poster said it well earlier that much of the money in the market now is based on speculation, which elbows out people that use it as a real medium of exchange. Huge chunks of BTC disappearing (especially publicly) increases the propensity to hoard, discouraging people from putting more money into the system and/or spending the money they have.
"Splitting" the coins doesn't create "more" of anything, just like when people agree that they will start using half-dollars for some reason. One BTC will still be 10 tenths, 1000 thousandths or million millionths of BTC.
|
On March 01 2014 01:58 3772 wrote:Show nested quote +On February 28 2014 00:21 aksfjh wrote:On February 28 2014 00:01 aseq wrote:On February 27 2014 23:38 MoonfireSpam wrote:
If I understand this right. If MtGox disappears and never fixes itself then all those bitcoins go poof? Yup. Which is not a huge problem. The total amount of bitcoins is 21 million, but a bitcoin is divided into 100mln satoshi. If things were to go crazy they could even decide to split those up further later on. It's just that in this case, it's a significant portion of the total amount of bitcoins discovered, so it'll have a big impact. Not quite. While you can continue to "split" the coins, there is still the matter of deflationary pressure. The more there is, the less stable the currency. Another poster said it well earlier that much of the money in the market now is based on speculation, which elbows out people that use it as a real medium of exchange. Huge chunks of BTC disappearing (especially publicly) increases the propensity to hoard, discouraging people from putting more money into the system and/or spending the money they have. "Splitting" the coins doesn't create "more" of anything, just like when people agree that they will start using half-dollars for some reason. One BTC will still be 10 tenths, 1000 thousandths or million millionths of BTC.
I meant the more that bitcoins disappear. Sorry, that was poor wording on my part.
|
|
|
United States43340 Posts
This is, of course, the entire point of bitcoin.
|
On March 02 2014 15:40 KwarK wrote:
This is, of course, the entire point of bitcoin.
And this is why I don't find any value in Bitcoins. For you to be well off in investing in Bitcoins, you need to watch the market pretty carefully and bank on your investment before the next major bubble. As Bitcoin gets bigger and bigger, there's higher probability that the government will get more involved, especially with websites using it as a viable form of currency. Competition in currency is not something that our banks will look lightly on and if it in any way impedes the US Dollar, then the government is likely to step in. This kind of regulation is not good for a "free" currency and will most likely cause the price and value of Bitcoins to drop, severity depending on government influence.
That kind of volatility is not something I wish to invest in. If other people find the opportunity cost to be worth it, then right on them to take the risk and be rewarded; personally I choose not to take that chance, especially if the government recognizes this as competition to their own economy.
|
(Reuters) - The Japanese government will set rules for trading bitcoin, including imposing taxes on transactions with the virtual currency, that will become the basis for guidelines applicable to similar currencies in future, the Nikkei reported.
Japan's government is still trying to explain the collapse of Mt. Gox - once the world's once largest bitcoin exchange - and figure out how the Tokyo-based company could lose nearly half a billion dollars in bitcoins, Finance Minister Taro Aso said on Tuesday.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/03/04/us-bitcoin-mtgox-nikkei-idUSBREA231Y420140304
|
|
|
Cryptocurrencies are so awesome. I mean seriously, digital cash algorithms are crazy, crazy shit. Now, whether they make sense as actual currency seems a little weird to me. I thought they would make more sense on a small scale sort of thing. Maybe if we had 'company towns' again haha.
That being said, cybersecurity is serious shit. Mt. Gox is the death of bitcoin, and probably any cryptocurrency without some built in security. Even if they wanted to institute some way to reimburse people, how could they possibly do it? It doesn't make sense with the algorithms. Maybe someone will find some way to design a currency with that kind of reimbursement scheme, but I would think that implies some sort of central authority, which pisses off the crazy libertarians.
Maybe I'm wrong? Is there a way to reimburse a cryptocurrency without a central authority?
|
T.O.P.
Hong Kong4685 Posts
On March 05 2014 10:13 DoubleReed wrote:
Cryptocurrencies are so awesome. I mean seriously, digital cash algorithms are crazy, crazy shit. Now, whether they make sense as actual currency seems a little weird to me. I thought they would make more sense on a small scale sort of thing. Maybe if we had 'company towns' again haha.
That being said, cybersecurity is serious shit. Mt. Gox is the death of bitcoin, and probably any cryptocurrency without some built in security. Even if they wanted to institute some way to reimburse people, how could they possibly do it? It doesn't make sense with the algorithms. Maybe someone will find some way to design a currency with that kind of reimbursement scheme, but I would think that implies some sort of central authority, which pisses off the crazy libertarians.
Maybe I'm wrong? Is there a way to reimburse a cryptocurrency without a central authority?
A bit coin escrow service? Then again, they could just say that your bitcoins disappeared too.
|
Man I love bitcoin. I get to watch a bunch of libertarians learn why we need financial regulation point by point.
|
On March 05 2014 11:24 Jaaaaasper wrote:
Man I love bitcoin. I get to watch a bunch of libertarians learn why we need financial regulation point by point.
I feel like bitcoin went from their biggest talking point to their biggest hole haha.
|
I think a cryptocurrency with a central authority is plausable, but I don't know how central the libertarian nonsense is to the success.
|
On March 05 2014 13:51 aksfjh wrote:
I think a cryptocurrency with a central authority is plausable, but I don't know how central the libertarian nonsense is to the success.
central authority is against libertarian at least american libertarian as they are against centralized banking.
|
On March 05 2014 13:54 semantics wrote:Show nested quote +On March 05 2014 13:51 aksfjh wrote:
I think a cryptocurrency with a central authority is plausable, but I don't know how central the libertarian nonsense is to the success. central authority is against libertarian at least american libertarian as they are against centralized banking.
You can have cryptocurrencies without crazy anti-gubmint people though. They aren't some integral part of the system.
|
Just got interested in the bitcoin topic, very interesting, I might try it in the future.
It is a bit like gold, but you don't have the hassle of carrying it on you. By the way I don't understand the people who opened an online wallet. I mean the whole point of such system is that you don't have to deal with fuckin third party, then why would you create an online wallet, this is utterly stupid from my point of view and it is not like a .dat file is as difficult to hide as real gold or silver.
Though it is highly unstable at the moment, you might only want to use it for small transaction. you know, "don't risk what you can't afford to lose" -_-
|
I've heard that a bitcoin transaction takes about 60 seconds because everyone on earth with a bitcoin wallet has to be notified of the transaction, only then the transaction is complete.
That also seems to be the reason why bitcoins cannot be used for stock trading.
Also, the more people join the system world wide, the longer this transaction interval will become, making the system unusable at some point.
I've only heard about this, so I'm wondering if this is correct?
|
On March 06 2014 00:32 urboss wrote:
I've heard that a bitcoin transaction takes about 60 seconds because everyone on earth with a bitcoin wallet has to be notified of the transaction, only then the transaction is complete.
That also seems to be the reason why bitcoins cannot be used for stock trading.
Also, the more people join the system world wide, the longer this transaction interval will become, making the system unusable at some point.
I've only heard about this, so I'm wondering if this is correct?
No it is not. The wallet takes a moment to check the first string of code is legit (so it's a real bitcoin). Afterwards at regular intervals it checks bigger chunk codes, but faking a bitcoin is extremely costly so small transactions are legit with 1 check (first 60 seconds) and 2nd and 3rd are only needed for extremely large money sums.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
