Slashdot Mirror


Mega Accepts Bitcoin; Email, Chat, Voice, Video, Mobile Coming Soon

An anonymous reader writes "Kim Dotcom knows how to stir up a storm on Twitter. On Saturday, he announced Bitcoin support for his cloud storage service and also sent out a slew of tweets suggesting Mega is going to become much more than just the successor to Megaupload."

143 comments

  1. Megasite by bazald · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    It sounds like Kim Dotcom is turning Mega...

    ...puts on sunglasses...

    ...into a megasite.

    Yeeeeaaaaahhhh!

    --
    Insert self-referential sig here.
    1. Re:Megasite by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      mod parent up.

  2. Can't wait until my company can offer it! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    As soon as my companies new site is up this is something I'd love to offer our customers. We sell real physical goods too. The problem right now in implementing it is the integration with our shopping cart. I'm sure though when we have the time it'll be something we make sure to implement.

    1. Re:Can't wait until my company can offer it! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What is the benefit? Is there a risk that the U.S. government will make the credit card companies will cut you off, or do you do a lot of business with customers that don't have credit cards?

    2. Re:Can't wait until my company can offer it! by houghi · · Score: 1

      Is there a reason you can not offer the customer an option on how to pay?
      e.g. Various credit cards, BitCoin, Paypall, Bank order, On delivery, ...
      Just like it is possible to make a choice on how you want it deliverd.

      That way the customer has the choice. Sure, each has its advantages and disadvantages and it is then upon you to see how you deal with the possible extra cost (e.g. extra charge or reduction) and then let the customer make his choice.

      So if you want it in 24 hours and you do not care what the cost is, you get some priority DHL delivery and pay with your AmEx card.
      If cost is the important part, you pay via bank (which is free of charge in e.g. Belgium, but takes at least two days to process from/to a business account due to legal stuff) and have the postal service do the delivery. That way you will wait probably 2 weeks or so and you need to be where the package is delivered. Otherwise you need to go to the postal office. Cheaper, but not as easy.

      And then there are all the options in between.

      As long as I am not loosing money on payment and delivery, if my primary goal is sales, then I do not care and have the customer make a choice.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    3. Re:Can't wait until my company can offer it! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nope. Increased sales!

      There is an entire underground economy that needs to spend its illgotten gains.

    4. Re:Can't wait until my company can offer it! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      This is all very "ideal world" though. The reality is that Bitcoin directly undermines established payment processors such as VISA, MasterCard, and PayPal. Consequently, expect that if Bitcoin continues to grow in popularity, that these companies will threaten to block payments through their networks to any merchants using Bitcoin in any official capacity. At this point it will most certainly be in the merchant's interest to drop Bitcoin.

    5. Re:Can't wait until my company can offer it! by maxwell+demon · · Score: 3, Informative

      At this point it will most certainly be in the merchant's interest to drop Bitcoin.

      If Bitcoin grows enough that the credit card companies are concerned about losing business, it will no longer be clear whether it is a better idea to drop Bitcoin, or to drop the credit card option.

      Anyway, I'm not aware that credit card companies are threatening to block payments to companies offering PayPal. Why should Bitcoin be any different?

      And besides, at least in Europe I'm pretty sure it would be illegal to credit card companies to do this.

      If I were considering whether to accept payments by Bitcoin, I'd be more concerned about legal aspects than about whether the credit card companies would like it.

      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
    6. Re:Can't wait until my company can offer it! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Anyway, I'm not aware that credit card companies are threatening to block payments to companies offering PayPal. Why should Bitcoin be any different?

      I don't think Visa will blacklist you for accepting Mastercard, either.

    7. Re:Can't wait until my company can offer it! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Anyway, I'm not aware that credit card companies are threatening to block payments to companies offering PayPal. Why should Bitcoin be any different?

      PayPal plays by the big boys' rules, policing the customers for anything that might look like something they don't like. Bitcoin made it so it can't.

    8. Re:Can't wait until my company can offer it! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A PayPAl account is also usually tied to a credit card or bank account so they're still involved and getting a cut. That's not the case with Bitcoin

    9. Re:Can't wait until my company can offer it! by Mr.+Slippery · · Score: 1

      Anyway, I'm not aware that credit card companies are threatening to block payments to companies offering PayPal. Why should Bitcoin be any different?

      ??? PayPal generates a huge amount of business for Visa, MC, Discover, and Amex. Why would they threaten PayPal?

      --
      Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
      You cannot wash away blood with blood
  3. filecloud by ionix5891 · · Score: 4, Informative

    http://filecloud.io/ cloud storage site (with more features + cheaper than Mega btw) has been accepting bitcoins for a long time, and being an Irish company has to follow Irish+EU dataprotection laws

    1. Re:filecloud by blind+biker · · Score: 4, Interesting

      http://filecloud.io/ cloud storage site (with more features + cheaper than Mega btw) has been accepting bitcoins for a long time, and being an Irish company has to follow Irish+EU dataprotection laws

      Except, they don't encrypt the content.

      --
      "The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.
    2. Re:filecloud by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      You can always encrypt your files yourself before you upload them.

    3. Re:filecloud by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Make no mistake; Mega encrypts files for it's OWN protection. If you want encryption worth considering a defense for yourself, you should be using Truecrypt before uploading to the cloud anyhow, no matter where it's going. Mega's encryption is about plausible deniability, not making anything particularly bulletproof.

    4. Re:filecloud by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Either you need encryption, in which case you better encrypt it yourself for obvious reasons, or you don't need it. Oh, there's always the change that you don't understand the real problems with encryption...

    5. Re:filecloud by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Irish Data protection laws" are a joke at best. Ireland is so-called "business friendly." Tax is one of the things they are very flexible on, and so are "data protection laws." It is no coincidence that both Facebook and Google operate out of Ireland in Europe.

      That having been said, if you have to rely on your storage provider to follow data protection laws in order for your data to be secure, you are doing it wrong.

    6. Re:filecloud by Turmio · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If you're really interested in privacy of your data stored on some cloud service, I'm sure you'll understand that the only way to make sure that your data is safe is to encrypt the data yourself before uploading.

    7. Re:filecloud by briancox2 · · Score: 1

      Encrypt it yourself...? 50 gig free is pretty damn good. Right?

      --
      We should learn what we need to know about issues, before we decide what we need to feel about them.
    8. Re:filecloud by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, since the Mega web client does the encryption on the client side, your actually are "encrypting the data yourself before uploading". Unless you are advocating writing the encryption program yourself, you will undoubtedly be using a program provided by someone else - so it is functionally identical.

