News articles that do not contain the word "Bitcoin" are usually off-topic. This subreddit is not about general financial news. Submissions that are mostly about some other cryptocurrency belong elsewhere. Promotion of client software which attempts to alter the Bitcoin protocol without overwhelming consensus is not permitted. Straight talk on getting debt-free - everything you need right here!
Your employees are key to your company's success. Learn how to engage them via relevant, productive and memorable brainstorming workshops. A Philosophy of Nature. Product details File Size: Prequel Books May 28, Publication Date: May 28, Sold by: Related Video Shorts 0 Upload your video. Share your thoughts with other customers. Write a customer review. There was a problem filtering reviews right now. Please try again later. Kindle Edition Verified Purchase. This is the now famous "white paper" written by Satoshi Nakamoto introducing Bitcoin. I don't pretend to understand all of it, and haven't taken the time to play with the mathematic formulas therein.
However, after reading it a couple of times, I do now have a better grasp of what makes Bitcoin a store of wealth money and not just another currency or payment system like PayPal--and that distinction is important. Also, equally important, is that it decentralizes commerce like never before, which should give business and commerce a flexibility and fluidity it's never had before. One person found this helpful 2 people found this helpful.
This is just a copy of Satoshi Nakamoto's now infamous white paper describing the Bitcoin peer-to-peer currency system. For this reason, I would recommend purchasing it if you frequently need to show off the basic technical principles of the Bitcoin system to people new to the system. If you do not frequently do that, I wouldn't bother buying it. Copying stuff fromm the internet and posting it with someone else's nickname is so uncool. Just look for Satoshi Nakamoto's paper on the internet. See all 3 reviews. Amazon Giveaway allows you to run promotional giveaways in order to create buzz, reward your audience, and attract new followers and customers.
Learn more about Amazon Giveaway. Giving an award for Bitcoin right now would seem more like giving an award to the financial institutions that created securitized loan products before the housing crisis. Right now it seems more like a novelty technology that hasn't yet made itself relevant for long-term innovation except to generate excitement about it. And you underestimate that you still can't give someone an award who does not exist to receive it.
What you said makes sense. Which is what baffles me. It's weird that people get more precedence over ideas. What's worse is that the prize isn't awarded posthumously as well! The achievement of bitcoin is not about economics, it's about the software design, authenticity and proof of work. It would justify a Nobel in software engineering, not economics.
Method-X 9 months ago.
Someday he'll likely get it. There's not any new economics in bitcoin Can you point me to any paper other than the Satoshi paper that describes an immutable distributed ledger and it's implementation? If there was no new economics in Bitcoin, can you explain why the paper would be nominated for Nobel Prize for Economics in the first place?
It's quite clear that the nomination was rejected on flimsy grounds of not awarding the Prize for "unknown people" because there is no such "precedence". Asdfbla 9 months ago. Not that creating Bitcoin wasn't an achievement, but it built upon heaps of existing systems that explored proof of work, distributed ledgers and so on. The main innovation was the combination of ledgers with proof of work to prevent Sybil attacks in the face of a system with unidentified participants.
Knowing how to implement an immutable distributed ledger won't help you understand anything about the economy on its own. Those are computer science advances. The nobel prize for economics about economics, not comp sci. This paper packs an enormous idea into a tiny package. It's worth reading - and re-reading. Otherwise it's a challenge. At least that's what I found. Here's a companion article that fills in some of the blanks.
It seems to me, an understanding of financial systems and macroeconomics is much more useful or at least as useful in evaluating a currency than the technology behind it. There's plenty of people who understand the blockchain quite well who have a pretty Care to share some of your insights, or did you post solely to tell everyone how smart you are? Sure, what do you want to know? What do the people who understand blockchains but not monetary theory get so wrong? Not all blockchains, but bitcoin specifically.
The effect of deflation on the velocity of money is the most obvious. It isn't eliminated, but instead dampened. While economic miracles and bull runs seem great, if they are followed by devastating crashes, the market instability and "whiplash effect" of this occurring in rapid succession can slow attempts at economic recovery at best, and spark revolutions at worst.
Austrian economists love the idea of "letting the chips fall where they may", but that reductive thinking ignores the social and political upheaval that the previous centuries have taught us result from instability. The financial safeguards that we've been putting in and unfortunately removing over the past years are there for a reason. Apparently, many economists missed this because their model of bank lending is wrong. Some Bank of England staff did a paper on it a while back, if I recall correctly.
