81–90 of 208 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Given tptacek and colleagues' paper on the RSA-doomsday scenario that might not be too far out in the future, I think it might be possible to reclaim (steal?) that money in the future. Obviously when RSA's end nears, assuming bitcoin is still around then, we'll see some sort of managed transition to a newer cryptosystem. I imagine the network will probably support announcing transactions saying something like, "Walle…
Bitcoin doesn't use RSA.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hah rich families are usually rich because they spear-headed a manufacturing industry or rose to political power. Yes, their CHILDREN may not deserve the wealth, but they earned it. Bitcoiners are getting rich for designing a pump-and-dump scam & passing it along. It's called a pyramid scheme. You make a pitch that sounds convincing and then shop it out through "Multi-Level Marketing" strategies. Why do Bitcoiners be…
> Why do Bitcoiners believe so much in a currency that allowed the originator to pull so much wealth out of thin air? Even if you don't believe in bitcoin, the problem with fiat currencies is that they are insecure. > Baaaaaw Bitcoiners' wealth are disproportionate to their merit Just like in fiat currency, in Bitcoin, lots of people who don't "deserve" anything are rich. Deal with it or go back to your imaginary uni…
Currency is something relatively stable, it's not a trading platform. I spoke about it in this way the other day --
One should not have to consult an exchange rate to figure out how much their currency is worth. They should know what it's worth by how much it costs for a dozen eggs. If that number changes rapidly (dozen eggs costs 1 BTC Monday, 3 on Friday, .5 next month, 100 in the future, .002 after that) well.... you don't have a currency, you have a speculative commodity.
The only reason Bitcoin users don't complain is because they're mostly hoarders/traders & the general trend is up.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> But the fact that early adopters are psychotically rich for doing nothing is... one of the many signs of a flawed system This is also the case with rich families. It doesn't make the system unusable.
Hah rich families are usually rich because they spear-headed a manufacturing industry or rose to political power. Yes, their CHILDREN may not deserve the wealth, but they earned it. Bitcoiners are getting rich for designing a pump-and-dump scam & passing it along. It's called a pyramid scheme. You make a pitch that sounds convincing and then shop it out through "Multi-Level Marketing" strategies. Why do Bitcoiners be…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Given tptacek and colleagues' paper on the RSA-doomsday scenario that might not be too far out in the future, I think it might be possible to reclaim (steal?) that money in the future. Obviously when RSA's end nears, assuming bitcoin is still around then, we'll see some sort of managed transition to a newer cryptosystem. I imagine the network will probably support announcing transactions saying something like, "Walle…
Bitcoin doesn't use RSA.
Can we link IP addresses and hence approximate locations to these wallets using announced transactions on the network? That might be an interesting visual. Maybe not because I doubt anybody was logging bitcoin network traffic in the early days. But doing that even starting today might turn out to be useful. And there's little doubt NSA and friends are likely already doing this.
No IP address is saved in the block-chain. You would need to trust the source of this IP listing service, and still you wouldn't be able to actually prove people's real IP address if they were using systems like TOR to send money.
And what percentage of bitcoin nodes use Tor? With NSA-like global passive logging, I think even Tor could be vulnerable.
I know nothing of BitCoin, but could one figure out which Address belongs to the Winklevoss brothers? Does it matter? [1] http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/wp/2013/11/09...
It's likely the Winklevoss brothers have all their coins spread over many addresses. Their wallet will show 100,000+ coins but you can't tell because they are spread among many addresses inside the single wallet file. If they use a brain wallet seed they can create unlimited deterministic addresses but only have to remember one key, and you won't see large accumulations of coins.
Spreading the risk of loss by hack? And reducing their visibility as a target?
Question: How hard/impossible would it be for me as a US citizen to cash in on a large lot like that? Say I want 10 million dollars for some partying I want to do for New Years. It seems some people have mega riches, but is it actually feasible for me to realize that money (in US Dollars, deposited to my Chase bank account)?
The whole price of Bitcoin is an illusion that they use to get people to keep buying. It's the result of a bidding war. There is an article here about that basically explains (this is my interpretation not his words) how the price of BTC is kindof like the sticker price on an item in the store. It doesn't represent the real value, it's simply the value as perceived by consumers and is, in a way, fixed -- http://falkv…
No they risked their money with a speculation that had almost 0% chance of getting any return in the future. They took a huge risk, without this, bitcoin would not exist. And that's why they are rewarded: Taking a risk that almost no one would have taken to create something big.
> Basically if everyone started selling the market would destabilize because supply/demand curve would change & I'm pretty sure the value of what they're selling would plummet before they can unload most of their stack.
Bitcoin had already 2 big crashes (one time from $30 to $1-2 and one time from 200+$ to under 100$) and still recovered afterwards because there's people like me who see the potential in bitcoin.
And please tell me what your "real value" exactly is, because in my opinion their is only a perceived value for everything in the world.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Bitcoin doesn't use RSA.
Thanks, I did not know that. But there's little reason to believe that whatever encryption that bitcoin uses (presumably EC?) won't be vulnerable at some point in the future.
What kind of repercussion will this have in the future, say, when Bitcoin will be more widely utilized? It seems to me that it might only cause an issue to Bitcoin's market during these initial stages, where a rich bitcoin owner could fluster the market by selling large amounts. But in the long run, there will always be the rich and the poor. Or is there something I'm missing?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The whole price of Bitcoin is an illusion that they use to get people to keep buying. It's the result of a bidding war. There is an article here about that basically explains (this is my interpretation not his words) how the price of BTC is kindof like the sticker price on an item in the store. It doesn't represent the real value, it's simply the value as perceived by consumers and is, in a way, fixed -- http://falkv…
> But the fact that early adopters are psychotically rich for doing nothing is... one of the many signs of a flawed system. No they risked their money with a speculation that had almost 0% chance of getting any return in the future. They took a huge risk, without this, bitcoin would not exist. And that's why they are rewarded: Taking a risk that almost no one would have taken to create something big. > Basically if e…
Repeat each few weeks, and let's say there's 20 people that realized this and have enough bitcoins for this to be feasible.
End result = currency that's mostly owned by a few people. And when everybody realize this - bubble collapses.
At least that was my train of thought when I first learnt about bitcoin and now I hate myself for being too risk averse :)