    9. Re:filecloud by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      His encryption scheme is moronic. He has to store the keys on his end so he also has the ability to access the files/store the keys as well as transmit them. His system (mega) isn't remotely secure.

  4. Am I the only one... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    who feels like a larger chunk of the stories on /. cater to freetards and the people grasping on the latest technology fad? Wow, mediocre service is accepting a currency more volatile than the Zimbabwe dollar. Wait, but that service is MEGA and that currency is BITCOIN, let's frontpage this shit!

    1. Re:Am I the only one... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Informative

      Bitcoins are likely to be a more widespread alternative to the USD if and when enough of the users of it (10-20%) lose faith in the dollar due government/central bank mismanagement of monetary&fiscal policies. This is already happening, but on a small enough scale that it's barely a niche though (e.g. currency users switching to Bitcoin, but it is widespread knowledge that the dollar is being trashed and therefore faith in it is being degraded).

    2. Re:Am I the only one... by burni2 · · Score: 1

      Americans have faith, they separated religion from government, but swear to god, and the dollar states "in god we trust".

      And history tells a different story, even when faith in dollar starts flickering, people start to believe in it and it outgrows currency problems - leaving the poor and impoverished people in the dirt of their hopeless existence.

      Btw. it's money, why put faith in money, ohh wait, faith is about believing and we believe in money, money == religion, you need to believe in.

      To sum it up: "the dollar is the true currency of god."

    3. Re:Am I the only one... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Exactly, we all should use money created from nothing.

    4. Re:Am I the only one... by brokenin2 · · Score: 2

      ...and we do..

      Ingredients to the US dollar are 98.5% nothing if I recall correctly.. Then about 1.5% paper..

      Most other currencies are about the same..

      Bitcoin has just gotten rid of the paper waste..

      Fiat money is pretty much the standard these days. Fiat literally means "by decree" or basically "cause I say so"..

      Cause I say so money

    5. Re:Am I the only one... by Bogtha · · Score: 2

      This isn't even a faddish story. It's an advert. This guy is a publicity whore, the only question is whether Slashdot were dumb enough to run his ad for free or not.

      --
      Bogtha Bogtha Bogtha
    6. Re:Am I the only one... by alen · · Score: 1

      Bitcoin is a deflationary currency

      As more people use it the value will drop

    7. Re:Am I the only one... by CAPSLOCK2000 · · Score: 1

      Be that as it may, Mega and Bitcoin are on the cutting edge of both technology and politics. Even though their direct impact may be small, they are a looking glass for what the future may look like. Decisions made today may have large legal ramifications in the near future.

    8. Re:Am I the only one... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      You have that backwards. As more people use bitcoin, its distribution becomes increasingly limited which in turn will raise its value. Luckily its divisible to 8 decimal places. Once bitcoin is the same as 100 million satoshi's.

    9. Re:Am I the only one... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bitcoin has just gotten rid of the paper waste..

      And replaced it with electricity waste.

    10. Re:Am I the only one... by Mr.+Slippery · · Score: 1

      Ingredients to the US dollar are 98.5% nothing if I recall correctly.. Then about 1.5% paper..

      All currencies are nothing but an assumption/hope/promise that someone else will recognize them as having value. This is just as true for those "backed" by some other substance or item; commodity money relies on the assumption/hope/promise that someone else will recognize the commodity as having value. (Take your gold to a tribe in Africa where wealth is measured in cows, and hilarity ensues.)

      --
      Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
      You cannot wash away blood with blood
    11. Re:Am I the only one... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      See, this is exactly what I'm talking about: people with no idea how currency actually works just bearhugging the latest internet libertarian fad. If this guy were 40 years older he'd be telling us how we're all crazy for not stocking up on non-hybrid seeds.

    12. Re:Am I the only one... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Similarly, as more people use it there's more of an incentive to save it instead of spend it, which is horrible for a currency. Anyone who touts "deflationary" as a positive point of bitcoin has absolutely no idea what they're talking about.

    13. Re:Am I the only one... by linhares · · Score: 1

      that might be the case if there weren't 140+ inflationary currencies in the world for all the suckers to hold onto

    14. Re:Am I the only one... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Generally people invest their money, rather than put it under a mattress.

    15. Re:Am I the only one... by Linkreincarnate · · Score: 0

      Which do you think takes more electricity printing a dollar or storing it in memory? Physically moving a dollar or transmitting it?

  5. Godwin's law by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Interesting

    Kim "Kimble" Dotcom Schmitz is German-Finnish descendant, and during the WW II both Germany and Finland were Axis nations. See? With enough spin this could be turned into a drone bombing mission against an enemy combatant.

    1. Re:Godwin's law by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So an American funds an enemy combatant, Kim Dotcom, by buying his services, who them finds him/herself also an enemy combat and placed on the killist. The drone bombing on the enemy combatant will commence at the next available opportunity. All under the auspices of "Peace and Security" of the country.

    2. Re:Godwin's law by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Kim "Kimble" Dotcom Schmitz is German-Finnish descendant, and during the WW II both Germany and Finland were Axis nations. See? With enough spin this could be turned into a drone bombing mission against an enemy combatant.

      The Axis connection goes further: Satoshi Nakamoto is a Japanese name, and MtGox is headquartered in Japan.

      There was a british article attacking The Zeitgeist Movement, claiming that those who criticize or oppose the financial system are anti-semites!

      Do we need more to justify a drone attack? :D

    3. Re: Godwin's law by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Where is Adolf?

  6. Re:Reddit beat him to it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Don't tell me you never heard of megaupload before the guy was arrested.

    Because I have no clue who the guy behind reddit is right now (heard of him once I believe, due to the death of swartz, if I am correct.

  7. WHEN IT IS DIRTY YOU MUST LAUNDER !! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That is saying, drug gangs and pirates need to convert ill-gotten geld to untraceable cash, so to live it up behind their walls of scum !!

    Count me in !!

    Where do I send them my (used to be yours !!) money !!

  8. ASIC by Janek+Kozicki · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    a side note about bitcoin: ASIC mining is starting now. I guess this is why bitcoin price rised recently. asicminer has currently 2TH, and prepares for next 12TH. 2 avalon units have been shipped, and one of them is reviewed by Jeff Garzik (bitcoin developer). Nobody knows when other 298 avalon units will arrive, etc. But slowly asic mining becomes part of the history.

    --
    #
    #\ @ ? Colonize Mars
    #
    1. Re:ASIC by dbIII · · Score: 0

      Why not use it to find oil by reprocessing seismic data, or FEA on potential product designs and make real money instead of falling for this crappy ponzi scheme?

    2. Re:ASIC by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why would ASIC mining make bitcoin prices rise?

      When something is plentiful, its value is reduced. When it is rare, its value is increased. Supply and demand. If you don't understand something that simple, you probably shouldn't be posting here.

