sprockets The Snowman is coming! Realistic head model by Dan Skelton Vintage character and mo-cap animation by Joe Williamsen Character animation exercise by Steve Shelton an Animated Puppet Parody by Mark R. Largent Sprite Explosion Effect with PRJ included from johnL3D New Radiosity render of 2004 animation with PRJ. Will Sutton's TAR knocks some heads!
sprockets
Recent Posts | Unread Content
Jump to content
Hash, Inc. - Animation:Master

bitcoins...what the heck


Roger

Recommended Posts

  • *A:M User*

Bitcoins are up to $1000 a coin now. I'm not sure what is driving the value so high, since there is not a lot of stuff you can actually spend them on.

 

Just 500 would be worth 500,000. There was as story on some tech site about a guy that threw out a hard disk with a bitcoin wallet that had 7500 of them on it.

 

Oh how I wish I had bought and/or mined some of these back in 2008/2009. Oh well at least I didn't do that and then throw them out, wouldn't know whether to laugh or cry.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • *A:M User*
Sounds crazy to me.

 

It is crazy. There is nothing behind the value of these coins, other than people thinking they are somehow going to replace the US dollar or provide a hedge against hyperinflation. Like I said, there are only a handful of places you can actually spend them at. On top of that, there will only be 21 million coins, ever, so the incentive is to hang onto them and never spend them as the price will probably keep going up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Hash Fellow

I was reading that the appeal is that it's an anonymous way to exchange money, but if it's all done electronically over the internet... is that anonymous and untrackable anymore?

 

I think as soon as someone get arrested for an illegal transaction based on a bitcoin evidence trail, that will pierce the bubble.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • *A:M User*
I was reading that the appeal is that it's an anonymous way to exchange money, but if it's all done electronically over the internet... is that anonymous and untrackable anymore?

 

I think as soon as someone get arrested for an illegal transaction based on a bitcoin evidence trail, that will pierce the bubble.

 

Technically it is supposed to be anonymous but it really isn't. There are ways it can be tracked. I would have to dig up the article I found regarding that.

 

And the guy that was running Silk Road got taken down by the Feds not too long ago for contracting hits online and paying in bitcoin, so obviously there must be a way to track that kind of thing.

 

I think the bubble will eventually burst, just wish I had more tolerance for gambing (not sure I can call this investing). With something this speculative, though, I could just as easily be out $1000 instead of having that turn into $100,000.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 2 months later...
Whoops... other shoe dropping...

 

 

Bitcoin Exchange Mt. Gox Disappears From Web Amid Reports Of Massive Theft

 

 

How do you steal imaginary money?

 

 

There was a bit on the news today that suggested that "digital currency" might be the way Scotland goes if it votes for independence in the forthcoming referendum. Bitcoin was mentioned as an example but not perhaps the one to be followed...

simon

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 9 months later...
  • Admin

Which doesn't begin to explain why Microsoft (and presumably others) are now (reportedly) accepting bitcoin as a method of purchase... unless they think it'll bounce back and become more valuable in which case it might be wiser to get more bitcoins while folks are wanting to dump them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Admin
I presume they turn it around into dollars quickly, like foreign currencies they accept, so long-term changes in value aren't a major problem.

 

 

Good point!

 

That would appear to be a good trait for bitcoins (economy-wise) that works against the tendency to hoard money and keep it out of circulation.

If it can be assumed bitcoin will quickly lose value it's usefulness as a currency improves.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • *A:M User*

I wish I could remember what the technical term for that is (currency losing its value). It isn't exactly deflation but the currency has that aspect built into it.

 

As far as bitcoin goes, both Hashfast and Butterfly Labs (makers of bitcoin miners) they are both going out of business. Butterfly labs was shut down by the govt. for fraud.

 

So I'm really glad I didn't spend major $$$ on this nonsense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Hash Fellow

I wish I could remember what the technical term for that is (currency losing its value). It isn't exactly deflation but the currency has that aspect built into it.

