Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Bitcoin Hits $1 Billion

spectrum.ieee.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 205 posts

Re: Bitcoin Hits $1 Billion

#71

Post by vbuterin »

waffle_ss wrote: post #47
cs702 wrote: post #35

As usual on HN, any submission about Bitcoin is met with concerned comments about its high volatility, present impracticality as a currency, disadvantages versus precious metals, current concentration of transactions in a single exchange (MtGox), potential for market manipulation by governments and/or speculators, etc. This is analogous to being present at the creation of the World Wide Web, but instead of getting ex…

There are some real concerns with Bitcoin. For example, I was going to write an app that accepts Bitcoins as payment. However, the problem is that the amount of time it takes for a transaction to become "verified," i.e. be part of the official block chain, can take up to 10 minutes. What am I supposed to present to the user during this time? Am I supposed to tell them that their payment may or may not have been accep…

> However, the problem is that the amount of time it takes for a transaction to become "verified," i.e. be part of the official block chain, can take up to 10 minutes.

You actually can accept transactions instantly just fine; the term "confirmation" is slightly misleading here. Try actually paying for some web service or product with Bitcoin - they all confirm the payment instantly. Sure, there is now a very slight possibility of fraud instead of a negligible one, but given that nearly all businesses still do this it's clearly not a problem.

Re: Bitcoin Hits $1 Billion

#72

Post by niggler »

dragontamer wrote: post #68
niggler wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sounds like an opportunity for a "bitcoin credit card" or "bitcoin charge card" where a trusted third party maintains complete control.

These already exist. The problem is that all the advantages of Bitcoin is now lost, and you have transferred control of Bitcoin to the Bitcoin bank. For example: you can gather Flexcoins, which allow instantaneous transfers and so forth. But by doing so, you no longer have Bitcoins. You only have Flexcoins, and if the Flexcoin bank goes under... you lose all of your bitcoins. IE: Using Flexcoins (or any other form of…

"you have transferred control of Bitcoin to the Bitcoin bank."

This exists now with charge cards. You load up a card, and you bear risk that the company could go under.

"IE: Using Flexcoins (or any other form of Bitcoin bank) completely defeats the purpose of Bitcoin."

I'm not talking about an alternative coin. I'm talking about something akin to what happens now with CHIPS and FedWire, where the dollars are shuffled at a later date but the transactions are approved before it happens.

Re: Bitcoin Hits $1 Billion

#74

Post by wmf »

waterlesscloud wrote: post #69
tocomment wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't get the recommended transaction fee thing. What happens if someone pays 1 cent? Will no one process it?

You can even send transactions with no fee at all, but they tend to be prioritized rather low. So far, every transaction get processed. Eventually. I've seen some no-fee transactions take several hours recently. But there's also currently some issues with the overall load of transactions, due to a gambling site spamming tiny "dust" transactions as part of its system. That's caused there to be a lot more transactions,…

People accepting micropayments tend not to wait for any confirmations, so the lag may or may not matter. But if the network gets to a point where zero-fee transactions never get confirmed then there may be a problem.

Re: Bitcoin Hits $1 Billion

#76

Post by icebraining »

waffle_ss wrote: post #47
cs702 wrote: post #35

As usual on HN, any submission about Bitcoin is met with concerned comments about its high volatility, present impracticality as a currency, disadvantages versus precious metals, current concentration of transactions in a single exchange (MtGox), potential for market manipulation by governments and/or speculators, etc. This is analogous to being present at the creation of the World Wide Web, but instead of getting ex…

There are some real concerns with Bitcoin. For example, I was going to write an app that accepts Bitcoins as payment. However, the problem is that the amount of time it takes for a transaction to become "verified," i.e. be part of the official block chain, can take up to 10 minutes. What am I supposed to present to the user during this time? Am I supposed to tell them that their payment may or may not have been accep…

What are you charging for? For many stuff, it's perfectly fine to assume the payment is valid and then just lock the user out if it actually failed. If they're buying something that you can't away, there are other alternatives, like buying "credits" that one can then use to pay for stuff.

Re: Bitcoin Hits $1 Billion

#78

Post by vbuterin »

tocomment wrote: post #48

I'm curious, why hasn't anyone implemented a mining client in javascript, so you could in effect has visitors to your website mine coins for you. It might be a create way to fund content instead of advertising.

Because it's really inefficient and a horrible waste of electricity. Doing Bitcoin mining in that way basically turns it into a payment processor charging you through your electricity bill, with a 90% transaction fee.

Re: Bitcoin Hits $1 Billion

#79

Post by niggler »

waterlesscloud wrote: post #73
niggler wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Coinbase doesn't fit that bill, if that's what you are pointing to.

Coinbase is a bitcoin payment processor. It addresses exactly those issues.

Original issue: "However, the problem is that the amount of time it takes for a transaction to become "verified," i.e. be part of the official block chain, can take up to 10 minutes."

https://coinbase.com/merchants : "Confirmed in 1 hour"

Underlying issue not addressed

Re: Bitcoin Hits $1 Billion

#80

Post by wmf »

[deleted] wrote: post #75

[deleted]

Trying to override market prices has been tried many times, and what always happens is liquidity disappears from the official market (e.g. nobody's willing to sell you a BTC for $1) and a black market with shadow prices emerges.
Post reply on HN