    3. Re:ASIC by Janek+Kozicki · · Score: 1

      clearly you misunderstand bitcoin, when bitcoin difficulty rises its security increases. There is no such thing as "plentiful" because with faster mining the difficulty self adjusts.

      --
      #
      #\ @ ? Colonize Mars
      #
    4. Re:ASIC by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      *sigh*

      dblll, posting comments everywhere vacuously accusing Bitcoin of being a Ponzi does little for your credibility. If you are genuinely worried about Bitcoin scamming people and wasting resources you'd do well to post some well-reasoned arguments justifying your position. ... and no, prefixing "ponzi" with "crappy" is not a well-reasoned argument.

      How you're getting modded up is beyond me.

    5. Re:ASIC by petermgreen · · Score: 2

      The difficult adjusts to the block discovery rate such that the supply of bitcoin is roughly fixed. ASIC miners won't have much impact on total bitcoint production but they will dramatically change who gets that production.

      So it really depends on how the willingness to sell differs between the old GPU/FPGA miners and the new ASIC miners.

      --
      note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
    6. Re:ASIC by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why not use it to find oil by reprocessing seismic data, or FEA on potential product designs and make real money instead of falling for this crappy ponzi scheme?

      http://www.quickmeme.com/Bitcoin-owners-safe/?upcoming

    7. Re:ASIC by Issarlk · · Score: 1

      I admire your persistence sir. Keep saying it's a ponzi scheme, it just might work and people will stop using it to exchange services and goods.

    8. Re:ASIC by dbIII · · Score: 0

      I keep persisting because this scam is aimed squarely at the sort of people that read this site but do not have the life experience to have seen anything similar before.

    9. Re:ASIC by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Please provide an example.

  9. StorJ by IamTheRealMike · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Some time ago Gregory Maxwell proposed the idea of autonomous programs that maintain their own Bitcoin wallet. He gave the concrete example of StorJ, a program that provides encrypted file hosting capacity a la MEGA. By buying server time from VPS providers and re-selling services, purchasing advertising via ad networks that offer APIs, hiring humans to improve their code and spawning children that grow up and compete with the parents in the market, StorJ would be the first artificial life form truly worthy of the name. I enclose a copy of his proposal below for your perusal. I also wrote a wiki page on the concept where I explore the relevance of trusted computing and TPM chips to this use.

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    Hash: SHA1

    StorJ (pronounced Storage)

    Consider a simple drop-box style file service with pay per use via bitcoin.
    (perhaps with naming provided via namecoin and/or tor hidden services)

    Want to share a file? send at least enough coin to pay for 24 hours of
    hosting and one download then send the file. Every day of storage
    and every byte transferred counts against the balance and when the
    balance becomes negative no downloads are allowed. If it stays negative
    too long the file is deleted. Anyone can pay to keep a file online.

    (additional services like escrow can also easily be offered, but thats
    not the point of this document)

    Well engineered, a simple site like this provides a service which requires
    no maintenance and is always in demand.

    Many hosting services are coming online that accept bitcoin, they
    all have electronic interfaces to provision and pay for services. Some
    even have nice APIs.

    An instance of the site could be programmed to automatically
    spawn another instance of itself on another hosting service, automatically
    paid for out of its revenue. If the new site is successful it could
    use its earnings to propagate further. Because instances adapt their
    pricing models based on their operating costs, some would be more
    competitive than others.

    By reproducing it improves availability and expands capacity.

    StorJ instances can purchase other resources that it needs:
    it can use APIs to talk to namecoin exchanges in order to buy
    namecoin for conversion into DNS names, or purchase graphic
    design via bitcoin gateways to mechanical turk. (Through A/B testing
    it can measure the effectiveness of a design without actually understanding
    it itself).

    StorJ instances could also purchase advertising for itself. (though
    the limited number of bitcoin friendly ad networks makes this
    hard right now)

    StorJ is not able to find new hosting environments on its own, due to a
    lack of sufficiently powerful AI— but it can purchase the knowledge from
    humans: When an instance of StorJ is ready to reproduce it can announce
    a request for proposal: Who will make the best offer for a script that
    tells it how to load itself onto a new hosting environment and tells it
    all the things it needs to know how to survive on its own there?
    Each offer is a proposed investment: The offerer puts up the complete cost
    of spawning a new instance and then some: StorJ isn't smart enough to judge
    bad proposals on its own— instead it forms agreements that make it
    unprofitable to cheat.

    When a new instance is spawned on an untested service StorJ pays only the
    minimum required to get it started and then runs a battery of tests to
    make sure that its child is correctly operating.

    Assuming that it passes it starts directing customers to the new instance
    and the child pays a share of its profits: First it proxies them, so it can
    observe the behavior, later it directs it outright. If the child fails to pay,
    or the customers complain, StorJ-parent uses its access to terminate the child and
    it keeps the funds for itself. When the child had operated enough to
    prove itself, storj p

    1. Re:StorJ by MichaelSmith · · Score: 2

      I would be worried that it would hire hit squads to force a merger with competing AIs.

    2. Re:StorJ by Janek+Kozicki · · Score: 1

      ok, I want to make money by providing storage space to storJ, where do I start? :)

      --
      #
      #\ @ ? Colonize Mars
      #
    3. Re:StorJ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why is necessary virtual money for do this? You can do it also with a real money and paypal account.

      Which is the difference?

    4. Re:StorJ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You actually have to work for real money.

    5. Re:StorJ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The mechanism to ensure that malicious code isn't spawned by human actors is flawed, I can't see how it wouldn't get hijacked and turned into a botnet. How does it find said humans? How does it validate their code outside of simulated sandboxes? Can easily develop a malicious payload atop of the legitimate program.

    6. Re:StorJ by elucido · · Score: 1

      You gotta work for virtual money too. Just using Tor is a risk of current or future government persecution. So you risk your future using Tor. So you get compensated but I doubt the compensation is worth the risk.

      Don't get me wrong, it's worth it to browse Tor and see whats on there. Hosting is a completely different story with different levels of danger.

    7. Re:StorJ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      assuming that I can take care of that, where do I start?

    8. Re:StorJ by jcfandino · · Score: 1

      Because JSTOR wasn't bad enough!

    9. Re:StorJ by IamTheRealMike · · Score: 2

      Er, do you really think PayPal will allow accounts that are not owned by a human? Can you even do everything on PayPal via an API? PayPal sucks even for people due to rampant account freezes and buyer fraud, I can't even imagine how unfriendly an environment it'd be for programs. Especially given that file hosting costs are likely to be micropayment sized.