 

 

In-flation?

 

De-valuation?

 

Both of those would be instance where a currency loses value.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • *A:M User*

I just remembered what it was called: demurrage.

 

It lowers the value of a currency over time, by a specific defined rate: that is the demurrage rate.
Freicoin is another cryptocurrency similar to bitcoin that has a demurrage rate.

 

Demurrage is designed to discourage holding the currency.

The fluctuating value of bitcoin is not a design feature, though, I'm pretty sure. Hoarding is in fact quite a problem with bitcoin.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • *A:M User*

 

I just remembered what it was called: demurrage...

 

Demurrage is designed to discourage holding the currency.

 

 

So it's like a gift card that loses a "handling fee" every three months!

 

 

I hadn't thought of it that way, but I guess it is exactly like that. Speaking of gift cards, whatever happened to gift cards that were just spendable same as cash and you didn't have to activate them before you could use them? What kind of nonsense is that? I have to tie a name and identity to something that should be as fungible as cash?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Invest in Monopoly money, at least in 50 years if kept in good condition will be worth a little more than when first purchased. Bitcoins are worth nothing other than maybe as a collectible because there is nothing backing them, no gdp, no gold.. nothing. Just an arbitrary amount based on demand.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • *A:M User*

I've decided to steer clear of these digital currencies and stick to index funds and tangible assets. Maybe I'll never be super wealthy, but I should at least have something.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Hash Fellow
$5 million stolen electronically... Bitcoin exchange Bitstamp temporarily suspends services

 

Not bitcoin related but XOOM, a money transfer company like Western Union, just got robbed of $31 million... by someone transferring money.

 

Xoom says $30.8 mln transferred fraudulently to overseas accounts
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • Hash Fellow

From the Other Shoe Dropping desk...

 

 

This is Roger Ver. Last year he renounced his citizenship to avoid paying US taxes. Now he's upset that the "tyrants" in the US government won't give him a visa to visit Miami this weekend to speak at a Bitcoin conference...

 

Article.

 

I guess he'll have to Skype himself to that conference.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 9 months later...
  • 1 year later...
  • 3 months later...
  • Admin

I don't have any bitcoins and need a few to test out some possibilities.

The downside is that even when offering free transactions a small charge is generally required just to keep the bitcoin machine going.

Substitute other appropriate form of digital currency other than bitcoin for the currency preferred.

 

 

Hmmm... need more info or an alternative approach.

 

 

FYI: Currently 1 Bitcoin is valued at 1,299.07.

I figure for testing purpose I'll need about .0005 bitcoins.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Admin
Aren't you supposed to be able to mine your own bitcoins? Somehow?

 

Yes, although that almost looks as shady as the rest of the process.

(Of course, I doubt I'd be saying this if I had a huge stash of bitcoins)

 

Another word for 'mining' is 'work', although the form of that work can take on several different forms..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm gonna sound stupid here, but say I had some Bitcoins, which I don't by the way, but suppose I did.

 

Is it at all possible to trade them in for real physical money or is it a completely closed system? If it is possible how do you do this? Go into a bank and say I'd like to trade in my Bitcoins? and if it's not possible to swap them out for real money then aside from buying shady things from shady people what's the point?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...
  • Admin

The head scratching aspect for me (and there should be many with cryptocurrencies) is the 'mining' part.

It is said that in mining bitcoins the miner solves some complex mathematical equation.

Say what?

 

This'll be me going way out on a limb... not the first time.

So with apologies for the length of this post...

 

To me this solving of complex mathematical equations sounds a lot like someone behind the scenes setting up a shell game where resources are focused on breaking into things, 'solving' passwords, captchas and such so that those that pay the bitcoin benefit. Of course, there'd be no surprise there. Why else would they pay? If following this line of thinking, access to information/data normally hidden or overlooked by automated systems is released. The human in the loop make decisions that change outcomes in significant ways. Ways that computers alone might not.

