Slashdot Mirror


Btcd - a Bitcoind Alternative Written In Go!

An anonymous reader writes "The folks at Conformal have announced btcd, an alternative full-node implementation to bitcoind, written in Go! They have released the first of their core packages, btcwire, available for download at GitHub. As a bitcoin user myself, I love the idea of a full alternative. It will only make bitcoin stronger and more independent. This will be great for the Go community, too!"

150 comments

  1. This is good for Bitcoin by vikingpower · · Score: 3, Funny

    ...in world full of banking problems, banking crises and eroding trust in fiduciary money. Way to go !

    --
    Religous speak to God. Insane are spoken to by God. When all shut up, one can finally hear Shostakovich in peace
    1. Re:This is good for Bitcoin by Joce640k · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yep. What the world really needs right now is a new currency whose value fluctuates like a share price.

      (Because it's based on the same premise - that it's only worth what people are willing to pay for it).

      --
      No sig today...
    2. Re:This is good for Bitcoin by Linsaran · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Cash is only worth what people are willing to trade for it, I fail to see how Bitcoin is inherently any different.

      --
      In a bit of shameless internet panhandling, I accept Litecoin Donations at Lbd2oH9QsthD1GfuUXPyka12YxvWJYnBVf
    3. Re:This is good for Bitcoin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      While technically true, have you seen any major currency fluctuate over >1000% within a month lately? Ignoring what actually happens in real life does not help your argument.

    4. Re:This is good for Bitcoin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      That's funny. I see it as the value of a dollar fluctuates and bitcoin is constant. I guess it's all a matter of perspective. ;)

    5. Re:This is good for Bitcoin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      USD does not really fluctuate - it actually only depreciates slowly to zero

      btw, in weimar republic they also thought their fiat is safe...

      i think its better to have multiple competing currencies than to rely on one manipulated currency

    6. Re:This is good for Bitcoin by Joce640k · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The price of food can double in a single day and you think it's normal? Luckily your wages do the exact same thing, right?

      --
      No sig today...
    7. Re: This is good for Bitcoin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the ven currencu frok hubculturebis somthing like that

    8. Re:This is good for Bitcoin by dbIII · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Which makes you a target for such scams :(
      Schools used to have subjects called things like "social studies", "civics" or something similar to try to give kids a rudimentary bullshit detector to protect against bent politicians, naturopaths and pyramid schemes. Whatever happened to those?

    9. Re:This is good for Bitcoin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Bitcoin existence depends on real cash... Without real cash you won't have electricity, computers, phones, internet, etc... So, how good will a virtual currency be then? You won't be able to mine, receive or spend this or any other virtual currency...

      Bitcoin starts to seem a real pyramid scheme, where the early adopters (who cleverly invested time and real money to start mining on the good old days) are now eager for fresh cash to come in, to allow them to trade all those bitcoins to real cash again (but with 100x or more increase in value)... They are the ones who will stand in the end, at the cost of all those that didn't mine, but rather invested in bitcoins with real money at the current trade value...

    10. Re:This is good for Bitcoin by pmontra · · Score: 0

      In another age somebody would have said that banknotes are a virtual currency dependent on real gold. Well, maybe banknotes are really a pyramidal scheme with somebody at the top printing as much as they wish when it's more convenient to them and people at the bottom getting with nothing in their end if inflation kicks in too much or if somebody decides to confiscate the bits in their banking accounts.

    11. Re:This is good for Bitcoin by jonjon12 · · Score: 1

      Real cash still depends on gold. But now we a have a new player called bitcoins that depends not only on gold but also on cash, so... gold -> cash -> bitcoins. Without gold and\or cash bitcoins are simply useless. But not only, even with gold and cash, if there is a power grid black-out your bitcoin wallet or brainwallet is useless. Remember Katrina or sandy?

    12. Re:This is good for Bitcoin by aliquis · · Score: 0

      Back when you was in school there still was a gold standard?

    13. Re:This is good for Bitcoin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      True. Not to mention then when bitcoins attract to mush attention the regulatory agencies will find a way to either control or close it. Even with electricity, but without internet, bitcoins are useless.

    14. Re:This is good for Bitcoin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sure! Change nothing, nothing changes! Because WE LOVE BANKING PROBLEMS, WE GONNA DO JACK SH** ABOUT IT!

      Current currency schemes are foobar. Everywhere you look issue with inflation. Now fight with only currency that has inheritent protection against it.

    15. Re:This is good for Bitcoin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You need to learn a bit about economics. Cash doesn't depend on gold; that's why it's called fiat currency. Look it up. And bitcoins don't depend on gold or cash for value. They depend only on the ability to trade them. In practice, bitcoins are dependent on electricity, but that's not the source of its value.

    16. Re:This is good for Bitcoin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Back when you was in school there still was a gold standard?

      Yes, it was called an A at A-Level.

    17. Re:This is good for Bitcoin by aliquis · · Score: 2

      Could happen with fruits ;)

      I guess what matters in the end is how much real world stuff you can acquire / have.

    18. Re:This is good for Bitcoin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But the GP is true.

      What, you are so naive that you believe the money you have has any value? How much are you willing to bet on that?
      Have you ever seen a country collapse before?
      Perhaps those guys in Greece and, oh I forgot the other one recently that had its banks crash and burn, should say how they feel about their backed money?
      I'm sure they thought their cash would have been free from damage, free from losing worth. They thought they would live like kings.
      Its okay, we can just get out money out the bank if there are problems, that won't worsen things at all, that is what they are there for.

      What do you think would happen to gold if it started being used as a currency because people never trusted the standard note and coin?
      It isn't a good outlook at all.

      Physical money is just as broken as bitcoin is. It is just more stable because there are hundreds of currencies that bounce off each other daily.
      The decay rate of these currencies are far far slower because of that. And sometimes they recover before things go pear-shaped without doing too much damage, if any at all to the general population. (usually traders, bankers and other types that profit on these changes, just like crypto-currency miners are doing here)
      If there were the same number of crypto-currencies as there are fiat, it would be FAR more stable because it isn't in the hands of anyone but its users.
      And as more are added, they will be goldmines for a short period before they lose their mining worth for profit, then it will just be used by those who don't care for getting pure profit.
      A lot of money can be made in crypto-currencies and it will likely grow with time as more companies and people accept them.
      But as a stable currency, now, it isn't something you can depend on. Maybe in 10 years of work and new currencies might it be worth it. Maybe.

    19. Re:This is good for Bitcoin by Edzilla2000 · · Score: 2

      Actually, in Greece, they use the Euro, so... Their money has not lost value...

    20. Re:This is good for Bitcoin by IamTheRealMike · · Score: 1

      You're extrapolating from a month in which the entire worlds media decided on saturation coverage for Bitcoin, simultaneously. Go back and look at the prices throughout 2012 and you'll see long periods of stability.

    21. Re:This is good for Bitcoin by pantaril · · Score: 0

      Yep. What the world really needs right now is a new currency whose value fluctuates like a share price.

      No, we don't need new, volatile currency, we need proven stable currency with world-wide scope, limited supply and no central authority. Is bitcoin there yet? No, but it's best candidate. Unfortunately, no one has invented new currency with the good properties of bitcoin which would be stable from day one. I doubt it is even possible. The volatile phase and wild growth is IMO inevitable

    22. Re:This is good for Bitcoin by pla · · Score: 3, Insightful

      have you seen any major currency fluctuate over >1000% within a month lately? Ignoring what actually happens in real life does not help your argument.

