Nicholas Bohm write:
Now I find I can exchange a little over five bitcoins for a 50
Amazon gift certificate that Amazon seems happy to credit to my
account.
Danilo Gligoroski wrote:
Your example is about two actors: Amazon and BitCoin, acting within
small amounts of goods, services and
On 2011-06-15 7:58 AM, Nico Williams wrote:
Let's say you have an unbreakable code.
Which we do.
But there's still traffic
analysis, and even with onion routing and such, you don't know if your
peers are ratting you out,
If one of the mixers is my own, I know that that mixer is not ratting
Bitcoin is not a pyramid scheme, and doesnt have to have the collapse and
late joiner losers. If bitcoin does not lose favor - ie the user base grows
and then maintains size of user base in the long term, then no one loses.
I think in the current phase the deflation (currency increasing in
On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 6:50 AM, John Levine jo...@iecc.com wrote:
PS: For anyone who wants a crypto currency backed by gold, that's
functionally equivalent to a gold ETF, of which there are several,
such as ticker symbols IAU, GLD, GTU, SGOL, and AGOL. They do what
they do perfectly
On 2011-06-13 2:50 PM, John Levine wrote:
But that really has nothing to do with the crypto part. You can have
crypto out the wazoo, and it's worth nothing unless there's an issuer
in meatspace who will accept your crypto coins, cancel them, and hand
you the agreed amount of money.
But
On 13/06/11 10:31, James A. Donald wrote:
The difference was Fannie, Freddie, and the CRA.
This is entirely off topic. Please drop it.
--
__
\/ o\ Paul Crowley, p...@ciphergoth.org
/\__/ http://www.ciphergoth.org/
___
cryptography mailing list
Nicholas Bohm write:
Now I find I can exchange a little over five bitcoins for
a £50 Amazon gift certificate that Amazon seems happy to
credit to my account.
I see the example of an institution (organization, company, entity, ...)
willing to happily credit the current value of
On 13/06/11 5:54 PM, Adam Back wrote:
Bitcoin is not a pyramid scheme, and doesnt have to have the collapse and
late joiner losers. If bitcoin does not lose favor - ie the user base grows
and then maintains size of user base in the long term, then no one loses.
Um, Adam, that's the very
Bitcoin does not have to end with the pyramid scheme outcome - where it
stalls and all those still holding any lose - so long as there remain people
willing to exchange goods for bitcoin after the dust has settled.
Anyway my point is even if the deployment phase is a wild ride, with some
winners
On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 10:50 AM, Nathan Loofbourrow njl...@gmail.com wrote:
The good old market played a role here too. There are lots of investors
whose risk profile dictates that they should be in safe investments, e.g.
pension funds and old people. With the interest rates held on the floor,
On 2011-06-13 11:55 PM, Ian G wrote:
Um, Adam, that's the very definition of a pyramid scheme :)
No-one need lose as long as the size of the user base grows, long term!
If bitcoin stabilizes, no one loses. If a pyramid scheme stabilizes,
last to invest loses.
I was at ground zero of the crisis: Sunnyvale
California.
And every person I saw buying a seven hundred thousand dollar
house was a cat eating no hablo english wetback with no
regular job.
On 2011-06-14 1:29 AM, Nico Williams wrote:
First, there were plenty of middle class
(and better off)
On 2011-06-14 1:50 AM, Nathan Loofbourrow wrote:
After a while you run out of big dumb mortgages, and we did. So the pressure
was on to create more of them. Once everyone has a mortgage, or maybe two,
you start lending to folks with a risk profile that wasn't so hot anymore.
This happened in
On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 9:22 PM, James A. Donald jam...@echeque.com wrote:
I was at ground zero of the crisis: Sunnyvale
California.
And every person I saw buying a seven hundred thousand dollar
house was a cat eating no hablo english wetback with no
regular job.
On 2011-06-14 1:29 AM,
I get back from vacation and suddenly my inbox is filled with
misconceptions.
While this is supossed to be a fairly technical mailinglist (about
cryptography) it seems clear many people haven't quite understood bitcoins'
workings.
Let me break it down:
* With a private/public key combination you
ObCrypto: sorry, got nothing.
This crisis has a lot to do with the fact that Bitcoin is doing well,
and suggests demand for other cryptographic solutions.
As orthodox places to put your money and perform transactions are
increasingly suspect, people are now willing to consider unorthodox
On 12/06/11 4:21 PM, Peter Gutmann wrote:
Am I the only one who thinks it's not coincidence that the (supposed) major
use of bitcoin is by people buying hallucinogenic substances?