    10. Re:StorJ by IamTheRealMike · · Score: 1

      There are multiple ways to allow humans to modify the code safely, but yes, it's one of the parts of the idea that needs more fleshing out. In the wiki page I proposed the use of TPMs and trusted computing technology to help resolve some of these issues - you can have a small immutable core that handles the money which can't be changed, and then human upgrades can be limited to things like optimizing the web UI, the install scripts, etc ... things which can't steal the money. You can also run human-provided code inside sandboxes all the time (not simulated), for instance using Java/.NET code access security, or using a JavaScript interpreter, that way the unknown/untrusted code can be prevented from doing things it's not supposed to do, like network access. In short, I think there are ways to make limited adaptation and improvement possible.

    11. Re:StorJ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yeah, thats the point of using bitcoin. paypal sucks :)

    12. Re:StorJ by DanielRavenNest · · Score: 2

      PayPal business account set up in the name of a corporation. Later the corporation buys up all it's outstanding shares, becoming self-owned (or if that is not legal, a cycle of two corporations that own each other's stock). An autonomous agent actually operates the corporation, with no employees.

  10. Re:Reddit beat him to it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Surely you heard of Megaupload??

    Also, 4chan is accepting bitcoins for 4chan pass now, which gets rid of the annoying recaptcha from Google. (aka our word is plainly spelt out but will still return a failure on you because screw you we are Google!)
    Has been for, uh, few months or so I think.

    I wonder what the faces of all those naysayers look like now.
    The instant those 2 banks started trading bitcoins, bam, legit currency was born.
    Bitcoin itself is still horribly broken as a system because of various other reasons.
    Particularly the bitcoin mining limit, as use for shopping, you can't really do much with the coins on the shops end. Sure you can refund with bitcoins, but that is very limited in scope. Buy things? Still a limited amount of things accepting it at the moment.
    Still has a long way to go, I'd put it below the usefulness of Local Currencies at the moment. How long it will take for it to go past that is another question. (if it does, who knows what could happen, war, war on bitcoins, american tyranny, hacks, another meteor smashing our cities up, etc.)

  11. Word, folks. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This type of behavior is not unsurprising for a criminal organization.

    Mr. Dotcom can thumb his nose all he wants, but with time will com his downfall.

    A cell awaits Dotcom and all those who conspire with him.

    - The US Department of Justice

    1. Re:Word, folks. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How dare people use his service to download things we didn't even make ourselves for free?

      We're the only ones who can steal from artists!

      - The MAFIAA

  12. Profit!!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    1) Accumulate bitcoins bought at current prices at any bitcoin exchange.

    2) Be the owner of a worldwide-relevant website and announce that you will start accepting bitcoins, so bitcoins get more valuable (because, in the market, useful == valuable).

    3) See the quotes for bitcoins rising as a result. Sell bitcoins back. Profit!!!

    I envy you, Mr. Neary!!!

  13. E-Mail?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    With all the shady businesses he ran I trust this guy about as far as I can throw.
    And my record was -3m(sic!) in high school - and I _know_ when you are supposed to let go of the ball but my body refuses to do it right.

  14. Re:Reddit beat him to it by brokenin2 · · Score: 1

    Well, I'm sure I'd heard of it at some point, but I'd never been so interested by anything that I'd heard as to note what the site was even about.

    I guess I've always had places to put my files online if I needed, so I never thought they were even vaguely interesting.. The only thing
    that I could have told you about megaupload before his arrest, was what I could glean from the name.. AKA, "sounds like the either do, or allow you to do a lot of uploading"..... boring..

  15. Re:Reddit beat him to it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Surely you heard of Megaupload??

    Maybe he's not a pirate.

  16. 50 free gigs = too good not to utilize. by elucido · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It's in anyone's self interest to use 50 free gigs of encrypted cloud storage. The majority of the political dispute are just politics and have nothing to do with business or value to the customer. Megau is the best product whether you agree with it's politics or not. Bitcoin is a political move by Mega probably as a hedge out of fear the US government might try to cut off it's revenues somehow.

    Mega and these sorts of products are just more important than the political special interests. The user having privacy to think as they like is an essential human right. This essential human right is tied into the right of having encrypted cloud storage. It is not in the best interest of humans as a species to give up the ability to have private thoughts. Anything you put in your cloud is your thoughts and anything you search for via Google are your thoughts. There might be instances where in the course of say a child porn investigation we might need to check a customers search records to rule them out, but there is no reason to check peoples cloud storage. If it's a situation where a person somehow has dangerous classified information then put the person under surveillance if it's about national security. The police have no business here, the RIAA has no business here, and Mega isn't going to protect people from total surveillance and it's not designed for it so once again the people who are against Mega are against it for political reasons only. Political reasons are not always in the best interest of the community or the country.

    Sometimes we have to set politics and ideology aside and use the best product if it's the best. Google drive isn't offering 50 gigs of storage and doesn't encrypt it. Facebook doesn't offer 50 gigs of storage either. Once again they should not have a right to view out files as there never has been any legal justification for giving the police the right to view out private files.

    1. Re:50 free gigs = too good not to utilize. by maxwell+demon · · Score: 1

      Bitcoin is a political move by Mega probably as a hedge out of fear the US government might try to cut off it's revenues somehow.

      Indeed, he might have looked at what happened to Wikileaks, and decided to take preventive measures.

      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
    2. Re:50 free gigs = too good not to utilize. by elucido · · Score: 1

      Bitcoin is a political move by Mega probably as a hedge out of fear the US government might try to cut off it's revenues somehow.

      Indeed, he might have looked at what happened to Wikileaks, and decided to take preventive measures.

      Wikileaks has nothing to do with Mega. When you even put them in the same category you endanger Mega. Wikileaks was basically functioning to piss the US government off almost exclusively for the past few years and wasn't prepared for the reaction. Wikileaks was threatening not just a faction within the US government but the entire State Dept itself. That being said the actions to try to block the flow of money were unconstitutional as Julian Assange is not an American Citizen they had no business trying to treat him as if he were. Even if he were he was not under oath so they had no business trying to give him a responsibility to protect classified information which that responsibility belonged to Bradley Manning. The only person who should have been arrested and prosecuted is Bradley Manning.

    3. Re:50 free gigs = too good not to utilize. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wikileaks exposes hidden truths not just about USA but many other countries. The fact that this pisses off Americans and that Americans think it's all about them and only them, says a lot more about Americans than anything else.

    4. Re:50 free gigs = too good not to utilize. by daver00 · · Score: 1

      It's in anyone's self interest to use 50 free gigs of encrypted cloud storage.