      Bitcoin has not fluctuated anywhere near 1000% in the past month. At most you could say 530%, comparing the low of 50 on April 16 to the high of 266 on April 10th. And excluding that bubble-and-pop (which very much still happens in USD-denominated assets), the exchange rate has remained relatively stable in the 90-120 range.

      However, even in making that 530% point, you've overlooked the opposite side of the coin - Bitcoin has whatever value people will pay for it, as does the US dollar. If people will pay $266 US dollars for one Bitcoin, not only has Bitcoin shot up in relative value, but the US dollar has shot down at the same time.

      Only the size of the USD vs BTC economies hides that fact. But when people will pay $266 for what most of the haters call a scam currency, that doesn't reflect well on the overall confidence in what they've traded for that "scam" currency.

    23. Re:This is good for Bitcoin by Smallpond · · Score: 1

      With real money when I take your wallet you have no way to prove it was your money. Its created this whole class of criminal called "thieves". A currency with traceable transactions eliminates that class and replaces it with smarter criminals.

    24. Re:This is good for Bitcoin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      If people will pay $266 US dollars for one Bitcoin, not only has Bitcoin shot up in relative value, but the US dollar has shot down at the same time.

      That explains why a loaf of bread suddenly jumped 530% up in price in April - Bitcoin shot up and dollar shot down! I'm sorry, but does anyone (outside of BTC community) value dollar relative to Bitcoin?

      Pretty sure dollar's value depends on many things - oil, inflation, banks, bread, stocks, tanks and everything, but MtGOX is far from being one of those.

      Kinda like "It's not me drunk and fallen, it's the floor suddenly standing up!"

    25. Re:This is good for Bitcoin by Smallpond · · Score: 1

      I'm assuming this is a joke given what happened to gold prices lately.

    26. Re:This is good for Bitcoin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do tell how you're supposed to prove this was your wallet and your Bitcoins if someone makes away with them?

      If someone has your Bitcoin wallet, only thing traceability adds to it is that now you can watch how your money went into a tumbler and disappeared, or how your money were all spent on Silk Road.

      So, just like cash, but with more frustration.

    27. Re:This is good for Bitcoin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I guess the difference is wether it takes off or not, and in what manner.
      There are worlds of differences, but of course, anything traded, is traded.
      So you can also say there's no difference, but it's really disingenous and providing nothing of value about the subject matter at all.

      It's like saying fracking is fracking, wether it causes water table pollution and earthquakes or not.
      The devil lies in the details, but some people are too intellectually dishonest and lazy to bother.

    28. Re:This is good for Bitcoin by gmclapp · · Score: 2

      You might be interested in reading the history of the foreign exchange to better understand why the Bitcoin is different. I don't think that Bitcoin is necessarily a bad thing. But it certainly is not a currency and is very different than the US dollar. We use a system of floating exchange rates now in which the US Dollar is "backed" by the British pound, the Yen, the Australian dollar and many more. this system ensures that the value of the US dollar, as well as the others mentioned are relatively stable with respect to commodities. (Like Bitcoin)

      Long story short, the Bitcoin is a commodity. Not a currency.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gold_standard
      http://www.fxtrademaker.com/forex_history.htm

      --
      Common Sense (+1)
    29. Re:This is good for Bitcoin by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure that anybody, possibly aside from poor suckers in no position to do anything about it, had the slightest confidence in the Weimar republic's fiat currency...

      You don't think that the Versailles reparations were due in goldmarks rather than papiermarks just because the winning side liked shiny things, do you?

    30. Re:This is good for Bitcoin by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      Sigh.

      Yet again it is not a pyramid scheme.

      Under some operating modes, it shared some similarities, but it does not share others. If the amount of money circulating round the system is much greater than the total amount of money in the system, then the "sucker" left at the end holding the bag will not loose out nearly to the same extent that you are making out my claiming it is a pyramid scheme.

       

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    31. Re:This is good for Bitcoin by daveime · · Score: 1

      They depend only on the ability to trade them

      Let me know when I can exchange a Bitcoin for a McDonalds.

      Right now, the only thing it is being exchanged for is illegal drugs / services, virtual services such as server hosting etc, and exchanges into a REAL currency such as USD, which can be used for myriad legal purposes not tied to an online realm - such as buying a burger.

    32. Re:This is good for Bitcoin by daveime · · Score: 1

      What good are traceable transactions, if you don't know WHO made them.

      A hashed address doesn't identify anybody, that's kind of the point of Bitcoin. You know exactly which transactions were made, but not who owns them.

    33. Re:This is good for Bitcoin by usuallylost · · Score: 3, Informative

      Cash is only worth what people are willing to trade for it, I fail to see how Bitcoin is inherently any different.

      I do not think it is inherently different. I think the volatility comes in because Bitcoin is a tiny market compared to say the US dollar or the Euro. So transactions that wouldn't impact those larger currencies at all can have a major impact on the value of Bitcoin. Things like currency sell offs happen all the time in the world market. The major government currencies are so large that we hardly notice them. Smaller currencies, those from smaller economies and Bitcoin, get hit with things like that and it has a large impact on the value of those currencies. So people have to realize if they are dealing in Bitcoins it is a smaller more volatile market than say the one for dollars. I wouldn't be surprised if we don't, assuming we haven't already, start seeing things like currency speculators operating in the Bitcoin market. The danger will be is if those speculators find ways to artificially manipulate that market.

    34. Re:This is good for Bitcoin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except, like, The price of a loaf of bread at the local store has been the same in USD for the last 6 months. So, um, you're retarded.

    35. Re:This is good for Bitcoin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The value of money is the trust of the issuing authority. This is why the dollar doesn't fluctuate much w.r.t. the good/services it can buy onshore. This is why bitcoin is crap.

    36. Re:This is good for Bitcoin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you retarded?

    37. Re:This is good for Bitcoin by ultranova · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Actually, in Greece, they use the Euro, so... Their money has not lost value...

      Which is one of the problems of euro, since it means that neither industry nor tourism get a boost from prices effectively falling. Euro will eventually collapse, of course, once enough countries have gone bankrupt that the rest can't carry it anymore, but it'll be too late for Greece.

      --

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

    38. Re:This is good for Bitcoin by hedwards · · Score: 1

      I can't pay my taxes in BTC and even with that "relatively stable" 90-120 range you're still talking about a 30% fluctuation, which is both unpredictable and dangerous for people who are trying to use it for normal currency stuff.

      As for overall confidence, there's a sucker born every minute, as long as there are suckers having confidence in it, it will remain, until such a time as it becomes so mind blowingly obvious that even the most idiotic supporter can't deny it.

      In the long term it will deflate out of existence, I just hope that there are some criminal prosecutions for the folks that are boosting the currency for personal gain.

    39. Re:This is good for Bitcoin by hedwards · · Score: 1

      It's not just as broken as BTC. The Federal Reserve has engaged in incompetent management over the last 30 or so odd years, but that can still be fixed. With BTC, there's nothing anybody can do to fix that, because the curve at which new BTC come into existence is defined and the maximum number is also defined. If they need more coins, because people are hoarding them, they can't create new ones. Whereas with USD, or any other paper currency, they can print more or print less, the fact that the current Federal Reserve is so incompetent as to think long term inflation is acceptable does not mean that somebody competent to run the reserve couldn't be appointed at some point.

