bitcoins

[Daddy]

How much power does it cost vs value of when you generate a bitcoin?


You're losing money if you're spending more on electricity than you are generating value in coins.

[snoorkel]

How much power does it cost vs value of when you generate a bitcoin?


You're losing money if you're spending more on electricity than you are generating value in coins.

That's exactly the problem for most people who try to mine effectively -- using 1-2 GPUs takes many months to get a block. So I had the idea of colocating a specially configured server in a dc, where you get dedicated amps of power for a flat rate (like $40-50/mo for a single server)

It's pretty much a threat to the traditional banking industry, and guess who is a major contributor to political campaigns. Two corporate lapdogs, Sen. Charles E. Schumer (D-NY) and Sen. Joe Manchin (D-WV), want the government to shutdown Silk Road. Schumer has even described bitcoins as "money laundering."

well yes obviously. but the goal is to get rid of these things by democratically (actually democratically) introducing and supporting a new standard that doesn't require the government to support it (because the actual point of democracy and capitalism is identical to the point of p2p -- collective power, collective decisions. the uneducated will call this socialism). In a dream world where PayPal and other 'virtual' banks turn into bitcoin-like systems, what would governments be able to do vs. the power of millions of people around the world using billions of dollars of decentralized currency, who choose to abandon their government's currencies and keep their money in a deflation-proof virtual system that everything supports? it would be easier, faster, and unable to be manipulated by the people who run it, because no one would be running it. what would come next? (THINK ABOUT IT)

[musica.cards]

but I wouldn't know where the Supreme Court would stand on it since they characterize money as free speech.

[C.Mongler]

i dont know what the fuck this bitcoins shit is about

[musica.cards]

Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission
Read it.

That does not refer to money itself.

[musica.cards]

But it talks about the spending of money as free speech.

I wouldn't phrase it that way, but you're right.

Although, one could argue under Article One of the Constitution that Congress does have the right to regulate bitcoin as a "foreign" currency.

What argument would you make?

[musica.cards]

While Congress can't outright ban the bitcoin, they could pass a bill regulating American companies that exchange bitcoin into USD. From Article I, Section 8: "To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures" Bitcoin is a foreign currency as it is outside American jurisdiction. Easily, these bitcoin exchanges could be setup outside of the US, but other countries might follow suit.

What regulations would we be looking at, and how does that affect individual traders (i.e. if a trading medium exists, but with individuals running that exchange rather than a company, on a p2p-like basis)?

[musica.cards]

We could see an official ban on the exchange of bitcoin into usd and the purchase of bitcoin from US dollars. We will probably be inundated with propaganda against "illegal currency" much like we have encountered with the war on drugs. And like the war on drugs, individual traders/dealers will probably encounter difficulties processing VISA/Mastercards transactions and take a small risk of not being discovered by the government.

Worse case scenario, that does not nor cannot easily result in a ban in native bitcoin transactions legal or otherwise (i.e. buying vidya games with bitcoins). Worse case scenario, one couldn't legally profit off of bitcoins in USD (and possibly in other currencies, if not other countries, as the case might be in Europe).

[musica.cards]

But it would effectively limit transactions to bitcoin to bitcoin. To mine bitcoin today requires powerful hardware or joining a pool. By joining a pool, one encounters the threat of collusion. For this and other reasons, bitcoin will be a niche currency for the foreseeable future.

I'm pretty sure there's about 6,709,000 bitcoins currently in circulation. So if everybody stopped mining, I'd say there's enough bitcoins available to make it a viable currency (given the current userbase). However, like all currencies, you'd still have to do stuff in order to obtain bitcoins (assuming you're not mining). But an important aspect of currencies is the ability to buy goods with them.

In the mean time, mining can not only earn one quite a bit of bitcoins (and as long as it's still legal to exchange it into USD, a lot more USD at current prices). The idea behind bitcoin mining is that by the time it's nearly impossible (or not worthwhile, whichever comes first, if not both) to mine, there'd be more than enough bitcoins in circulation to keep it a healthy currency, even if its usage is restricted in the same manner that the AUD is pretty much restricted for use in Australia in all important ways).

[snoorkel]

We could see an official ban on the exchange of bitcoin into usd and the purchase of bitcoin from US dollars. We will probably be inundated with propaganda against "illegal currency" much like we have encountered with the war on drugs. And like the war on drugs, individual traders/dealers will probably encounter difficulties processing VISA/Mastercards transactions and take a small risk of not being discovered by the government.

wtf are you ever talking about. so people would exchange it to pesos and then to dollars and make a little intermediary forex profit, or find one of the million and one online exchanging services and trade their coin wallet to their LibertyReserve, Moneybookers, AlertPay, etc other 'offshore' virtual currency and then deposit directly to bank account.

I'm pretty sure there's about 6,709,000 bitcoins currently in circulation. So if everybody stopped mining, I'd say there's enough bitcoins available to make it a viable currency (given the current userbase). However, like all currencies, you'd still have to do stuff in order to obtain bitcoins (assuming you're not mining). But an important aspect of currencies is the ability to buy goods with them.

In the mean time, mining can not only earn one quite a bit of bitcoins (and as long as it's still legal to exchange it into USD, a lot more USD at current prices). The idea behind bitcoin mining is that by the time it's nearly impossible (or not worthwhile, whichever comes first, if not both) to mine, there'd be more than enough bitcoins in circulation to keep it a healthy currency, even if its usage is restricted in the same manner that the AUD is pretty much restricted for use in Australia in all important ways).

exactly

[snoorkel]

Guess who's a member of the World Trade Organization? Mexico. Other countries would probably follow suit if we regulated bitcoin exchanges.

uuggghhhhh

[musica.cards]

Guess who's a member of the World Trade Organization? Mexico. Other countries would probably follow suit if we regulated bitcoin exchanges.

Again, worse case scenario only limits the use of bitcoins to online use. One could regulate bitcoin exchanges, but good luck  regulating Bitcoin itself.

[musica.cards]

Then what use would be of bitcoin if it were limited to online usage.

More than you may think.

You can't pay your utilities with bitcoin, which bitcoin will surely depend on. It will be a niche currency for this reason.

If you can get web hosting with bitcoins, if you could pay for internet access for bitcoins, if you can buy food with bitcoins, then you could pay for the utilities with bitcoin; for if things keep gohttp://bitmunchies.com/index.phping the way they are, the USD, our fiat currency, may too be a niche currency used exclusively in the US with no value outside the country.

[snoorkel]

You can't pay your electric bill with bitcoins. Nice try.

you're not correctly understanding anything in this thread, just making bad arguments about irrelevant things.
obviously Bitcoin will never be a worldwide currency or available for finance/utilities. you pick one illustrative example from each reply, treat it as an objectively stated fact (e.g. your interpretation 'the only way to convert bitcoin would be to use the peso'), and reply with another tangentially related fact that barely has to do with the topic. are you experiencing severe psychological stress, or just stupid?

Whether or not you are intentionally fucking with this makes no difference to my impulse to flame you 

[silvertone]

why dont we change the source code and make our own currency?