      See I thought the same thing but then discovered that "use" is a key word in this sentence. I've so far not even managed to successfully back up my photo collection and a few other odds and ends to the tune of a mighty 4GB. The upload speeds I'm getting are terrible, the interface makes it worse in that you must have the browser running to upload anything. It doesn't do jack shit in the background (like dropbox does).

      I'm ready to give up on Mega, the browser only thing I can handle, but the upload speeds have just been atrocious rendering it unusable for me.

    5. Re:50 free gigs = too good not to utilize. by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      I'm sure you can pay that nice Mr Dotcom for an upgrade.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
  17. Who is it marketed to? Why be Anon? by elucido · · Score: 1

    I see no real advantage to using Bitcoin and Tor just for storage when you can store it on Mega or anything else on the more reliable Internet. Also anyone who uses Tor receives the stigma of rapist, pedophile, terrorist, just by using it at all.

    So what are the benefits to Storj and who is it marketed to? Is Storj supposed to be the black cloud or something? Once again for what purpose do we need a black cloud and who is going to use it?

    1. Re:Who is it marketed to? Why be Anon? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Really?
      You can't imagine anyone having any use for: 100% censorship resistant online storage at an extremely competitive price.

      Really!?!

    2. Re:Who is it marketed to? Why be Anon? by elucido · · Score: 1

      Really?
      You can't imagine anyone having any use for: 100% censorship resistant online storage at an extremely competitive price.

      Really!?!

      I don't see how you can censor what you can't see. Mega is encrypted.

    3. Re:Who is it marketed to? Why be Anon? by icebraining · · Score: 1

      Storj is a proposal for an experiment on independent artificial entities, not a product to be marketed and sold.

  18. Fiat money depends on promises by dbIII · · Score: 1, Informative

    This stuff however isn't Fiat money, not even Yugo money :) - it's an empty promise from people with no reputation to lose. It's just another Ponzi scheme but this time baited for geek. The fixed volume of potential bitcoins is a pretty massive clue that it's a scam.

    1. Re:Fiat money depends on promises by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What empty promise? There is no promise to Bitcoin and that's partly the point. It's a zero-trust wealth transfer protocol.

    2. Re:Fiat money depends on promises by ultranova · · Score: 4, Informative

      It's just another Ponzi scheme but this time baited for geek.

      "A Ponzi scheme is a fraudulent investment operation that pays returns to its investors from their own money or the money paid by subsequent investors, rather than from profit earned by the individual or organization running the operation."

      "Ponzi scheme" is not a synonym for "something to do with money I disagree with". Stop using it as such. Bitcoin isn't a Ponzi scheme because it's not an investment scheme. Furthermore, since all the details about Bitcoin are publicly known, it's hard to see how it could be called a scam at all - there are no below-table dealings there.

      "Ponzi scheme" is quickly becoming the Godwin of economic discussion.

      The fixed volume of potential bitcoins is a pretty massive clue that it's a scam.

      While it's likely that deflation makes Bitcoin unsuitable as a currency, that doesn't make it a scam, just flawed.

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

    3. Re:Fiat money depends on promises by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So all government issued currency is also a ponzi scam under your definition? It's just an empty promise too.
      Gold is also a ponzi scam too due to its fixed volume on earth.

      Even trade appears to be a scam under your definition, since both parties trading have fixed volume too.

      I guess since all methods of tracking "value" are a ponzi scam by your definition, they are all equally valid, including the true ponzi scams.

      That doesn't look like much of an improvement over our current situation.

    4. Re:Fiat money depends on promises by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Herbalife is a ponzi scheme. Bitcoins are not. A bitcoin's stability is related to the number of number of vendors accepting the currency. If it collapses then the founders theoretically lose as much as the later miners (i.e. they gained nothing to begin with because they had no chance to cash out):

      https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/FAQ

      Is Bitcoin a Ponzi scheme?

      In a Ponzi Scheme, the founders persuade investors that they’ll profit. Bitcoin does not make such a guarantee. There is no central entity, just individuals building an economy.

      A ponzi scheme is a zero sum game. Early adopters can only profit at the expense of late adopters. Bitcoin has possible win-win outcomes. Early adopters profit from the rise in value. Late adopters, and indeed, society as a whole, benefit from the usefulness of a stable, fast, inexpensive, and widely accepted p2p currency.

      The fact that early adopters benefit more doesn't alone make anything a Ponzi scheme. All good investments in successful companies have this quality."

    5. Re:Fiat money depends on promises by IamTheRealMike · · Score: 5, Informative

      The idea that deflation leads to depression was proven to be false back in 2004. The "Bitcoin has a flawed economic design" argument is wrong and I will keep posting this study on Slashdot until it gets modded up and people read it.

    6. Re:Fiat money depends on promises by Kjella · · Score: 2

      "Ponzi scheme" is not a synonym for "something to do with money I disagree with". Stop using it as such. Bitcoin isn't a Ponzi scheme because it's not an investment scheme.

      If you're going to argue something it's probably not smart to quote something that ruins your argument. The vast majority of BitCoins are being held as an investment/speculation, and the only way it'll pay returns is by subsequent BitCoin buyers driving up the price allowing the early investors to sell off their BitCoins at a profit, since BitCoins don't produce anything or have any value by themselves. Current BitCoin holders have exactly the same incentives as members of a Ponzi scheme to keep the pyramid growing, the bigger the pyramid the more profit they make. That all this profit flows from the late entrants to the early entrants without producing anything of value is what makes it a Ponzi scheme, that it is done through deflation only makes it look like there's no money flow.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    7. Re:Fiat money depends on promises by Macrat · · Score: 1

      While it's likely that deflation makes Bitcoin unsuitable as a currency, that doesn't make it a scam, just flawed.

      Did you stock up on Flooz as well?

    8. Re:Fiat money depends on promises by IamTheRealMike · · Score: 2

      What he quoted doesn't "ruin his argument". Bitcoins are no more an investment scheme than domain names are. Sure, you can camp on domain names and hope they go up in value. That does not make the DNS a ponzi scheme.

    9. Re:Fiat money depends on promises by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "proven to be false" are pretty strong words for that study.

    10. Re:Fiat money depends on promises by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Like it matters. Your "Nerdcoin" is a joke, economically viable or not. An endorsement by Kim Fatcom doesn't help.

    11. Re:Fiat money depends on promises by icebraining · · Score: 1

      BitCoins don't (...) have any value by themselves.

      Sure they do: they provide a cheap way of sending money to someone else over the 'net that isn't subject to the shenanigans like Paypal's constant money freezing or the Wikileaks blockade.

      Whether that's good enough for it to survive remains to be seen, of course.