 

To look at it in another way... I've often wondered about spam... how a majority of it makes very little sense (i.e. illogical targeting as well as content)... almost as if there is no intelligent mind behind the actual content and yet the spam continues to flow as if perpetrated by actual people at some link in the chain. 'Solving' complex mathematical equations is akin to this if what is being produced (unawares) by real humans isn't what they think they are solving. They solve for X but since X=Y inside the baited switch they solve for Y as well.

 

A real world example of this is a report from several years ago where the head of a company bragged about their secondary usage of captcha data. Their service provided the data displayed in sites login captcha but when a real person 'solved' the captcha to gain access a flag was set which solved something else behind the scenes.. One person solving a captcha isn't likely going to be enough but several people who solve the same riddle will invariably tell their tale. In the meantime, the company in question profits considerably in translating analog sources (scanned documents) into digital forms (such as translation, optical character recognition, etc). Every user who logs into these honey pots works for free and doesn't even know they are involved in the ongoing processes behind the scenes.

 

This is the stuff of fourth and fifth generation warfare... fighting battles we don't even know we have entered and that we can truthfully declare (from our perspective of ignorance) that we are not involved in. Was it North Korea that hacked that network? No silly. It was you simply accessing a random site via captcha.

 

Yet another real world example is in universities where program learning and AI is being studied and implemented that helps to 'train' a computer or network to recognize specific objects, shapes, etc. The machine makes a best guess but volunteers validate (or invalidate) the accuracy of the computers choice. And ultimately, the correct (or at least acceptable) solution is derived because of the human (or army of humans) in the loop. Individuals involved might be occasionally wrong (purposefully or not) but in the end the house wins.

 

 

And yet another example might be that of UK Magician Derren Brown who, if his performance is to be believed at face value, played a group of chess masters and bested many of them at the game. The explanation of how he did it was that by the setup of the games (around a group of tables) Derren had each of the chess masters play against themselves (and not him) so that as he went from table to table he simply passed the complex mathematical equations over to the next available expert who then responded masterfully so that Derren could up his game... presenting that higher challenge to the next master... etc. etc. The video is well worth watching if you haven't seen it. One of the masters even commented later that he felt like he was playing against someone with a vast amount of experience. Well, yeah!

 

At any rate, the shadowy mysteries that shroud much of cryptocurrency needs to have more light shown upon it before I can convince myself that someone 'out of time' (i.e. not subject to the rules of the game) has an unfair advantage at the table. Of course, many who deal in cryptocurrency might not particularly care about what lurks in the shadows as long as they continue to reap profits from the endeavor and don't draw the short stick.

 

As money in any of its varied forms doesn't simply appear from nowhere someone is paying for it.

And where some are paying a little others are paying considerably more for it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Admin
look at the code in some open-source mining software

 

I recognize bits and pieces but have not yet arrived at any understanding.

 

In any viable conspiracy scenario, there needs to be a centralised system.

 

Yes, but that centralization need not be large (in participants). It just needs a vulnerability.

And it need not be a conspiracy if one person could exploit said (theoretical) vulnerability.

I do understand any exploitation would be difficult due to the highly distributed nature of bitcoin validation; which is what makes mining operations so important to the system.

Because of the distributed nature of the system exploitation would almost have to consist of conspiracy.

It's certainly hard to imagine one lone individual being able to break into the bitcoin vault (block?) or circumvent it's architecture.

 

Still, I can see a few potential vulnerabilities... which I must assume the champions of bitcoin are well aware of and work to mitigate.

 

There is also the cost of mining itself to consider which I read as currently appraised at $18+ per transaction.

 

Added: Here's an interesting site: http://historyofbitcoin.org/

A fan of bitcoin should probably add something more positive to the end of the timeline...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Hash Fellow

Something I'm not clear on... when you mine a bitcoin you are basically being rewarded for doing the work of verifying or clearing bitcoin transactions.

