Does anyone know whether there exists a website or document that has such an overview? Preferably one that is regularly updated?

So it would for example have a list of bitcoin and alt-coin exchanges, of alternative platforms/protocols, of online and offline wallets, and of all other types of companies, technologies etc in the cryptocurrency ecosystem.

Or do you know of documents or websites that have an overview of one or more of these categories (e.g. I know there is one that lists all the different alt-coins)?

Thanks.

I think that is possible, yeah. Via OKPay. Or it may be that bank transfers (to Gox's bank account) were completed on Friday but Gox only processed them (crediting people's accounts) on Saturday.

I'm speculating though.

Fiat money entering Gox to arbitrage between BB and GOX.

Yeah, but then it went down again, then came up again, then down, then up and hovered around $220 for some time, and then at about the time of this post it went up again by about 15%

Oh, and I don't think withdrawals are working. I just tested it and no. And I haven't read any other claims (then again, if some other anonymous forum members now start to say the same thing the price will jump again)

There is a pretty good chance that this person's post was single-handedly responsible for the 15% increase that just happened (and that began at roughly the same time as this person's post here). A single unsubstantiated comment by some anonymous person on a forum.

Thanks

I have the same problem in Linux Mint.

I guess it would be possible for the network or applications built on top of it to transfer control over or access to some types of things external to the network (by e.g. transferring the digital key needed to open a safe, operate a car etc)

there is also a sixth reason: if the network is going to function as an exchange as well, then a built-in currency can function as the bridge currency (Ripple mentions this reason)

they can't (at least not by only using only tools available within the network), and that is where trust issues re-appear.

same story. but this holds for all metacoins or alternative networks (such as Ripple)

well, you don't need a central depository, but you do need to trust e.g. the company that issues stocks (when each stock is represented by one unit within the network), the company that stores your gold etc

at least the public ledger provides transparency and will limit people's and businesses' abilities to deceive the people they transact with.

So i guess there is a fifth reason for including a built-in currency, namely that as long as it is only used as a currency (and not as a vehicle for a metacoin) it eliminates the trust problem which is something that doesn't work for an external currency represented in the network by a unit

I know and my question is whether there are other ways to incentivize node-operators than by using a built-in currency

the idea is that the network would function as a ledger the same way Bitcoin does but while bitcoin has a limited number of units that can be used for transactions this network would have an unlimited number of units. That makes those units useless as a currency and so valueless in and of themselves. Instead they only come to have value bwhen they are used to represent   something external to the network (e.g. a stock, a dollar, a bitcoin), and so transacting in the unit is transacting in the thing that it represents outside of the network. (similar to how e.g. colored coins work)

Because there would be an infinite supply of units (but of course only a limited number of units that each represent e.g. a stock in company X) they are not currency units and value-less in and of themselves, so they can not be used to reward e.g. node-operators. So the question then is whether there would be other ways to reward node-operators.

Yes. Not sure though that that is a separate reason, more a crucial element that makes a built-in currency able to function as a solution to the problems mentioned in the 4 reasons I gave

To be sure, there is a difference between saying that the network requires units of something for transactions and saying that those units function as currency units. I'm not asking whether it is possible to do away with built-in units for transactions altogether, only whether it is possible to do away with built-in units that function as currency units.

If we use the ledger terminology, for the slots in the ledger to function as a currency there need to be limits on their supply. But if they simply function as media for transactions of whatever kind (by representing e.g. external currency units, stocks) then those constraints on their supply are no longer necessary and there can be an unlimited number of them. That way, the spots in the ledger still function as the media that make all sorts of transactions possible (by representing ownership of something external to the ledger) but no longer as currency units. And in that way, individual nodes can still verify that the person selling a spot in a ledger (that represents e.g. a stock, or a dollar) actually owns that spot and has not spent it elsewhere.

The problem then however is that in that case they (especially newly created ones) could no longer be used to reward miners, speculators, founders etc or to prevent spam because they simply aren't valuable in and of themselves anymore. Their only value would be derived from the thing that they represent outside of the network.

So the only way in which they could still function as rewards despite there being an unlimited supply of them is if individual units are tied to something external to the network, and yes, then in many cases issues of trust will re-emerge.

Thanks for your reply.

Okay, I think I understand, but with merged-mining the new chain would still have a currency of its own that functions as a reward for miners, no?


Yes, good point. Who would blacklist them though in a decentralized network?

Decentralized crypto-transaction networks such as Bitcoin, Ripple, Ethereum and pretty much all others all include their own built-in currencies. As far as I can tell they do this for one or more of the following reasons:

1) as a reward for those who provide their computing power to secure the network
2) as a mechanism for paying the transaction fees that help to minimize spam in the network
3) to provide rewards for the founders (who either pre-mined (part of) the currency or who are among the first to mine the currency)
4) to encourage people to start using the network by rewarding them (if the currency appreciates in value) for buying into the currency that needs to be and can only be used on said network

But are there other ways than by creating a built-in currency in which decentralized crypto-transaction networks can solve these problems? I'm particularly interested in alternative ways of solving the first 2 problems (network security & anti-spam).

Haha! Indeed.

Fortunately the reason I aksed about it was not because I wanted to create a new Bitcoin network but because I needed the answer for a thought experiment.

I'm not talking about creating a new alt-coin or anything, nor about becoming another node in the current Bitcoin network, nor about copying anything (e.g. bitcoins) within the current Bitcoin network, but to start a new Bitcoin network, by using Bitcoin's source code, with the exact same properties as the original Bitcoin network started out with.

Obviously this new network will be doomed to fail in that there is essentially no reason for people to join it, but if you can get a couple of friends to join it and become nodes then it's at least possible to create a new Bitcoin network, no? And of course the (eventually 21 million) bitcoins created in that network won't be fungible with the bitcoins in the original network.

I mean, with other types of software you can make identical copies. Can one do the same with Bitcoin?

Even geprobeerd en het werkt goed, maar Weebly maakt het werken met html tot een absurd tijdrovende zaak, dus ik wacht tot ik wat meer tijd heb en/of me stierlijk verveel om de notes in de eerdere artikelen allemaal te vervangen.

ah, dank voor de tip!

5 Artikelen tot dusver. Feedback is meer dan welkom.

- Who benefits if Bitcoin succeeds?

- Why Bitcoin Needs Neither 'Intrinsic Value' Nor Government Backing

- Why start or invest in Bitcoin companies? Why not free ride instead?

- Why your bitcoins won't make you as rich as you may think they will

- Why an end to Bitcoin's growth need not result in its collapse (unlike Ponzi schemes and bubbles)