    12. Re:Fiat money depends on promises by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      what you're describing is precisely how the dollar is created: the Fed says that [random] TBTF bank now has 1 trillion to play with, the TBTF gambles/loans it and has to pay the Fed both principal + interest. Look up: Libor conspiracy, TARP, QE1, QE2, QE3, QE4, MF Global, Paypal accounts frozen, etc etc. Before singling bitcoin up as "unfair". Nicely summed up here: http://www.quickmeme.com/Bitcoin-owners-safe/?upcoming Bitcoin is the only honest international banking system we have.

    13. Re:Fiat money depends on promises by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It does not make the DNS a ponzi scheme, because new domains cost the same as old ones.

      But if i mine a Bitcoin now, i invest only a little bit. Then others mine more bitcoins and need to invest more. In relation, my bitcoin has a better price-performance ratio. So just assume i trade my cheaply mined bitcoin with a bitcoin of a recent miner. The exchange in bitcoin is 1:1, but the investment cost of the coins are very different, the recent miner invested a lot more (electric power) to mine the coin.
      thats the ponzi part.

      the deflation part is, that my coin gets worth more and more, because it gets harder to get the same amount of bitcoins. So i would be stupid to spend it for something with defined worth (like a physical item), because if i buy a new computer for my bitcoins, the worth of the computer does not grow (it even decays slowly. hardware *sigh*). So its clever to keep my bitcoins and watch them getting worth more instead of spending them.

    14. Re:Fiat money depends on promises by Linkreincarnate · · Score: 0

      You would rather a currency backed by high school football players? I'll bet on the nerds than you...

    15. Re:Fiat money depends on promises by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      lol, I actually read this paper. if this passes for "proof," a very strong word, that the authors of said paper do not use, then no wonder people are standing in line to piss on economists who use their mighty science to fix policy. Yeah, there are some fundamental methodological issues with these "scientific" observations that hugely discredit them for hypothesis testing. Can you spot them? Or are you a fellow economist?

  19. How much free storage? by elucido · · Score: 0

    How many free gigs?

    And why would we use filecloud when we KNOW the political establishment hates Mega so at least with Mega they wont turn over our most private thoughts to the police for political points.When it comes to stuff like cloud storage it's very important that the company watching over our data doesn't have a political agenda. If they do then they might abuse our trust.

    1. Re:How much free storage? by maxwell+demon · · Score: 1

      If you properly encrypt your most private thoughts before sending it to the cloud, you don't have to worry about to whom that company may give that pile of bits, because without the key it will not be worthwhile anyway.

      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
    2. Re:How much free storage? by siride · · Score: 1

      Here's an example of where the rule that prepositions shouldn't go at the end makes a sentence more awkward rather than less. Now you have this awful "about to whom" pile-up. Instead, you could write: "you don't have to worry about who that company may give that pile of bits to".

    3. Re:How much free storage? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're nuts, if you think Mr. Schmitz doesn't have a political agenda ; )

    4. Re:How much free storage? by retchdog · · Score: 1

      i agree, but it would still be `whom.'

      --
      "They were pure niggers." – Noam Chomsky
  20. How about a different name by dbIII · · Score: 1

    How about Colossus or Guardian?

  21. MEGA was foolish to use PayPal in the 1st place... by ornia · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Last month, just a couple days prior to the launch of MEGA, Slashdot ran a story that informed us all that each user would get 50GB gratis storage on the service. This story brought with it a comment from the creator of ScatterBytes, the distributed storage backend that MEGA uses. The entire reason that gratis 50GB can even be offered to all users, and indeed one of the oft-touted improvements of MEGA over MegaUpload (to try and convince us we won't lose our data at the whim of any given government like last time), is that anyone with spare storage space and bandwidth can be financially compensated for hosting the (encrypted) data of other MEGA users.

    The concept of this distributed storage and accompanying financial compensation system is certainly a more novel approach to what file lockers have offered in the past, and this is precisely what ScatterBytes is providing to the infrastructure of the MEGA network. But I was shocked to learn, in the comment of ScatterBytes creator, that the financial compensation system would be using PayPal. Why the creators of MEGA & Scatterbytes would be so short-sighted and foolish to base their system off of a centralised, USA-based payment company widely known to be the Internet sector of the US financial-military-industrial complex was completely beyond me.

    As a server operator myself, why would I want my disk space (NOT in the USA) to be a part of the MEGA network (NOT a US website) when details of my contribution (and a cut of the profits) would be handed directly to a US company known to directly work with the US government? Had the people behind MEGA & ScatterBytes not been paying any attention to PayPal's history? Shouldn't the operators of a file locker site which was mercilessly raided by the moneyed American corporate interests trying to stymy progress (and currently entangled in a court case) be slightly more intelligent and aware than this?

    In my response to his comment, I asked the ScatterBytes creator why they are creating a system that would hand the US government banking-level details of MEGA collaborators , easily sortable by size of contributions no less! For the successor site to MegaUpload, this level of unthinking oversight is absolutely embarassing. MegaUpload's servers are still sitting in limbo, and people have served jailtime over this service. Why any third-party (ie most of us on Slashdot) would be enthusiastic to contribute to the relaunch of this service, even if it does differ technologically from the previous incarnation, when it means giving all of our personal information to an organisation as nefarious and unfriendly to progress as PayPal is beyond me. To Jack's Complete Lack of Suprise, within a week of the launch of MEGA, an organisation seemingly created to kill file locker services (at least ones which multimedia publishing cartels decide to target) worked to shut off PayPal access to the primary MEGA resellers. So much for paying attention to history.


    To see adoption of BitCoin is good news, but it's what should have been done at launch. It's 2013. We don't need centralised US-controlled middlemen spying on all of our financial transactions and taking our money anytime we want to transfer funds. We ha

  22. Email... by flyingfsck · · Score: 1

    Well, duh, all programs expand until they can send and receive email.

    --
    Excuse me, but please get off my Pennisetum Clandestinum, eh!
  23. Re:Reddit beat him to it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Surely you heard of Megaupload??

    Maybe he's not a pirate.

    I fail to see how a wooden leg or a parrot is related, you're weird dude.

  24. Bitcoin is taking off. Pay attention to it. by ragingbull1965 · · Score: 5, Informative

    In the last 3 months: money supply expansion halved, number of merchants doubled, wordpress accepted it, US facing pokersite leaks they will accept it, largest gambling site profit up hundreds of %

    If this stuff happened to any company, its share price would double.