    40. Re:This is good for Bitcoin by hedwards · · Score: 1

      What you're arguing there is semantics. It's got far more in common with a pyramid scheme than any other currency I've ever heard of.

    41. Re:This is good for Bitcoin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think it's wrong to call it a pyramid scheme.

      It's more of an MLM in my eyes. I mean, even lower rungs make _something_ on all that Avon and Amway stuff, right? And it's cemented even more by the fervor in those "I've cashed out to buy an ASIC rig, now the money'll get rolling in!" posts.

    42. Re:This is good for Bitcoin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ahh, Servitroll_major! So nice of you to take a break from trolling Mir/Wayland articles and remind us of what we already know. Indeed, Nerdcoin is not a true pyramid scheme, rather it shares some amusing similarities. Just calling it such pisses off the "True Believers", though the OP wasn't exactly making that declaration. Nice troll attempt, but seems this is out of your league.

    43. Re:This is good for Bitcoin by Rockoon · · Score: 1

      The value of money is the trust of the issuing authority.

      Actually, its the demands of the taxation authority that give currency value.

      --
      "His name was James Damore."
    44. Re:This is good for Bitcoin by serviscope_minor · · Score: 0

      It's got far more in common with a pyramid scheme than any other currency I've ever heard of.

      Tell me, which other pyramid schemes out there allow me to trad them for goods and services?

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    45. Re:This is good for Bitcoin by Hatta · · Score: 1, Informative

      When did you go to school? When I went to civics class it was nothing but indoctrination. I didn't hear anything about the problems with our system, just how important it was for us to vote for one of the puppets chosen for us. Somehow all our problems would be solved if we got 100% voter turnout... voting for the same damn Democrats and Republicans we get anyway.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    46. Re:This is good for Bitcoin by gman003 · · Score: 3, Informative

      At least it only fluctuates. When a major currency *does* change value by that much, that fast, it's always been part of an inflationary spiral - the value goes down, and never comes back up.

      And I think it's a bit unfair to judge Bitcoin against major currencies just yet. Even the most ardent supporters of Bitcoin don't claim it's on par with the Euro or Dollar. It's perhaps on par with certain small countries' currencies - and yes, those experience changes in value relative to other currencies as well, even when "pegged" to a larger currency. Not quite to the degree of the Bitcoin Bubble, but that was a pretty rare circumstance.

      PS: How are you figuring that 1000% figure? It peaked almost exactly a month ago at 235$/BTC, crashed at its lowest to 25$/BTC, and currently seems fairly stable around 120$/BTC. I can't see a sane way to get 1000% out of those numbers.

    47. Re:This is good for Bitcoin by serviscope_minor · · Score: 2

      Ahh, Servitroll_major!

      You know you've achieved some sort of slashdot goal when you have your very own AC stalker!

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    48. Re:This is good for Bitcoin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I would be quite happy to bet all of my money that my money has any value.

      You're welcome.

    49. Re:This is good for Bitcoin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      How are you figuring that 1000% figure? It peaked almost exactly a month ago at 235$/BTC, crashed at its lowest to 25$/BTC

      (235/25)*100%?

    50. Re:This is good for Bitcoin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As much as I can recall, "Social Studies" was mostly just a renamed History class. Rather than giving kids a rudimentary bullshit detector, it actually filled them with bullshit. Yay, America and all that.The closest that kids get to a bullshit detector is a philosophy course in college and most do not go for more than a few. Surely not enough to get to the point of understanding critical thinking.

      So, no wonder that everyone that you meet will be filled with the most absurd bullshit imaginable. Talk shows, psychics, health and medicine, science, or even political things. People do their jobs semi-competently and come home and argue that they have special powers, or that the war in Iraq was justified, that evolution did not happen, or that their iphone 5 really was free because they bought it from AT&T.

      It would be nice if there actual were some sort of critical thinking classes that were required, but I can only see two possible outcomes of it:

      One, it would be too hard for most people and they would fail. GPAs are effected because most people can do math or rote memorization, but not think. Football players might get pulled from the team because they can't pass this class. It would be removed from the curriculum and replaced with Sports Trivia or Home Ec or shop class or something.

      Two, it could destroy the America that we know. Our current society is very much built on an underclass that believes what they want to believe. The economy would be more sluggish if people thought about purchases instead of reacting based on "call now, our first 100 callers..." or "only 4 monthly installments...", or "only 23.7% interest" and the like.

    51. Re:This is good for Bitcoin by pla · · Score: 4, Informative

      I can't pay my taxes in BTC

      You can't pay your (US) taxes in Euros, either. Does that say anything about the legitimacy of the Euro? Though in fairness, if you wanted to consider that particular example one of a failing currency, I'd have a hard time disagreeing. ;)


      As for overall confidence, there's a sucker born every minute, as long as there are suckers having confidence in it, it will remain, until such a time as it becomes so mind blowingly obvious that even the most idiotic supporter can't deny it.

      I literally cannot think of a better argument against fiat currency. "Here, suckers, work for 40 years to collect enough of these papers we prooooomise will still hold (30% of) their value when you retire, and when they don't, hey, at least you'll have <snicker> Social Security to fall back on". And for the record, it actually comes out to more like eight suckers born every minute (in the US alone). That doesn't necessarily make BTC any better - But as with my point about the Euro, any argument against something you dislike that applies equally well to something you like, doesn't really have much persuasive power.


      even with that "relatively stable" 90-120 range you're still talking about a 30% fluctuation, which is both unpredictable and dangerous for people who are trying to use it for normal currency stuff.

      Barnes & Noble has a market cap of 1.3B - Roughly the same as Bitcoin. It shot up, yesterday alone, by 30% (well, 26%, anyway). Most people, even its own investors, expect it to go the way of Borders within a year or two.

      Barnes & Noble stock, however, does not count as a currency. So take that as you will.


      In the long term it will deflate out of existence, I just hope that there are some criminal prosecutions for the folks that are boosting the currency for personal gain.

      I merely disagreed with you up to that statement. But that? Why? Why would you hope for criminal prosecutions over something you have gone so far to minimize as little more than a fad? Do you wish the same for collectors of Beanie Babies and Hummels, or do you reserve your bitterness for collectors of failed foreign currencies?

    52. Re:This is good for Bitcoin by dywolf · · Score: 1

      Cash has stable value because because of artificial scarcity due to the fact it is controlled (ie, only creatable) by the government.
      If any was allowed to just print their own dollar bills at home cash would have the same unstable "value" as bitcoins.
      That why it's illegal and called counterfeiting.
      That's what gives fiduciary currency it's stable value.

      Bitcoin itself has artifical scarcity within itself, but the concept does not because it's not a physical tangible asset; it's software. I can make my own computer program right now and start generating DitCoins, and McCoins, and ZitCoins. There is no limit to the number of virtual currencies we could create. Which bring sup the next point...

      Bitcoin trading has more in common with gold selling in MMOs than it does with real currency.

      That's how it's different.

      --
      The guy who said the election was rigged won the presidency with the second-most votes.
    53. Re:This is good for Bitcoin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cash is only worth what people are willing to trade for it, I fail to see how Bitcoin is inherently any different.

      Meanwhile, the rest of the world and reality look at it from the other side: They fail to see why cash is inherently any different. As in, they fail to see why they should go through all the trouble of using Bitcoin for what is clearly a lateral move at best and a scam at worst, more likely a blatant ruse to simply reshuffle the deck in the favor of a few early adopters who were shocked to discover they couldn't get a paying job putting together l33t computing rigs on their own.