But is some extra busy-work added to slow down the addition of new bitcoins to the supply?

I figure there must be if they've announced that are going to decrease the reward for mining.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • *A:M User*

Something I'm not clear on... when you mine a bitcoin you are basically being rewarded for doing the work of verifying or clearing bitcoin transactions.

 

But is some extra busy-work added to slow down the addition of new bitcoins to the supply?

 

I figure there must be if they've announced that are going to decrease the reward for mining.

 

To the best of my knowledge, they increase the difficulty of the hashing algorithm so that over time, as more bitcoins are mined, it becomes exponentially harder to mine the things. There are only ever meant to be 21 million bitcoins in circulation, some of these have been lost forever. Originally way back when bitcoin was in its infancy there were people mining them with CPU based systems, then GPU based systems. The only way anybody is mining them now is with custom ASIC miners or farms of the darn things. I don't think there are any individual miners (or not many, anyway) still in the game. I had contemplated setting up a Litecoin mining rig at one point (alternative cryptocurrency) but never got around to it and it wouldn't be worthwhile now. Plus I didn't feel like spending the better part of 2 days setting the damn thing up.

 

The whole thing just seems shady to me but not for the same reasons Rodney is worried about it.

 

However, if you live in a country with currency controls or hyperinflation, Bitcoin can be a valuable way to hang onto your money.

For most normal people, it is too volatile. The extreme deflationary nature of Bitcoin also makes it difficult to use as a currency,

since it encourages hoarding.

 

I think eventually we are going to see some sort of cryptocurrency take off as a standard that is backed by a major bank, I just don't know that Bitcoin will be it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Hash Fellow

IF bitcoin becomes subject to the same reporting regulations that normal currency is then I'm not sure what advantage it would be to a bank, except to speculate on its value.

 

Currently the IRS regards it as property so the reporting thing is a bit gray to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...
  • 2 months later...
  • *A:M User*

Here is the latest in virtual funny-money news:

 

https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/ywbbpm/bitcoin-mining-electricity-consumption-ethereum-energy-climate-change

 

 

Sounds like the plot to a Star Trek episode:

 

Kirk: "Spock, this is a class M planet, perfectly fine...but.... the civilization appears to...have collapsed...from...overuse....of resources.

 

Spock (examining an ancient terminal): "Captain, it appears they were "mining" cryptocurrency."

 

Kirk: "Ah...well....that explains it, then. Earth outlawed cryptocurrency....in the 2050s....due to it killing the electrical grid."

 

Spock: " Apparently money grows neither on trees, nor in the memory banks of a computer"

 

*cue theme*

  • ____ 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
  • Admin

Some old players (of other technology) are getting into the game of cryptocurrency and there are some reasons that might not immediately come to mind for doing so.

Blockchains... the underlying technology that makes cryptocurrencies such as bitcoin possible are set to change the way everyone does business and not just because of the money aspect but rather because of the level of confidence that can be had in verifying orgins and whether the item is authentic. In a world where digital copies prevail and are hard to trace this approach suggests a way to safeguard bits and bytes.

 

In other words, Kodak has announced their own cyrptocurrency (kodakcoin):

 

http://www.zdnet.com/article/kodak-announces-the-kodakcoin-blockchain-cryptocurrency/

 

Will it take off?

 

This seems to be Kodak's way of becoming relevant again after losing so much in the move to digital 'film'.

The question might be... how can they poise themselves to profit by this when others can do the same thing and create their own cryptocurrency.

It would seem that when taken to the extreme (read: inevitability) eventually everyone will have their own cryptocurrency.

.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Admin
that was probably the point.

 

 

You may be right. The buzz certainly is a factor and it surely helps that the buzz has been stoked up by prediction that blockchain technology (not cryptocurrency) will change the way everyone does business.