    Also, in the last year:
    Network transaction fees per day are up 1100% from 4 to 48
    Explosion in p2p exchanges for cash or bank transfers on sites like localbitcoins
    Coinlab and BitPay each got 500k in venture capital. Coinbase got 100k.
    Bitcoin Foundation Launched in September 2012
    ponzi worth between 250k and 5mil collapsed
    BitInstant lets you buy bitcoins at walmart, 7-11, and CVS
    Silk Road is doing at least 2mil/month. Forum usage up hundreds of percent over last year.
    A $10mil company will be releasing the BitcoinCard this year at the Vienna Bitcoin Conference. The Russian founders say 5 years of research have gone into this technology allowing a super-low-power credit card sized device to send texts, bitcoins, login info, and consumer data through an ad-hoc network instead of cell towers, at a card cost of only $10-$25
    SatoshiDice has shown the potential of the bitcoin gambling market by earning $600k, including 17,266 bitcoins in December
    Many companies in the bitcoin community have gone public.

    Read the bitcoin FAQ: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/FAQ
    If you still have concerns, see if they are addressed in the "myths" section: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Myths

  25. Re:Bitcoin is taking off. Pay attention to it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I've never seen somebody using slashdot to ramp currencies before. Good luck.

  26. Fixed Volume Erroneous Argument by DanielRavenNest · · Score: 2

    Well, not as large as the states that make up the former Yugoslavia, but the Bitcoin money supply ($295 million) is 1.8% of the Slovenia money supply ($16 billion), one of the states it broke up into. That's not bad considering Bitcoin's money supply was negligible two years ago.

    * Bitcoin makes no promises, it is a transaction protocol, like FTP or HTTP. If someone is making promises, point them out.

    * Bitcoin units in circulation are growing at about 12% a year, so it is not fixed volume. The final quantity of 21 quadrillion Satoshi should be sufficient for any conceivable financial purpose. 1 Bitcoin = 100,000,000 Satoshi, and transactions are recorded in the smaller unit. The larger bitcoin unit is for convenience when the price was low. milliBitcoin (mBTC) are becoming more common now that the value is higher, and people will transition to micro-coins and Satoshi when it makes sense. If you didn't know Bitcoin are divisible into smaller units, I guess you didn't know much about them.

    * By your argument, the fixed volume of gold and land makes them scams too. New gold mining adds about 2%/year to the world supply, which about keeps even with population, and is slightly behind economic growth, so it is nearly fixed in the short term. They aren't making more land, of course, except in some cities where land values are very high. This is more than made up for by sea level rise which is decreasing the Earth dry land area.

    1. Re:Fixed Volume Erroneous Argument by dbIII · · Score: 1

      gold and land

      There's plenty of reasons why both are unsuitable as the basis of a currency and the modern world (1700 onwards) would not exist as it does today if either of those still were the basis of a currency. An easily readable description of why is in the Neil Stephenson novel "The Confusion" - it really comes down to static versus dynamic systems.
      Anyway there's no point arguing about currency systems when what we have here is just an old fashioned pyramid scheme the just happens to be baited for geek. It has nothing more to do with currency than limited edition collectable toys do. So if you have bitcoin number 10032 of 20001 for example it's just like having a collectable toy.

    2. Re:Fixed Volume Erroneous Argument by jesset77 · · Score: 1

      You've claimed that any investment in a fixed supply of something is a pyramid scheme. We mention Gold and Land (which also fit these criteria) and you hand wave about whether you're trying to use something as a currency or not.

      Virtually all commodity investments have static supply in the short term. Bitcoin is a digital commodity. In fact it's the first digital commodity to be both counterfeit-proof and non-centralized, and those four properties (digital + commodity + counterfeit-proof + decentralized) drive 90% of it's value as a transaction and value store system. Can you name any alternatives which satisfy all four of those criteria?

      What I ask from you is to disambiguate how it is that you view Bitcoin as a scam compared to any other fixed-supply commodity investment.

      --
      People willing to trade their freedom of expression for temporary entertainment deserve neither and will lose both.
    3. Re:Fixed Volume Erroneous Argument by dbIII · · Score: 0

      You've claimed that any investment in a fixed supply of something is a pyramid scheme

      No - I've claimed bitcoin in the specific case is a pyramid scheme, then I wrote a bit about historic problems with actual currencies. Don't put words in my mouth and argue against your own construct.
      Bitcoin is an artificial device designed to make the early adopters in the pyramid benefit greatly from the late adopters who do not benefit much at all. The flaw is deliberately designed into the system - thus a scam where the perpetrators pull in as many rubes as they can to maximise the take.

  27. Re:MEGA was foolish to use PayPal in the 1st place by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    here here!! :D

  28. Re:Bitcoin is taking off. Pay attention to it. by DanielRavenNest · · Score: 2

    What some people here on Slashdot are missing is that bitcoin is not just a virtual currency, it's a transaction protocol, with new features being developed and applications being written. It should be thought of in the same category as FTP and HTTP, as a means of securely transferring balances, rather than bits.

    The protocol can be used for other purposes than a currency. You can use it anywhere you need to securely transfer a quantity, value, amount, or balance from one place to another online. Think for a bit what you can do with that, it goes far beyond just currencies. The distribution of initial amounts can use other algorithms than the one in the Bitcoin system, they just chose one that appears to work well for a currency.

  29. Re:MEGA was foolish to use PayPal in the 1st place by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    nice post. I think you mean "which has increased the wealth to so few"

  30. Re:MEGA was foolish to use PayPal in the 1st place by IamTheRealMike · · Score: 1

    It appears the ScatterBytes creator actually replied to your comment and asked for advice/help on implementing Bitcoin payments, so I'm not sure you should say his "level of unthinking oversight is absolutely embarassing". Perhaps if you'd helped randallman, they'd be accepting Bitcoin already.

  31. Re:MEGA was foolish to use PayPal in the 1st place by ornia · · Score: 1

    You are absolutely correct, and I should have indicated this in my initial post. I did not actually mean to come off as dismissing the work of the Scatterbytes creator, as his system (even in beta) is the most solid attempt at solving the technological problems of relatively secure, web-based distributed storage that I have seen. And I was very glad that he seemed receptive to implementing support for BitCoin in response to my comment in the earlier story. Personally, I have enough work to do than help him implement BitCoin support for his (and MEGA's) own profit, but I was perplexed that they didn't forsee an issue using PayPal in the first place (and I am not surprised AT ALL to see how fast that part of their plan failed).

    To be honest, I am mostly perplexed at the admins/creators of MegaUpload/MEGA. They know first hand the extent of the global power of their enemies: they were on the receiving end of an excessively brutal campaign to ruin their lives. Millions of dollars of servers confiscated, SWAT team raids on private property, jailtime, property and asset seizure, onerous international court cases, threats of extradition: all of this is based on the concept of profiting from data storage. To force contributors of the backend of the resurrected version of MegaUpload (who would be profiting via similar methods on a service with almost identical name) into using PayPal is, in my opinion, absolutely irresponsible. It would be announcing, loud and clear, to the US government (perpetrator of the aforementioned excessive force) that we too would be profiting from this new version of MegaUpload, not just Kim Dotcom and his associates. This puts contributors in danger, with those with the capacity to be the largest contributors in most danger.