    54. Re:This is good for Bitcoin by LordLimecat · · Score: 1

      Its different in that its price routinely fluctuates by 50%, and has a crash every 6 months. USD fluctuates by a few percent, and has a crash every 40 or so years.

      I would call that a substantial difference, even if its only quantitative.

    55. Re:This is good for Bitcoin by AuMatar · · Score: 3, Insightful

      No, you don't. Look at the dollar or the pound. You see multi-decade stability (the last major blip with the dollar was disinflation in the 80s) , with a roughly constant rate of devaluation. That's what you want to see in a currency. Not a few months of relative stability with massive swings on either side. To even make the claim of stability because it had periods of it for parts of 1 year is a complete joke.

      --
      I still have more fans than freaks. WTF is wrong with you people?
    56. Re:This is good for Bitcoin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cash is only worth what people are willing to trade for it

      Cash typically has the added support of being the only thing a local government will accept as payment for taxes. This creates a baseline demand for the currency that stabilizes the price.

    57. Re:This is good for Bitcoin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Only the size of the USD vs BTC economies hides that fact.

      Look, if I want to buy food at the grocery store, the only way to do this is BTC->USD-> FOOD. If I do this over a short period of time, I'm basically buying food with BTC. You'll notice that the amount of food I get (which, mind you, does not actually fluctuate in value that much over the last say 10 years) fluctuates wildly over the last 3 years for BTC; with the USD, it's basically constant (you know, to within a few % points a year). If you cannot recognize this as a problem with BTC as a currency, then you're just deluding yourself.

    58. Re:This is good for Bitcoin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

      I can't pay my taxes in BTC and even with that "relatively stable" 90-120 range you're still talking about a 30% fluctuation, which is both unpredictable and dangerous for people who are trying to use it for normal currency stuff.

      https://www.google.com/search?q=euros+to+dollars

      Looked it up, and the euro and dollar exchange rate over the last 4 years (sure a bit longer than 1 year, but euro has existed longer than BitCoin as well), ranged from 1.2 to 1.6, which is also a 33% fluctuation, one of those fluctuations was in a single year as well. So it seems that BitCoin fluctuates about as badly as the Euro.

    59. Re:This is good for Bitcoin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Looked up what now?

      BTC jumps 30% up and down over _a day_. Daily fluctuation of EUR/USD is under 1%.

    60. Re:This is good for Bitcoin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Oh not this claptrap again.

      You can't pay your (US) taxes in Euros, either. Does that say anything about the legitimacy of the Euro?

      You cannot pay your taxces in Euros because they are not a legal tender in the United States. They ARE legal tender in the European Union and as such any citizen on a member state CAN, in fact, use Euros to pay their taxes. No suich country exists for Bitcoin. Try again.

      But as with my point about the Euro, any argument against something you dislike that applies equally well to something you like, doesn't really have much persuasive power.

      Your point is hogwash that serves to highlight your misunderstanding on basic economic concepts like "legal tender" and "currencies" and nothing more. Its persuasive power depends on the reader sharing said misunderstandings.

      Barnes & Noble stock, however, does not count as a currency. So take that as you will.

      Oh hey, finally something that makes sense. Yes, Bitcoin is a commodity, like stocks. An extremely volatile commodity, currently priced far above its inherent worth. If you understand how commodities work, you should take THAT to mean the only rational action is to short Bitcoin.

      Why would you hope for criminal prosecutions over something you have gone so far to minimize as little more than a fad? Do you wish the same for collectors of Beanie Babies and Hummels, or do you reserve your bitterness for collectors of failed foreign currencies?

      For the record, I hope for criminal actions against those who participate in pump-and-dump operations on ANY commodity. Bitcoin is just one of many in that regard.

      Your entire argument hinges on your idiotic assimiliation of Bitcoin with an actual currency, of which it holds NONE of the required properties. Buying and selling goods with Bitcoin is EXACTLY like buying and selling goods with livestock. It`s bartering, pure and simple.

    61. Re:This is good for Bitcoin by pla · · Score: 1

      Look, if I want to buy food at the grocery store, the only way to do this is BTC->USD-> FOOD.

      Not entirely true - You can buy just about anything, directly denominated in BTC - But not worth picking nits over. As you point out, whether you pay in BTC or convert on the fly makes little difference.


      You'll notice that the amount of food I get (which, mind you, does not actually fluctuate in value that much over the last say 10 years) fluctuates wildly over the last 3 years for BTC; with the USD, it's basically constant (you know, to within a few % points a year). If you cannot recognize this as a problem with BTC as a currency, then you're just deluding yourself.

      Of course it counts as a problem, and a pretty substantial one at that. But not a problem with nature of the currency itself; rather, a problem with the relative size of the economies involved. The US Dollar has a hell of a lot more users than does Bitcoin, and thus, we enjoy a day-to-day stability that even most other national currencies do not (ask most of Eastern Europe if they'd have loved a "mere" 30% inflation in a month in the early 1990's - Or hell, half the planet during WWII).

      When a currency has 4 billion users, it takes a hell of a lot to change its value. When it has 10 million, sudden large shocks can move it a few percent here and there. And when it has only 50 thousand users, a change in the weather can send it flying by 10-20%.

      if you consider the existence of a low-friction non-nationally controlled currency as an overall good idea, the solution to this problem lies in nothing more complex than having more people use it for more day-to-day purposes (as opposed to only trading it on the exchanges). And if you see no need for that, well, you have every right not to use it.

      You don't, however, have the right not to use USD, if you owe taxes in the US. Keep that in mind.

    62. Re:This is good for Bitcoin by pla · · Score: 1

      No suich country exists for Bitcoin. Try again.

      Which, as an American, matters why to me compared to the Euro? Free clue: I don't hold securities denominated in GBP and RMB so I can pay taxes in England and China.


      Its persuasive power depends on the reader sharing said misunderstandings.

      Or - given that I didn't make a persuasive argument, I rebutted one - having basic reading comprehension skills.


      If you understand how commodities work, you should take THAT to mean the only rational action is to short Bitcoin.

      Really now? So I take it you've shorted the entire CME? Or just those commodities that have trended strongly upward in the past three years?


      Buying and selling goods with Bitcoin is EXACTLY like buying and selling goods with livestock. It`s bartering, pure and simple.

      Funny that you would specifically highlight the subtle distinction between legal tender and currency, yet would then confuse a perfectly good token currency (though not legal tender) for barter.

      Protip: Carry a sheep around for a week. Keep a Bitcoin in an online wallet for a week. Let me know which one shits all over you.

    63. Re:This is good for Bitcoin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just about all of the better ones that have some way of cashing out so as to make it look like not a scam and to get a few people at the top of the pyramid to make money?

    64. Re:This is good for Bitcoin by gl4ss · · Score: 1

      That's funny. I see it as the value of a dollar fluctuates and bitcoin is constant. I guess it's all a matter of perspective. ;)

      well anyone who sells anything has the other perspective, even if they accept bitcoin. derpa derp.

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    65. Re:This is good for Bitcoin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ok, so you can't pay taxes in BTC. On the other side, you can't pay at Silk Road with USD or EUR.

      It's a tie.

    66. Re:This is good for Bitcoin by hedwards · · Score: 1

      It's not a tie. You would just do like any sane person would and pay cash for those transactions. The silk road itself is just a black market and historically people use cash for those transactions.

