i also took an online quiz that said i was a giraffe. and i guess you're dumb enough to believe that i must be because the internet said so.
FE'ism requires suspension of disbelief...
I don't even care to find out what you're doing wrong, but I'm sure you're doing something wrong.
What are Bitcoins and why do they matter?
How often is the algorithim difficulty upped and who has the job of making that crucial decision?
Why are you so obsessed with bitcoins?And isn't asking for donations basically being a cyber-beggar?
inb4 Blanko spoons a literally pizza
Why is there so much turmoil in the Reddit bitcoin community? The subreddit regularly appears in subredditdrama.
Portability: Paper currency printed by a central government wins. Hassles like internet access and printing + verification codes make it much more complicated than what is already in place.
Durability: What do you mean by lost? I don't want to cast judgment before I know what you mean. Physical money can obviously be lost. That amount is not easy to determine either.
Uniformity: At a glance, the idea of tracking monetary transactions seems to be an invasion of privacy. Besides that, I don't see anything wrong with "tainted" money. I'd be willing to bet that a substantial portion of the currency in circulation has been used in an illegal transaction. What exactly happens to a tainted bitcoin.
Limited Supply: There is currently a limited supply of USD in circulation. That amount changes, but there isn't some cave that hasn't been discovered full of trillions of hundred dollar bills. If I understand correctly, the amount of bitcoin in circulation is dependent on miners and an algorithm. Correct me if I'm wrong. To answer the question of which is more effective in terms of limited supply, it is a matter of opinion. Do you trust an algorithm more than you trust the people that make decisions about how much money is in circulation?
E-mail is more complicated than good old fashioned snail mail
Will things other than bitcoin exist? Of course. But using Bitcoin is more advantageous in the long run than not using it.
As in never to be recovered. If I have 10 bitcoins on a hard drive and I light the hard drive on fire, those bitcoins are gone. Forever. This can be avoided by keeping backups and not forgetting your encryption password.
Because addresses can be generated at free will, privacy isn't a large concern (it is a concern, though). You can generate a new address every time you receive any sum of coin. There are 2^256 possible addresses. To give you an idea of how big that number is, if I hooked a computer up to the sun (for energy) and this computer generated 1 billion addresses every second... the sun would burn out before it generates even half of the addresses.
I can tell you exactly how many bitcoins will be generated. Can you tell me how many dollars will be printed? The federal reserve can print how ever much it wants whenever it wants, the Bitcoin protocol, however, can only generate what is allowed. Asking if I "trust" the protocol is irrelevant. Do I trust 2 + 2 to equal 4? Bitcoin is open source, you're welcome to look at the protocol's code yourself.
There is free speech and there is being an annoying twat. This user is exercising his right to the latter.
Quote from: Irushwithscvs on January 28, 2014, 05:17:30 AMAs in never to be recovered. If I have 10 bitcoins on a hard drive and I light the hard drive on fire, those bitcoins are gone. Forever. This can be avoided by keeping backups and not forgetting your encryption password.As far as destruction of currency is concerned, paper money wins. It can be regulated if the amount lost is significant enough to be noticed. As you have said, the amount of bitcoin in circulation is much more rigid. Backups, encryption passwords? Is this a joke? It's my money and I need it now!
I can tell you exactly how many bitcoins will be generated. Can you tell me how many dollars will be printed? The federal reserve can print how ever much it wants whenever it wants, the Bitcoin protocol, however, can only generate what is allowed.
You mean the equipment or the electricity? At 1.5 W/Gh/s it costs roughly $16M to churn out $4.4M in Bitcoin. The equipment itself varies, based on the tech (65nm vs 20nm) and availability (preorder vs shipping).
1. ASIC miners make a shitload of money. They are literally money printers and people are paying through the nose to grab one.
I don't know what you're implying, but you're probably wrong.
The US dollar doesn't have a limited supply
most economists don't agree Bitcoin is the better currency
so clearly your class taught you a concept most economists don't agree on.
You don't think I'm going to post here sober, do you?
I have embraced my Benny Franko side. I'm sleazy.
Justify this statement.
As far as destruction of currency is concerned, paper money wins. It can be regulated if the amount lost is significant enough to be noticed. As you have said, the amount of bitcoin in circulation is much more rigid. Backups, encryption passwords? Is this a joke? It's my money and I need it now!
What is the process involved in "generating a new address"?
Flexibility of a currency != unlimited supply.
If I install Bitcoin, will I get a virus?
How much, roughly, (in old-skool currency) have you managed to spend with bitcoins and how much did you spend acquiring them?
What's to stop someone from changing the protocol to allow for more bitcoins to be generated?
Also, if the number of bitcoins is to be limited, how can they generate enough for everyone to use?
What's to prevent bitcoin hoarding?
Why would anyone mine bitcoins if it's cheaper just to purchase them?
Conversely, what happens in 2140 when mining stops, and nobody devotes any more of their processing time to bitcoin?
How can both of these statements simultaneously be true?