    The harsh tone in my post mostly stems from a burning desire to see people cease using (and therefore funding) PayPal. To anyone reading this, please close your account if you have one !!! Do humanity a favour and let's let this one die, for the betterment of all of us. Exponentially so if you are running a service which uses (promotes) it.

  32. Really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There appear to be a lot of people on /. that are afraid of computers.

    1. Re:Really? by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      There appear to be a lot of people on /. that are afraid of computers.

      There are also quite a lot of people on /. who are highly familiar with computers but aren't 12 years old and don't believe they are the cure for all mankind's woes.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    2. Re:Really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There are also quite a lot of people on /. who are highly familiar with computers but aren't 12 years old and don't believe they are the cure for all mankind's woes.

      I trust math and good computer code more than I trust central banks and governments. YMMV.

  33. Everybody should try Bitcoin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Bitcoin adoption is increasing and reaching new businesses every day. The more people who get into this virtual currency, the better! For those who haven't joined the revolution yet, check out http://thebitcoinmaster.blogspot.com and get started!

  34. Re:MEGA was foolish to use PayPal in the 1st place by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    While I might agree with you bitcoin is still in its infancy and paypal has a significant number of users. I would love to impliment bitcoins on our web site although there are problems accepting it still. For instance my company uses a shopping cart platform and there are (or at least were) no solid implimenations to support bitcoins in a sane automated and simple manor. My business is not bitcoins. I'll put money into implimenting the code if needed if it is not too costly although chances are we will still need a third party to convert bitcoins to USD, etc. Ultimately we can't accept bitcoins and spend them without converting to other currencies because most of our suppliers don't accept them at the moment. There is a company working on these aspects though and when I have the time and money to put into it sure. Until then though there are problems with the immediate acceptance of bitcoins.

    I would suggest mega go and seek out the one UK company which has partnered with a bank and is legally following the laws of the UK/Europe. That would probably be more bulletproof than paypal. However it would probably be better for them to impliment there own local solution and fight for local political control. If you can fund the political campaigns/influence the vote it'll be much harder for the enemy to attack. However mega needs to do this at the European and international levels too or the company could get wrapped up treaties that ruin the business.

  35. Re:Bitcoin is taking off. Pay attention to it. by kokojie · · Score: 1

    and your account is how old? I support ragingbull1965's comment 100%, my account I believe is old enough?

  36. Re:Reddit beat him to it by Tatarize · · Score: 1

    Heck the other day Megaupload sent me an email saying that a file sextrivia.txt violated their TOS. It apparently had the word sex in it. Even though it was just a list of trivia questions rather than porn or something. I might have been like one of the only people using it for legit purposes, and still got burned.

    --

    It is no longer uncommon to be uncommon.
  37. Re:MEGA was foolish to use PayPal in the 1st place by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    nice post. I think you mean "which has increased the wealth to so few"

    The FIAT system has brought US's inequality to 3rd world status, and here you are, defending it.

  38. Re:Reddit beat him to it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Gosh, good thing it wasn't about sextuplets. Who knows what might come of it!

    AC

  39. Re:MEGA was foolish to use PayPal in the 1st place by ornia · · Score: 1

    nice post. I think you mean "which has increased the wealth to so few"

    This was a typo on my part, but actually I meant "which has increased the wealth OF so few", if anyone was confused.

  40. OK then pedant - pyramid scheme by dbIII · · Score: 0
    OK then pedant - pyramid scheme, however the popular usage is "ponzi scheme" and the full description of such on wikipedia applies here if not the dictionary definition. Since it fits the description so well it's no more a Godwin than bringing up the Nazis in the context of 1930s German politics.

    that doesn't make it a scam, just flawed.

    "Flawed" by design with the "flaw" being of benefit to the founders - thus a scam.

  41. Re:MEGA was foolish to use PayPal in the 1st place by randallman · · Score: 2

    ScatterBytes is NOT the backend for MEGA! I'm not sure how I gave that impression. I have however worked BitCoin into the service and to my delight, it has enabled the creation of registration free storage nodes. That means to run a storage node, all you'll need to provide is a BitCoin address to accept payments, and you can just put that in the configuration file. Uploading/Storing data still requires a verified email address because it seems necessary to me for billing. I'd like to support other payment options so I'm all ears.

    I haven't released the updated software yet so please be patient. Shortly, I'm going to be publishing a Debian repository for the client and server to make installation and updating easy. I've also got some new (512 MB RAM) Model B Raspberry Pi's in the mail which I'm going to setup as storage nodes. I think they'd make great storage nodes due to their low cost and low power consumption. I welcome any feedback.

    -Randall

  42. Re:Bitcoin is taking off. Pay attention to it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is the main value of bitcoin. The mining aspect is closer to a game to get initial interest, the deflationary character makes it an unreliable working currency prone to speculation but as a reliable, secure, anonymous payment mechanism it's hard to beat. For significant commercial adoption the exchange rate will have to stabilize, probably some sort of hedge fund to slow fluctuation enough that spikes don't completely devalue payments before the merchant can extract them.

  43. Re:Reddit beat him to it by allo · · Score: 1

    paying money for some anonymous imageboard ... can there be a more obvious trap?

  44. Re:Bitcoin is taking off. Pay attention to it. by tehcyder · · Score: 1

    A $10mil company will be releasing the BitcoinCard this year at the Vienna Bitcoin Conference. The Russian founders say 5 years of research have gone into this technology allowing a super-low-power credit card sized device to send texts, bitcoins, login info, and consumer data through an ad-hoc network instead of cell towers, at a card cost of only $10-$25

    You have to pay to get your arse raped by Russian gangsters? I can't imagine the most helpless slashdot virgin falling for that one.

    --
    To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
  45. Re:MEGA was foolish to use PayPal in the 1st place by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    I love how on slashdot you can praise Mega and Bitcoins, but PayPal is "nefarious". Here's the thing: if you want to trade in illegal goods, don't be surprised when you're caught and tried as a criminal.

    Posted AC for obvious reasons, as criticising Kim Dotcom here is like visiting vatican.org and saying the Pope's a cunt.

  46. Re:MEGA was foolish to use PayPal in the 1st place by apachetoolbox · · Score: 1

    I'd love to run a storage node! How do I sign up? I've sent you a message via the contact page on the web site. io{at}damnit dot org.