Quote from: gweedo on April 19, 2013, 01:48:34 AM

Quote from: 1krona on April 19, 2013, 01:39:12 AM

Quote from: gweedo on April 19, 2013, 01:24:13 AM

Quote from: 1krona on April 19, 2013, 01:16:40 AM

Lol do you seriously dont get my point?
For me to OWN a bitcoin I have to put my faith in it that some other person would value it as much as I did, otherwise I loose. Lets say a bitcoin 2.0 gets online with much better properties making your bitcoin 1.0 worthless. If I own Stored energy, I can USE it to something like powering my computer, TV, cooking plate, powering ASICs performing protein folding, (not useless shit like double SHA-256 hashing Tongue

)..

Do you still dont get it??

So for me own a dollar the same would have to be true, that is true in any currency. Your energy currency theory is still under the same law. What if one computer requires X energy to be powered. Yet computer 2 requires X+1 energy.

Then I would like to offer a Service or a Product to get hold of "1" more energy if I wanted to power computer 2..

I still want to know who decides to change the mining process!

The people... Gavin would create the software to change the mining process, we would all upgrade to that, and the miners would start using that, and then the blockchain would fork and as the fork gets longer, then that software would be the only one that would be able to create the valid transactions.

That sounds kinda centralized if you ask me. Could you please explain the forking process and what effect it have on othe holders of bitcoin and bitcoin softwarer? And you say that the fork have to get long before you can validate transaction.. So that 51% holder would still be able to reverse transaction during that time, how long would it take to get the fork long enough?

The more I read about cryptos I actually starting to feel safer holding crappy currencies like fiat, Swedish Krona to be exact Tongue