The best way to think of this is from the marketing concepts of product
diffusion or product life cycle.
On 2011-06-13 9:26 AM, Ian G wrote:
However. Unless the laws of financial conservation have been repealed by
the design, those who follow have to invest a lot and come out with less...
Financial conservation does not apply to money. If paper currency
collapses, and is replaced by gold, those
On 2011-06-12 6:13 AM, John Levine wrote:
Useful for something, but not useful for money. I can't help but note
that the level of economic knowledge in the digital cash community is
pitifully low, and much of what people think they know is absurd.
(Anyone who thinks that a gold standard is
On Sun, Jun 12, 2011 at 10:44 PM, James A. Donald jam...@echeque.com wrote:
On 2011-06-12 8:53 AM, Nico Williams wrote:
A fiat currency with no capital controls and reasonably free
trade is probably the best currency system yet. Details do matter
though.
If operated by far sighted men with
On Sun, Jun 12, 2011 at 10:34 PM, Jeffrey Walton noloa...@gmail.com wrote:
I think Sparta had it right in this instance: put the public officials
on trial when their term is over, and make them accountable for their
actions. Its funny how those lessons were lost.
Doesn't help. The trials
On Sun, Jun 12, 2011 at 11:54 PM, Nico Williams n...@cryptonector.com wrote:
On Sun, Jun 12, 2011 at 10:34 PM, Jeffrey Walton noloa...@gmail.com wrote:
I think Sparta had it right in this instance: put the public officials
on trial when their term is over, and make them accountable for their
We can therefore see that someone has to make that worth mean
something, so for this we need an issuer sometimes known as Ivan.
It's beyond the scope of a crypto list to discuss this in depth, but
typically Ivan would deposit $1 for every issued electronic dollar in
some bank account
On Sun, Jun 12, 2011 at 11:28 PM, Jeffrey Walton noloa...@gmail.com wrote:
I recall Obama boasting: My Administration is the only thing saving
you from the pitchforks of the American people [sic] at a banker's
lunch after he took office. On the campaign trail, he received over 1M
USD from
On 2011-06-11 3:12 PM, James A. Donald wrote:
On 2011-06-11 1:58 PM, Peter Gutmann wrote:
I wouldn't call bitcoins digital cash. They're more like digital tulip
bulbs,
Misattribution, that was John Levine, not Peter Gutman.
___
cryptography mailing
On Sat, Jun 11, 2011 at 02:16:55AM -, John Levine wrote:
In article 021ccba9-9203-4896-8412-481b94595...@cs.columbia.edu you write:
http://gcn.com/articles/2011/06/09/bitcoins-digital-currency-silk-road-charles-schumer-joe-manchin.aspx?s=gcndaily_100611
I wouldn't call bitcoins digital
BitCoin has only one problem: maintenance of the relationship between unit
BitCoin value and the material world (energy, as in KWh) is 'soft', it requires
some sort of a volatile communal effort, which sets it for failure (as a
counter example, the amount of Au atoms on this planet is rather
On Sat, Jun 11, 2011 at 4:13 PM, John Levine jo...@iecc.com wrote:
Unlike fiat currencies, algorithms assert limit of total volume.
And the mint and transaction infrastructure is decentral, so there's
no single point of control. These both are very useful properties.
Useful for something, but
;-)
On Sat, Jun 11, 2011 at 6:29 PM, Jeffrey Walton noloa...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Jun 11, 2011 at 4:13 PM, John Levine jo...@iecc.com wrote:
Unlike fiat currencies, algorithms assert limit of total volume.
And the mint and transaction infrastructure is decentral, so there's
no single
On Sat, Jun 11, 2011 at 3:13 PM, John Levine jo...@iecc.com wrote:
(Anyone who thinks that a gold standard is better than what we have
now, or that the supply of gold is fixed in any but a purely
hypothetical sense, is either ignorant of economic history or shilling
for gold speculators.)
+1.
In article 021ccba9-9203-4896-8412-481b94595...@cs.columbia.edu you write:
http://gcn.com/articles/2011/06/09/bitcoins-digital-currency-silk-road-charles-schumer-joe-manchin.aspx?s=gcndaily_100611
I wouldn't call bitcoins digital cash. They're more like digital
tulip bulbs, or bearer shares of
31 matches
Mail list logo