    67. Re:This is good for Bitcoin by dj245 · · Score: 0

      Bitcoin has not fluctuated anywhere near 1000% in the past month. At most you could say 530%, comparing the low of 50 on April 16 to the high of 266 on April 10th. And excluding that bubble-and-pop (which very much still happens in USD-denominated assets), the exchange rate has remained relatively stable in the 90-120 range.

      There are only a handful of legitimate industries that have a profit margin higher than 10%. Notably real estate, lawyers, healthcare, and defense contractors. If a grocery store had a currency fluctuation of 20% in one month, they would probably be ruined, since they typically run on margins of 1-5%. Price stability is a good thing. Price stability means you know basically what something costs today, and tommorow, and the next day. If you don't know what something costs, how do you conduct transactions? 1% change a month is disastrous (about 12.7% a year!). How any sane person can argue that a 30% shift in exchange rate is "stable" is completely beyond me.

      --
      Even those who arrange and design shrubberies are under considerable economic stress at this period in history.
    68. Re:This is good for Bitcoin by hedwards · · Score: 1

      As anonymous said, there's reason to believe that there's active pump and dump activity going on. And there should be at least an investigation to determine the facts.

      B&N stock is not a currency, it's an ownership stake in the business and has risks inherent in doing so. But, B&N also produces things that people value and is regulated, whereas BTC provides no added value and is completely unregulated.

      As for your fiat currency argument there, bottom line is that it's predictable and relatively slow to happen. If you're planning on retiring next year, then yes most of that should be in cash and low risk securities. But, BTC which has had a 30% fluctuation over the last year is even riskier than a conservative stock portfolio.

      As for the taxes, I'm not paid in Euros, I'm paid in USD which is the only legal tender guaranteed for use in the US to pay for debt. When I'm in China I get paid in RMB and generally am not required to pay tax in the US. My tax bill there is denominated in RMB. Or, it would be, but the employer pays the taxes for me before giving me my money.

      What's more, there's enough use of both USD and RMB that even if I do have tax liabilities in the US that there's a thriving market for exchanging the two and the rates tend to be pretty consistent.

    69. Re:This is good for Bitcoin by dhomstad · · Score: 1

      Upmod to infinity. On with the Revolution of Thinking. Down with the Naivetities, the perpetuators of Groupthink.

      --
      No trees were killed to send this message, but a great number of electrons were terribly inconvenienced.
    70. Re:This is good for Bitcoin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Historically, people paid much less taxes than nowadays. Even with the most opressive regimes along history. So?

      Historically, at some time fiat money was not accepted. So?

      Historically, your sister and my mother were very beautiful. So?

    71. Re:This is good for Bitcoin by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      Currencies are standardized within a country, and mutually agreed upon with other countries as legitimate. Bitcoin is not standardized in that only a few banks take them, the means of bitcoin creations are dubious and favor the early adopters, etc. May as well claim that chickens are currency, at least chickens have intrinsinc value.

      The point about cash only being worth what people will trade for it is essentially political dogma. Especially telling that many bitcoin fans also subscribe to gold-standard ideas, even though the two ideas are contrary to each other in many ways.

    72. Re:This is good for Bitcoin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's more of an MLM in my eyes. I mean, even lower rungs make _something_ on all that Avon and Amway stuff, right?

      Amway? Nah, the lower rungs almost universally lose money.

      MLM's built in failure is that it oversupplies supply-chain operations. Conventional distribution schemes are sized by (hopefully) intelligent management, which hires about the right number of people to move the amount of product being sold. In MLMs this management function is delegated to individuals at every level of the organization, and they all want to sign up more underlings so they can climb higher up the ladder.

      This inevitably results in many more "distributors" than any given market actually needs, which drives the real open-market price of the products below profitable levels. There's always at least one willing to sell at a loss to get their numbers up, because they're convinced success is Right Around The Corner. And another who wants to get out and is dumping stock to cut losses. Anyone trying to make a living selling the product is at best slowly losing money. (Which is why you'll seldom hear of Amway distributors who don't have a day job.)

      On top of that there's the perpetual cult-like meetings where the highest rungs use high pressure sales tactics to get lower rungs to buy "training" material and courses. (The sort which always boil down to "YOU CAN SUCCEED IF YOU TRY HARDER!!!1!!!1!1".) I forget where I saw the analysis, but it turns out this is how the people making money off Amway do it. Actually selling Amway product is almost never profitable.

      I don't know as much about Avon. My general impression is that it's a much lower pressure operation which doesn't promise participants the world the way Amway does. Still, I wouldn't be surprised if it's also difficult to make a profit selling Avon. Any scheme which unconditionally encourages salespeople to hire more salespeople is doomed to over-supply salespeople.

  2. Go! or Go? by c0lo · · Score: 5, Informative

    TFS mixes the two: written in Go! and great for the Go community
    TFA says: it's Go not Go!

    --
    Questions raise, answers kill. Raise questions to stay alive.
    1. Re:Go! or Go? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's called an exclamation mark and it indicates an exclamation!

    2. Re:Go! or Go? by Svippy · · Score: 2

      According to the source, it is Go, not Go!. But yes, the summary was confusing.

      --
      Clicked pie.
    3. Re:Go! or Go? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The exclamation point is end of sentence punctuation. Jeez, get off my lawn, and off my planet.

    4. Re:Go! or Go? by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 2

      This is precisely why including punctuation marks in product names is UTTERLY FUCKING STUPID. It's right up there with naming your product something funny from today's news (*cough* The GIMP *cough*) when the joke stops being funny about ten minutes after the project goes live.

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    5. Re:Go! or Go? by pmontra · · Score: 1

      I wish I had a bitcoin for every go stone I played!

    6. Re:Go! or Go? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Indeed, if they'd meant Go! they would have said Btcd - a Bitcoind Alternative Written In Go!!!

    7. Re:Go! or Go? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is precisely why including punctuation marks in product names is UTTERLY FUCKING STUPID.

      Yeah... not punctuation marks, I know... but come to think... C#, C++... ah, yes, ObjectiveC (link included for reference to the correct orthography of the language name).

    8. Re:Go! or Go? by c0lo · · Score: 1

      I wish I had a bitcoin for every go stone I played!

      Ko's would be a fortune, isn't it?

      --
      Questions raise, answers kill. Raise questions to stay alive.
    9. Re:Go! or Go? by Beorytis · · Score: 2

      If the creators of Go! had called their language Go, then Google *might* have chosen another name for Go. Apparently Goo was already taken. Maybe they could have used (their ticker symbol) Goog. Of course they might have just used Goo!.

    10. Re:Go! or Go? by pmontra · · Score: 1

      Of course, but I'd agree with my opponent to setup a molasses ko :-)

    11. Re:Go! or Go? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The real question is, do stones in seki count?

      Also, meta-ko rules or no?

    12. Re:Go! or Go? by kumanopuusan · · Score: 1

      They should have gone with Ogle.

      --
      Use of the words "good", "bad" or "evil" is almost invariably the result of oversimplification.
    13. Re:Go! or Go? by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

      You can't have a modern language unless its binary name contains shell meta characters that will forever fuck up the first version of every script that ever has to work with it.

      Much kudos to the perl, python, and ruby devs.

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
  3. Why so serious ! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No need to use exclamation points, really !