While it sounds plausible on the surface, this is not at all supported empirically. There have never been economies without fractional reserve banking that one could reasonably compare with ours.
There are also plausible-sounding arguments to be made in the opposite direction: Fractional reserve banking allows money to be created and destroyed adaptively to support the economy, which makes the economy run more smoothly overall. Most of the information you need to understand to invest in Bitcoin e. Now that people are using Bitcoin as digital gold or digital tulips, one could even argue that the white paper is misleading.
Do you know how a fridge works? How about an airplane? How about how to make steel? How to sew a shirt? How to drill and process oil to make gasoline? Every level of the internet stack? How to program hardware drivers? How to farm everything you eat? Do you see how stupid what you are saying is yet?
I'd argue that we should read the White Paper for any of these technologies before investing in them in their infancy: Is bitcoin in it's infancy? You have CBOE offering futures on it. The prez of JPMC pro bitcoin. You have so many exchanges. Bitcoin is out of it's infancy. Bitcoin is far from infancy. The futures are a nice touch, but they are cash settled so they will drift from spot.
We still do not have a spot market with swaps from companies you can trust. Due to this, negative exposure is still difficult to replicate, hence why some brokers will not offer short side on the futures. Or a summary from experts. That paper has high level math in it and just isn't going to be comprehended by most people. Apparently, you have not read it. You don't have to invest in those to use them. You can, for example, use someone else's fridge, without first buying a fridge, and thus learn about the risks and benefits of fridges at no cost to you. A slightly more apples-to-apples comparison: No, I don't know how a fridge works.
And if you asked me to blindly pick one absent any regulations, I might take the cheap one that spews CFCs. Actually though, the principles behind refrigeration are also refreshingly simple. Compress gas it heats up as a consequence. Expose the warm air to the atmosphere it cools down. Decompress gas it cools down even more. Expose cold gas to the area to cool.
This is not really about trusting banks. Read more Read less. The only effect of which has been the punishment of savers. Do we have data on this or is it still just a theory? They just argue that some taxes aren't aggression and some exchanges aren't really voluntary. How do you pay for anything given those restrictions? I did it on my phone.
Seriously went over your list expecting to find something I didn't know - but I can explain them all, without needing to look up wikipedia. I may read too much. Sorry, which of those things do you think is not worth learning? They are all worth learning, but no one can know everything. Knowing how something works cannot be a prerequisite to using it. That is one of the purposes of division of labor in society. For the average person: There are contexts and limitations.
I have no practical use to understand my fridge to such a degree because it will yield me nothing in the future. I just need to keep it plugged in, cool, and not broken. All easy to verify. I have control of my money and bitcoin is within the realm of learnability, so I'd say it should be required. It is intimate knowledge of a protocol with many working parts that will have a direct effect on your earnings. How can we stop Bitcoin?
If Bitcoin wins, we'll become subservient to an algorithm we have no incentive to change. It will only take a few more 10x increases before people stop smiling at this possibility. The time to plan for subverting Bitcoin is now, not later. I'm deeply concerned about the potential of Bitcoin to become a financial black hole. I've written about this twice before: We need plans, and we need them now, while there may still be time to do something about it.
If the entire resources of all world governments were brought to bear on the task of destroying Bitcoin, what would be the most effective way to do this? I can't think of anything, and no one else has been able to either. Satoshi's email is prescient: Yes, but we can win a major battle in the arms race and gain a new territory of freedom for several years.
Governments are good at cutting off the heads of a centrally controlled networks like Napster, but pure P2P networks like Gnutella and Tor seem to be holding their own. Satoshi -- Why should you worry? I've articulated some of the concerns here: But I can't shake the feeling that we're staring at a 0. We will lose all monetary controls.
Doomsday prophecies have a long and sordid history, but the dinosaurs only had to look up at the sky at the right time to see theirs approaching. And, like the meteor, Bitcoin keeps growing bigger and brighter. If the basis of the worlds' wealth becomes crypto, what will we do? Madness of Crowds is worth reading: It was now that the frenzy of speculating began to seize upon the nation. Law's bank had effected so much good, that any promises for the future which he thought proper to make were readily believed.
The Regent every day conferred new privileges upon the fortunate projector. The bank obtained the monopoly of the sale of tobacco; the sole right of refinage of gold and silver, and was finally erected into the Royal Bank of France. Amid the intoxication of success, both Law and the Regent forgot the maxim so loudly proclaimed by the former, that a banker deserved death who made issues of paper without the necessary funds to provide for them.