Blockchain is the actual buzzword that is exciting people... cryptocurrency is simply the 'product' that initially used the technology.

 

There is the blockchain/verification aspect to this that makes Kodakcoin different from other cryptocurrencies and that is the aspect of interest to me personally.

Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies to date have been all about verifying the exchange of monies but the suggestion here appears to have other implications.

 

To stare at this from another direction... bitcoin is a self verifying system where a transaction of a digital currency is authenticated/verified.

But the suggestion of Kodakcoin is that the digital product associated with the transfer of the crypocurrency is also validated at the time of transfer.

This distinction may be lost on the layman but to those who must deal in transactions where that digital product needs to be verified as authentic that (in theory) ties the cryptocurrency to a product which in and of itself may have value. So at the time of authentication both the product and the transaction are verified and the value of both is preserved.

 

So if I'm not just reading all of this wrongly... there is a multiplier in the mix that potentially makes the Kodakcoin model more valuable than standard bitcoin not based on an associative product. It's a bit like returning the U.S. dollar to the gold standard where the money printed is backed up by physical gold.

 

Both systems have their pros and cons:

With bitcoin the cryptocurrency itself is the variable that changes/fluctuates in value while products purchased with it are independently assessessed.

If Kodakcoin is actually tied to the product then the value of that digital coin will fluctuate on the perceived value of the product.

 

It's a bit (pun intended) like having every 'product' available for examination and evaluation on the stock exchange.

The underlying 'promise' is that goods and services can more easily and securely be exchanged Peer to Peer where the only middleman involved is the authority that verifies/authenticates the transfer.

 

In short, from the article:

 

The KodakCoin cryptocurrency and the KodakOne rights management platform will both be backed by blockchain security.

 

 

 

Kodak is setting themselves up as the middleman that 'manages rights' and the arbitrator of the currency photographers (and others) will use.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Admin

Vaguely related...

 

Canya purchases major stake in Bounty Source.

 

First, a little background...

Bounty Source is an online community where someone posts a promise of compensation for a programming solution.

For instance, a software package might need some useful feature or a rewrite, etc. and because there may be little incentive for a programmer to devote time and effort to the task money is pledged toward that end and programmers vie for the reward... the bounty for the source code. This is generally open source software so the code can then be further worked by others freely or through additional bounties.

 

The bounties primarily represent an interest on the part of users or businesses that have need of the specified development.

 

Canya is a company vested in crypto currency (ala CanYacoin) with a specific interest in how blockchain technology cuts out the middle man to allow peer to peer exchange of digital goods and services.

This is largely true although I'm sure the general idea is that CanYa is placing themselves into the position (similar to that of Kodakcoin previously reported) where they profit from each exchange.

The most likely source of revenue being that of running the server where transactions are published for validation.

 

The general hype touted on this announcement is that of Bounty Source having an already established user base of 46K programmers which establishes a basis from which to generate digital products and services. Since every digital product or service touches a programmer that sets the potential for growth high. How much are you willing to pay someone to solve your problem? $5? $50? $100? Okay, good enough for me. Sold.

 

LINK

 

As Nemyax mentioned companies are seeing profits rise on the mere thought that blockchain technology is present and investors are wanting to get their foot in the door earlier rather than later. For me personally the interesting part is the furtherance of peer to peer exchange which potentially could remove all middlemen. The article (at link) suggests that CanYa can reduce associated costs by 20x over other transactions. That is telling in a number of ways, firstly and foremostly that a significant markup is required in order to satisfy the profit margins of current exchanges and in more strictly peer to peer transactions the seller can receive more of the buyers money because it doesn't need to move through the middleman. The buyer can therefore expect to be able to purchase the same digital goods and services cheaper than the would if relying on that middleman broker.

 

https://blog.canya.com.au/2017/12/20/canya-acquires-majority-stake-in-bountysource-adds-over-46000-users/

 

CanYa's site:

 

https://canya.io/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...