    1. Re:Why so serious ! by Sussurros · · Score: 1

      It was a glottal stop and not an exclamation mark. He had the hiccups when he wrote the summary.

      --
      I said - don't look Ethel!..., but it was too late..., she'd already looked.
  4. No crashing? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How are people gonna short this?

  5. Better than fiat currencies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "(Because it's based on the same premise - that it's only worth what people are willing to pay for it)."

    Better than fiat currencies, because they're worth what people are willing to pay for them, then less, then a bit less and some more dilution and some more and more and more and more. Bitcoin has a finite limit on the number of coins and thus hits a limit making it better for trade.

    And before anyone pipes and whines about deflationary currency, it's not deflationary. It's finite. Big difference.

    A finite currency is only deflationary if the value it represents increases, so that each coin becomes more valuable. So the critics of Bitcoins by saying its deflationary, are really saying they expect the Bitcoin economy to grow in value!

    Bitcoins have gone from worthless in 2010 to $120 a coin in 2013.

    1. Re:Better than fiat currencies by Joce640k · · Score: 2

      Bitcoins have gone from worthless in 2010 to $120 a coin in 2013

      $120 is only today's price. It can go down.

      “...the system is secure as long as the honest nodes collectively control more [computing] power than any cooperating group of attacker nodes.” - Satoshi Nakamoto, creator of Bitcoin.

      ie. If governments or bot-herders want to destroy Bitcoin, they can.

      In fact, if I was a bot herder I'd be busy working on a way to manipulate the price of bitcoin for fun and profit.

      --
      No sig today...
    2. Re:Better than fiat currencies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bitcoin is still utterly worthless actually. It's a fucking Dutch Tulip and if you dont understand that, your opinion on finance is worthless as well

    3. Re:Better than fiat currencies by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Given the (currently tiny) market for goods buyable with bitcoins, their 'value' is heavily dependent on the health of the exchanges where you can cash out into some other currency.

      Incidentally, those exchanges appear to get hacked and/or DDsSed every couple of months...

      With the GPU, FPGA, and ASIC miners either online or coming-real-soon-now, bot-herding in order to outcompete honest nodes is a substantial computational challenge, CPU miners are just too pitiful; but it would seem that the real weakness to exploit is the (much softer) underbelly of conventional web infrastructure and the price swings that attacks on that part of the bitcoin economy can create.

      The trade between bitcoins and USD looks sort of like the buying and selling of stock, in a world where it's totally normal for the NYSE to be firebombed multiple times per year...

    4. Re:Better than fiat currencies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Can you explain "bot herding in order to outcompete honest nodes"?

      If I have hardware capital, I can invest that into creating goods and services that create monetary value. Are you saying that it's dishonest to use my capital resources if I have them? Or to use my existing resources to bootstrap capital purchases of new bitcoin mining technology to generate more money? If so, you seen to be saying that capitalism itself is dishonest, because those with more starting capital can obviously outcompete those without under a pure capitalist society.

      What do you mean by "honest" in this case.

    5. Re:Better than fiat currencies by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 1

      "Honest" in the sense of the paper outlining bitcoin's design.

      Essentially, the obvious problem with a naive attempt at 'digital currency' is double spending: Unless you have a central authority of some sort, that clears all transactions, how do you prevent me from taking Bitcoin #2435345345 and sending it to two or more people?

      An 'honest' node is a node performing operations such that bitcoin's decentralized anti-double-spending mechanism is upheld. A 'dishonest' or 'attacking' node is one using its CPU power to undermine the hash chain.

      It has absolutely nothing to do with capitalism, or capitalism being honest or dishonest. My point was that(with the advent of extremely high performance specialized hardware) people who control botnets(that merely have CPU time, and maybe GPU time) are in an increasingly poor position to control more than a trivial slice of the computational capacity of the bitcoin network as a whole, which would prevent them from double-spending or other transaction-subverting attacks.

    6. Re:Better than fiat currencies by Flere+Imsaho · · Score: 1

      So the mining bot herds aren't running a miner that credits a pool account? They are actively trying to subvert the block chain?

      --
      It gripped her hand gently. 'Regret is for humans,' it said.
    7. Re:Better than fiat currencies by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 1

      So the mining bot herds aren't running a miner that credits a pool account? They are actively trying to subvert the block chain?

      I assume, given the difficulty of subverting the block chain(you'd need to have a botnet large enough to constitute more than half of the processing power across the entire network), that anybody mining on botnets is acting 'honestly' with respect to the bitcoin network, if not necessarily with respect to the people who own the computers being botted. Subverting the block chain would be a major coup, either if you wanted to destabilize the bitcoin scene or just cash out and burn the world behind you; but my understanding is that there is no 'partial credit' for such an attempt. Either you succeed, and control the block chain, or you fail, and get nothing. Pool mining, by contrast, has no real jackpot scenario; but offers partial credit in rather small increments.

      Back when CPU mining was still the major mover, it was much more plausible(though also of interest to many fewer people) that somebody could steal enough CPU cycles to dominate the mining capacity. Once GPU mining hit, the value of computers without rather specific hardware configurations fell through the floor. FPGAs and ASICs upped the game further, and those are something that you are never going to find except on other people's bitcoin mining rigs(unlike GPUs with reasonable compute power, which aren't terribly common, compared to Intel Integrated; but are found in the wild among gamers and the like).

  6. Not just perspective by ebcdic · · Score: 4, Insightful

    What have you bought over the last year? How has their price varied in dollars and in bitcoins? No currency's value is constant, but some are a lot more constant than others.

  7. It's not a full node by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    All they have released is a handler for the network protocol. This doesn't verify blocks, send transactions or anything else. Are the other parts closed source or do they just not exist?

    1. Re:It's not a full node by seventy-nine · · Score: 1
      From the end of TFA:

      Most of the code is in pretty good shape however some pieces are incomplete. Within 2 weeks we should have enough core functionality written and at that point we are going to release parts of the code to the general community.

      But I agree that there is not a lot available to play with yet.

    2. Re:It's not a full node by IamTheRealMike · · Score: 5, Informative

      A full node is a really, really large amount of work. I feel that lots of people don't realise this, get enthusiastic and think, "I love Bitcoin! I love Go! I'll write Bitcoin in Go" where for Go you can substitute basically any language that's fun or popular. Then they write the easy bits (like wire marshalling) and eventually the project dies around the time that it's time to implement the wallet or Bloom filtering or robust test suites. Possibly Conformal is different, we'll have to wait and see, but the feature set they advertised in their blog is very much what has been seen many times before. In particular there's no handling of the block chain, re-orgs, no wallet and they haven't got any infrastructure to test edge cases.

      One reason implementing Bitcoin properly is not fun is an entire class of bugs that doesn't exist in normal software - chain splitting bugs - which can be summed up as "Your software behaves how you thought it's supposed to work rather than how the original bitcoind actually does work". Bitcoin is highly unusual in that it implements group consensus - lots of nodes have to perform extremely complicated calculations and arrive at exactly the same result in lockstep, to a far far higher degree of accuracy than other network protocols. This means that you have to replicate the same set of bugs bitcoind has. Failure to do so can lead to opening up security holes via consensus failure which can in turn lead to double spending (and thus your users lose money!).