As soon as the bank, from a private, became a public institution, the Regent caused a fabrication of notes to the amount of one thousand millions of livres. This was the first departure from sound principles, and one for which Law is not justly blameable. While the affairs of the bank were under his control, the issues had never exceeded sixty millions. Whether Law opposed the inordinate increase is not known, but as it took place as soon as the bank was made a royal establishment, it is but fair to lay the blame of the change of system upon the Regent.
CryptoPunk 9 months ago. You don't have a right to dictate what abstract representation others choose to use to store their wealth. What you're promoting is using the power of criminal law to govern the private choices of other individuals. Sometimes, I sincerely wonder if the true point of releasing Bitcoin to the wild anonymously was because the creator had a strong hunch on what would happen and how the example of Bitcoin would in one fell swoop both serve as example of the fallacy of our current currency systems, as well as simultaneously challenge them, and become this kind of black hole you speak of.
Why else would the creator remain anonymous, unless they were truly a good Samaritan or feared for their safety. This feels like an experiment and an example as much as anything. I suspect there is much more to this story than we know, but who knows, that could just be the conspiracy theorist in me talking!
It is an experiment. I legitimately can't tell if you are real, or if this is a fake "foil" argument, meant to drive people into Bitcoin. Every single argument that you've mentioned, is a benefit, not a detriment. Your arguments about how Bitcoin will prevent the government from printing money, and stealing it from people via inflation, is a pro, not a con. I cannot think of a better pitch in favor of Bitcoin, than that you have provided.
That is why we need to be talking about this now, not later. Those benefits are all true, and that means BTC might win. This should terrify you. Think of a world in which you cannot collect taxes, and that not even prison can strip the wealthy of their coins. The wealthy will be able to do whatever they want.
How long until it becomes a crime to speak out against bitcoin? Or if not a crime, so socially backwards that you're looked at with the same contempt that the Chinese general population looks at their political activists? If you dare say this might be a bad approach, and you don't swallow the same madness that has overtaken everyone else, will you be shunned, left behind, or forced into it? The latter is the most worrisome; you won't want to keep your money in fiat, and the last billion people to switch will be subservient to the first ten thousand. Should I be scared now, posting this here?
For trying to say that we should launch a coordinated effort to stop this madness in its infancy? I run a very real risk of this following me around the rest of my life. Communism was once in its infancy too, and those who agitated for it or against it were penalized or rewarded by the waves of chance.
This disease -- the desire to get wealthy -- has been the basis of so much misery, and so much creation. It's as human as laughter. We'll never get rid of the lust for wealth. The only way we can manage it as a species is to control it. And Bitcoin removes this control. The state can exert control over all real estate, and can control the flow of physical goods within its jurisdiction and into and out of its jurisdiction , whether or not it has control over the flow of money.
Taxes will never disappear. They will just decline. I share Friedman's view that the effect that electronic cash will have, of reducing how much the government taxes, will be beneficial to society: You seem to be the only one who wants to take freedoms away from other people. The bitcoiners don't want to take away YOUR rights.
That would go against the entire concept of bitcoin, which is resistance to censorship. Bitcoin removes control, it does not add to it. That's exactly what is already happening. The rich already don't pay tax, and neither do the corporations they control. The only thing that is being changed is that the oversight of the masses is now being removed, because banks can no longer be trusted to look after the interests of their clients over the interests of the state. I suspect the only viable taxes in future will be consumption taxes, property taxes, and estate taxes. If ya wanna eat, ya pay tax.
If ya wanna buy something, ya pay tax. If ya wanna live somewhere, ya pay tax. If ya die, your assets are divided, the state collects its portion, and then everyone goes on their merry way again. It's no surprise that these are resisted, because they are the only taxes that are effective against wealthy people. The loophole that allows the wealthy to avoid paying taxes usually has nothing to do with hiding money though.
If anything Bitcoin and other crypto currencies are going to allow you to hide and transfer wealth even more. The same applies for visitors to the US. I'm pretty bullish on cryptocurrency, but I've actually been nervous for awhile about what you're talking about. I think that cryptocurrency might be an example of what futurists are always talking about with regard to exponential change. But almost overnight, these things could basically turn all of civilization upside down, or end it as we know it. I think it unlikely for any one of them, but you only need 1. And while they might be good in themselves, I think it's the shockingly fast shift that may cause issues.
