This is no doubt probably a very controversial Bitcoin Improvement Proposal
and is also a very rough draft of one.
Bitcoin lacks a Central Bank. This is good and bad. A central bank benefits
those with political connections. But Bitcoin lacks price stability, this
generates menu costs, and
are using the exchanges.
My proposal will still allow for 4.9% semi-weekly variations in the price
of Bitcoin, allowing for it to appreciate 11,800% per year.
On Mon, Dec 9, 2013 at 2:11 PM, Andrew Poelstra as...@sfu.ca wrote:
On Mon, Dec 09, 2013 at 02:01:07PM -0800, Ryan Carboni wrote
Bitcoin is made of many parts, yes, but not all parts were developed
simultaneously.
On Mon, Dec 9, 2013 at 2:06 PM, Gavin Andresen gavinandre...@gmail.comwrote:
On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 8:01 AM, Ryan Carboni ryan.jc...@gmail.comwrote:
The exchanges that are kept track of could be hard coded
You're just closed minded.
On Mon, Dec 9, 2013 at 3:10 PM, Jeff Garzik jgar...@bitpay.com wrote:
On Mon, Dec 9, 2013 at 7:23 PM, Ryan Carboni ryan.jc...@gmail.com wrote:
It is not a violation of the trust of those holding the currency. Many
people bought Bitcoin in the hopes that it's
I believe that if there ever becomes a consensus that Bitcoin?s inflation
parameters were a show-stopper for the Bitcoin economy, that the power to
correct it lies with merchants, who would vote for changing the rules. I
believe they would do this not by changing Bitcoin, but by accepting,
I think Bitcoin should have a sanity check: after three days if only four
blocks have been mined, difficulty should be adjusted downwards.
This might become important in the near future. I project a Bitcoin mining
bubble.
be sophisticated alternative to turn to, and enough time to make
the change.
On 12/22/2013 07:10 PM, Ryan Carboni wrote:
I think Bitcoin should have a sanity check: after three days if
only four blocks have been mined, difficulty should be adjusted
downwards.
This might become important
attacks.
BTW, what does difficulty would be reset mean? There are multiple
ways to interpret that statement. In the most straightforward way, my
objections apply.
On 12/23/2013 05:51 PM, Ryan Carboni wrote:
I think you misunderstood my statement. If time 3 days, and after
4 blocks have been
You just completely ignored my point. I'm not sure who's trying to insult
whom, or if you're attempting an argumentum ad hominem. My idea is
completely valid.
The only way to man in the middle to have such a large percentage of hash
power is to either a) attack a pool (which people would notice
This will easily create too much data in the block chain.
I think it's probably better to trust online wallets to handle complex
financial transactions such a debits or credits.
If Bitcoin achieves Visa-levels of popularity, that would mean one megabyte
of transactions per second (even assuming
10 matches
Mail list logo