      Being compatible with the way bitcoind is written (bugs and all) may require you to break whatever abstractions you have introduced to make the code cleaner or more elegant or whatever reason you have for reimplementing Bitcoin. Here's a trivial example - signatures in Bitcoin have an additional byte that basically selects between one of a few different modes. It's actually one of three modes plus a flag. So a natural way to implement this is as an enum representing the three modes plus a boolean for the flag. But that won't work. There is a transaction in the block chain which has a sighash flag that doesn't fit any of the pre-defined values (it's zero) and because Satoshi's code uses bit testing it still works. But if you turn the flag into an enum, when you re-serialise the mode flags you'll re-serialise it wrong and arrive at an incorrect result. So you have to pass these flags around as integers and select via bit testing as well.

      Bitcoin is full of these kinds of weird edge cases. Eventually you come to realise that reimplementing it is dangerous and probably whatever benefits you thought it had, it probably doesn't. Some people believe there should be independent reimplementations anyway and I can understand and respect that, but doing it safely is an absolutely massive piece of work. You have to really, really, really believe in diversity to do it - the features of language-of-the-day aren't good enough to justify the effort.

    3. Re:It's not a full node by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The new kids no longer have the patience and dedication needed to make a complete and fully functional application rather than a incomplete and shoddy piece of code.

    4. Re: It's not a full node by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      they exist but are being polished up before released to public.

    5. Re:It's not a full node by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So glad you pointed this out - bitcoind's complexity isn't well understood by the masses(but the masses think otherwise unfortunately).

    6. Re:It's not a full node by petermgreen · · Score: 1

      Failure to do so can lead to opening up security holes via consensus failure which can in turn lead to double spending (and thus your users lose money!).

      Afaict roughtly speaking you can divide differences into two categories.

      1: you accept something that the majority implementation doesn't
      2: you fail to accept somethign that the majority implementation does.

      1 isn't so bad, the strongest blockchain rules mean that a block containing something you accept but the majority doesn't is unlikely to ever see more than one "confirmation" before it gets knocked off the blockchain by the majority implementation.

      2 is potentially worse as it means users of your implementation will fork off into their own blockchain. However unless there are significant miners using your implementation your blockchain will gain blocks extremely slowly until it's difficulty readjusts and that readjustment will take a long time because readjustmenet intervals are measured in blocks not time.

      In summary as long as you require a reasonable number of confirmations and keep an eye on the block rate i'd say the risk of such an issue allowing a double spend attack by an attacker with normal computing resources* is fairly low.

      A much bigger risk IMO is that you fail to properly verify proof of work allowing an attacker to feed you blocks they generate at an arbitary rate.

      * An attacker with hashing power that represents a significant fraction of the bitcoin networks hashing power is another matter but such an attacker could probablly profit more by just mining normally than by attacking you.

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

    Since 90% of people don't understand Bitcoin articles that don't explain anything more than this
    will confuse people and add to their belief that Bitcoin is nothing more than a fiat currency.

    GO. GO. GO. Go Where?

  9. Namecoin by guises · · Score: 2

    As Bitcoin alternatives go, I really liked the idea behind Namecoin. Not that it's likely to go anywhere, but it's something that puts some real backing, value, to the currency while simultaneously doing something to address the piss poor domain name allocation system that we have right now. Bitcoin is currently just floating on enthusiasm and greed, this would actually have some worth if people got behind it.

    1. Re:Namecoin by daveime · · Score: 1

      Isn't this just destined to go the same way as any popular movie torrent ? An initial flurry of peers and seeds, with the seeds pumping out tons of bits, 99% of peers leeching and giving nothing back, and after a couple of weeks the torrent is good as dead, because there's one seed left who's never online, and only has 99% of the movie anyway ?

      With bitcoin, I can understand the incentive, however small, of winning the lottery and actually mining a coin. With a system with is a glorified DHT for DNS addresses, what exactly is the incentive for users to contribute ? Or is it going to be yet another onion / I2P thing, full of "hype" but no substance because there simply aren't enough users to support the thing ?

    2. Re:Namecoin by guises · · Score: 1

      Namecoin is supposed to function as a currency, just like Bitcoin. With the mining and everything, the same way. The difference is that Namecoins have some intrinsic value backing them up.

  10. Open-Dollar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How about the Open-Dollar? Bitcoin is based on a scarcity paradigm much like Gold. The Open-Dollar is a full Virtual Fiat Currency where the you create money by issuing the notes yourself Open-Dollar

    1. Re:Open-Dollar by egcagrac0 · · Score: 1

      Doesn't pass my sniff-test.

      I get suspicious any time someone is selling $1000 for $1.

  11. Re:Very glass half empty by Joce640k · · Score: 1

    The value of bitcoin is tied to the disposable income of the people who live in that country.

    If the dollar crashes, so will Bitcoin.

    --
    No sig today...
  12. omg that's the stupidest thing I ever heard! by gl4ss · · Score: 1

    omg that's the stupidest thing I ever heard.

    and to think that Go! was first.

    --
    world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
  13. Re:Very glass half empty by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Er, which country? You are aware that BTC is not a national currency, right?

  14. Krayon Kash!! by erroneus · · Score: 4, Funny

    My 6 year old loves to doodle with his crayons. Lately, I've been having him draw money. So far, the good ones are really rare. So I figure they are probably worth a substantial amount of money. I'm going to start releasing them as currency soon. I'm also working out a deal with Paypal to accept them.

    1. Re:Krayon Kash!! by nine-times · · Score: 2

      Try to sell them all before the Krayon Kash Krash.

    2. Re:Krayon Kash!! by H0p313ss · · Score: 1

      My 6 year old loves to doodle with his crayons. Lately, I've been having him draw money. So far, the good ones are really rare. So I figure they are probably worth a substantial amount of money. I'm going to start releasing them as currency soon. I'm also working out a deal with Paypal to accept them.

      You're my hero today. Perhaps my growing supply of nieces and nephews can get me in early on this game.

      (I wonder if we could get seashells back on the international currency exchanges.)

      --
      XML is a known as a key material required to create SMD: Software of Mass Destruction
    3. Re:Krayon Kash!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Nope. "She short-sells sea shells at the NYSE floor" just doesn't have the same ring.

  15. alternatives = it's broken by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Does no one see the problem with this?
    Bitcoin appears to have value because bitcoins are scarce.

    If everyone and their dog has there own bitcoin-style protocol with it's own coin pool, the scarcity is gone, and none of them are worth anything.

    Of course, this was the reality all along, just it'll be obvious now. The bubble is about to pop. Prepare to short-sell some bitcoins.

    1. Re:alternatives = it's broken by BanHammor · · Score: 1

      It's an alternative to the client, written in the same protocol, and thus compatible. Hurr durr durr.

    2. Re:alternatives = it's broken by mlk · · Score: 1

      Plenty of chains exist, some (like namecoin) are based on Bitcoin. (btc-e has a list of 'em).

      However a coin on each chain is only worth the amount someone else will pay for it. And for none-bitcoin that is not much. Litecoin seams to have some traction (as a micro payment focused version).

      --
      Wow, I should not post when knackered.
  16. cool! by cas2000 · · Score: 1

    using this software, I can set up my own BitPonzi<tm> money scheme.

    i'll make squillions, sell it all to buy gold, and then go retire in some libertarian utopia like Somalia, where wealth rules and i can even own other people if i want without evil socialist rules against perfectly legitimate sales contracts.