With cryptocurrency, there are a few things that give me pause though. The first is the question of what makes cryptocurrency fundamentally different in this take-over-the-world scenario from gold? Why hasn't gold or some other precious commodity spiraled up in price to the point where it's the most valuable thing in the universe? The second is that the USD and other currencies isn't going away, because you have to pay your taxes in it.
So doesn't that provide an upper bound on the value of Bitcoin? I'm clearly not a macroeconomist: Also, isn't the price somewhat limited by how much wealth there is in the world? Not that it'd be great if BTC was worth a few million, of course, but it couldn't reach billions could it? For that to happen, a large portion of the world's wealth would have to have shifted to BTC, and the value of other currencies would drop in that case, right? It just seems very destabilizing in ways that are hard to predict.
Anyway, enough rambling, maybe cc will be fine, who knows. If you follow the money, Bitcoin does not replace fiat. I'm not confident the governments really mind in that respect because the money is still here. Where that money goes in the end? Some goes to speculators, and the rest goes to lots of ASICS, graphics cards, electricty bills and food for miners. But none of it is every actually really stored in Bitcoin.
That's pocket change to them. Or if it's china just force the companies with ASIC's to do it for you: Actually, I wonder if in the long run governments will be the miners. How many trillions has the federal reserve created since ? You are a misinformed fool. I was there during the crash. And I don't mean I remember it; I lived through it. It had devastating effects on the people in my life. One of them lost their business constructing buildings, and would have lost his house if he hadn't been able to get his old job back.
And he wouldn't have been able to, had those bankers not injected the money into the system and persuaded the economy to keep turning. Bitcoin is gearing up to be the biggest financial disaster in all of human history. If it shows signs of winning, people all across the world will rush to transfer all of their currencies to BTC. What kind of upheaval do you think that will cause? More broadly, when your grand experiment encroaches on our ability to have a solid basis of wealth -- one that has worked for centuries -- what should we do?
Are we supposed to sit here and watch you gain power and legitimacy without thinking of ways to stop it, rather than merely profiting off it? If the BTC bubble pops, it will be a massive relief. But it will only sit dormant, waiting years for speculators to pick it up again and form another bubble that gets the world excited. Someday, that bubble might encompass everyone. When it emerges that Satoshi has passed his coins to his family, and they become the next world leaders by power if not by politics , what should we do when we don't agree with their methodologies?
When we can't collect taxes? Or divert wealth to social programs like UBI? So the bankers caused the problem in the first place and then we have to thank them because they convinced politicians to inject money? The white paper is very approachable, and Bitcoins is a technical marvel. My big problem with Bitcoins has nothing to do with blockchains, trust or even security. All of that looks great. Prove me wrong by spending, lending or investing your Bitcoins. DavidShares 9 months ago.
OP should probably link to another source for the original Bitcoin white paper, for example https: I believe sometime in the near future the owners will go ahead with their plans anyways as they seem to do that when it comes to other issues too. The linked whitepaper is the original, which is what matters for the purpose of this post. It will never work.
Maybe actually take a look at the paper. In which case it can simply be replaced with something else starting at specific block. Sure, but the block header only commits to the double-SHA hash tree of transactions. If SHA-2 was broken I could create a single block header that commits to two different valid histories, allowing arbitrary double-spends and irreconcilable divergent views of the network. Not to mention being able to spend anyone's coins by finding alternate pub keys or hashes that collide with their committed p2pkh or p2sh outputs. I'd say that's pretty broken.
Transactions follow very specific binary format. I don't think it's even plausible that you could find collision within those constraints. Plus, as you said it is double hashed. So then you would have to find collision within small fixed amount 32 bytes. It's just not happening. Regarding the second one, google bitcoin address collision, it was repeated so many times with great analogies that I'm not going to try to do it here yet another time.
A catastrophic break of SHA-2 would destroy the bitcoin ledger. The FUD surrounding this is built upon a poor understanding of how these algorithms are implemented in Bitcoin. The other scenario is quantum computing, which is even scarier, i think. Is that even the right question? There's no continuous project you're working on. It's just getting a lot of chances of winning the lottery.
If someone finishes before you, you just slightly alter the number you're searching for and continue on. You're also not really working towards the same thing. Your solution probably includes you sending the blockreward to yourself and their solution includes them sending it to themselves too, on top of that you may also choose other secondary transactions. The chosen transactions influence the number you need to find. It does happen that two blocks are found at nearly the same time, before adjustments can be made.
In those cases one of the two ends up getting 'orphaned', it's relatively rare compared to normal blocks though.