    1. Re:cool! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Go forth and enslave, oh paragon of liberty!

      captcha: private

  17. What programming language? "Go" or "Go!"??? by lucag · · Score: 2

    Please: observe that "Go!" and "Go" are two quite different programming languages.
    The client appears to be written in "Go" which is the language by google, but the headline would suggest "Go!" by McKabe & Clark.
    I find the same ambiguity in the text... still, I am looking forward to the time we shall use the full unicode range in order to have
    similar looking, yet entirely different, names. That shall be fun!

  18. Re:You? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    People saying something is a bad idea does not automatically make it a good idea, and your delusions aside, I think you know that.

  19. Bank killer. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    With a mathematically fixed number of bitcoins, and no need for any central authority, Bitcoin is immune from a large number of the scams the world banking cartel use to maintain population control on the planet. Usury crime is much more difficult to wield as a means of control because everybody knows you can't create more bitcoins than are in existence once the mines are all dried up.

    That's great!

    The downside I see is that an alternative system implemented by governments would lead to a means of completely controlling everybody. I see Bitcoin potentially being used as a market softener, getting people excited about the idea so that they accept a single planetary currency controlled digitally, completely traceable and able to be turned on or off depending on an individual's compliance with the authoritarian regime.

    I also think it's highly unlikely that one mysterious Japanese genius created Bitcoin. I think it might have been a consortium with a hidden agenda.

    Maybe that agenda was a good one; kill the banks. Maybe it wasn't. Time will tell.

  20. Go by Google or Go! by Francis McCabe by Murdoch5 · · Score: 2

    Go and Go! are very different language, which one was it programmed in?

    GO: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Go_(programming_language)
    GO!: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Go!_(programming_language)

  21. Re:You? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yes, yes, you've told us that the bar and the floor is now vertical and we're all horizontal.

    No, we're not "attacking" your new and better coordinate system, we just find it silly and funny (and hope nobody lets you drive).

  22. Bad Name by mlosh · · Score: 1

    They chose a bad, confusing name: btcd. It is only nmemonic for the thing for which they want to provide an alternative. Some people will wonder "Is it Bitcoin or not?"

    Why not choose "Gocoin" or something more distinct?

    1. Re:Bad Name by Beorytis · · Score: 2

      They chose a bad, confusing name: btcd

      Imagine if bitcoins were instead called x-Koins. What would this project be called?

    2. Re:Bad Name by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Extrapolating from how open source projects often end up named, probably something like "seXKrab" --- and the developers would be oblivious to why people sometimes don't take them seriously as reformers of international monetary systems.

    3. Re:Bad Name by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They chose a bad, confusing name: btcd

      Imagine if bitcoins were instead called x-Koins. What would this project be called?

      xkd. You are missing a "c".

  23. I conclude the opposite by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Your post is extremely interesting, but the mandatory conclusion I make from it is the exact opposite of yours. If the original code is so full of idiosyncracies and gotchas then it's an extreme liability to everyone who values Bitcoin, and quite likely contains backdoors or deliberate weaknesses that are hidden by the obscurity.

    There can be no more important task for the Bitcoin community I think than to specify all elements of the static protocol and dynamic behavior of all parts, and reimplement them in other languages, especially safe languages.

    Go is certainly a good candidate for this large body of work, safe, clean, and fast.

    1. Re:I conclude the opposite by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can conclude the opposite— it's a free internet, but Mike has actually written an implementation and you have not.

    2. Re:I conclude the opposite by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can conclude the opposite --- it's a free internet, but Mike has actually written an implementation and you have not.

      If you think that's a valid logical counter to the parent, you clearly aren't acquainted with logical fallacies.

      Hint: personal action or inaction cannot validate nor invalidate a premise or argument in logic.

  24. And to think, you almost had .05% of the world! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    As a bitcoin user myself, I love the idea of a full alternative. It will only make bitcoin less likely to be adopted by sensible people and more handwavey if anyone asks inconvenient, non-utopian questions.

    FTFY.

  25. room for one domoinant currency by peter303 · · Score: 1

    Its a market like auction houses or friendship networks: there basically isnt no reason fro a #2 or #3. Bitcoin may not be the winner due to it flaws, mainly speed.

    1. Re:room for one domoinant currency by H0p313ss · · Score: 1

      Its a market like auction houses or friendship networks: there basically isnt no reason fro a #2 or #3. Bitcoin may not be the winner due to it flaws, mainly speed.

      I may be a cynic, but I expect Bitcoin to have spiraled into the sun long before more than 1% gives a flying anything about virtual currency.

      --
      XML is a known as a key material required to create SMD: Software of Mass Destruction
  26. WHERE is Mt GOX?!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You can't pay your taxes in bitcons.

    You can pay your taxes in bitcoins in Aynrandistan. Come, free yourself and join our enlightened society! Offer for M^H Billionaires only

    Actually, that's not entirely accurate. There's no need to pay you taxes in bitcoin because Aynrandistan has no taxes. Instead, you spend the equivalent (or more) fortifying your compound so the starving masses don't slaughter you in your bed and take all your stuff.

  27. Re:You? by Darinbob · · Score: 1

    "first they ignore you"
    "then they attack you"

    Sounds like the start of a seven step program to get a cult into the mainstream.

  28. Re:Very glass half empty by Darinbob · · Score: 1

    Prices in chickens do not make drastic jumps, except in a few rare cases of dysfunctional economies (ie, Zimbabwe). Chickens in euros or dollars have relatively slow changes in prices over time and those changes are usually related to supply and demand and not fiscal policies.

    Bitcoin is a political movement by amateur economists, or a piece of performance art, or both. Not sure which. Everything about it seems designed to be a parody of currency and fiscal policy.

  29. Information asymmetry by NewYork · · Score: 1

    Bitcoin is NOT immune to https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pump_and_dump
    Unless https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Information_asymmetry#Adverse_selection is implemented in Bitcoin protocol, I'd not invest my time/money in it.

    1. Re:Information asymmetry by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, pretty awful information-assymmetry already exists in current system of banks / credit card companies. When I say awful I mean bad for end-point users and good for the middle-men of those transactions.

      Information-assymetry between end-points of a transaction will always exist. How could you ever guard against it?

      A new way to do things does not need to solve All possible problems at once - it just needs to address some of the problems better than the previous alternatives - and clearly bitcoin is able to do that.

  30. Re:Very glass half empty by Raenex · · Score: 1

    I have several problems with it, and have made many negative posts about it, but at this point I consider it an interesting early experiment with digital currency, one that will be the seed for something better down the line.

  31. Re:Very glass half empty by Darinbob · · Score: 1

    It would be more of an experiment if the experimenters were disinterested observers. Instead the early adopters and creators stand to make a whole lot of money from this if they can convince people to legitimize the system. We get upset when drug researchers turn out to have financial stakes in their products, and the same should apply to economic "researchers".

  32. Re:Very glass half empty by Raenex · · Score: 1

    It would be more of an experiment if the experimenters were disinterested observers. Instead the early adopters and creators stand to make a whole lot of money from this if they can convince people to legitimize the system.

    To play devil's advocate, from their point of view it was a legitimate effort to put forward a new system, one that at least on some level is working. As for the windfall the creators and early adopters would get (assuming they kept their bitcoins), that's no different than any innovators typically get. A good example would be one of the credit card networks like Visa.

    From my point of view, the problems are too big for me to take it seriously, and like you I'm bothered by the huge head start the early adopters have gained. However, if something better comes along and actually replaces Bitcoin, having learned some lessons and copied some ideas, then Bitcoin deserves a lot of credit for blazing a trail.