Search content
Sort by
Showing 2 of 2 results by acrylicist
Someone much earlier in the thread mentioned geocaching as a way to execute a trade.
I thought of another way. There's this group of people who do this thing called "geohashing" (google it). Basically they take a hash of the date plus some figure not known until that day (in their case, they use MD5 and the NYSE closing price) and compute a lat/long with it. And they meet up (whenever possible) at that place.
Something like this - merely the idea of a pseudorandomly selected meeting place - could make a trading system viable, nobody would need to go to any known specific place... (that is, after the algorithm being refined so it chooses places people can actually go inconspicuously, rather than in the middle of some farmer's field).
Further, it could be arranged so that the pseudorandom location generator had some sort of duress input, whereby a drug user turned informant by force could simply give a duress input that would break the function of the algorithm and leave the cops showing up to a random place all alone...
Just random ideas, I don't see them as viable all by themselves without major refinement
I thought of another way. There's this group of people who do this thing called "geohashing" (google it). Basically they take a hash of the date plus some figure not known until that day (in their case, they use MD5 and the NYSE closing price) and compute a lat/long with it. And they meet up (whenever possible) at that place.
Something like this - merely the idea of a pseudorandomly selected meeting place - could make a trading system viable, nobody would need to go to any known specific place... (that is, after the algorithm being refined so it chooses places people can actually go inconspicuously, rather than in the middle of some farmer's field).
Further, it could be arranged so that the pseudorandom location generator had some sort of duress input, whereby a drug user turned informant by force could simply give a duress input that would break the function of the algorithm and leave the cops showing up to a random place all alone...
Just random ideas, I don't see them as viable all by themselves without major refinement
You'd have to hire mules to make deliveries to locations and dozens of red herring mules to wonder around the city randomly to default surveillance. It would be quite effective and have a even stranger side effect of spreading out the potential area that law enforcement would need to monitor. No more "drug districts." Now search and replace "heroin" with "resistance orders" and now you've got a courier system for a revolution.
How soon will it be before its illegal to own a GPS?
Re: Inflation and the end of 50 BTC per block (from technical discussion)
Let me recalibrate my understanding.
Every computer will be essentially generating bitcoin. Essentially, it is hyperinflation. However, this distort economic calculation to a really bad level. Everything you invest in looks like a profit, when it's actually not.
There is still no incentive to save, because your saving is becoming worthless every single day due to inflation. Basically, it rewards the biggest generator at the expense of everybody else, except those who borrows money.
In the bitcoin economy, the generators still benefit disapportionately, but it will also benefit those who save. In other words, everybody who save win, except those who borrows money.
Investors in business will be forced to be more conservative or efficient at finding economic opportunity.
Every computer will be essentially generating bitcoin. Essentially, it is hyperinflation. However, this distort economic calculation to a really bad level. Everything you invest in looks like a profit, when it's actually not.
There is still no incentive to save, because your saving is becoming worthless every single day due to inflation. Basically, it rewards the biggest generator at the expense of everybody else, except those who borrows money.
In the bitcoin economy, the generators still benefit disapportionately, but it will also benefit those who save. In other words, everybody who save win, except those who borrows money.
Investors in business will be forced to be more conservative or efficient at finding economic opportunity.
There won't be hyperinflation with BitCoin because of the algorithms--the faster BitCoins are generated, the harder they become to generate (and thus require ever more amounts of electricity or hardware). My issues with BitCoin come from the unfairness of money creation, which is essentially a technocratic central bank issuing currency. If you have enough CPU-power and energy, you can originate most significant amount of new BTC into the market. While the rest either hoard it because of its deflation or spend it occasionally because of "time preference." As people deflate BTC into smaller and smaller units, in absolute terms, everyone is playing with "more and more units of currency," the only difference being the zeros are being added on the opposite side of the decimal point. With all of the hype and attention for BitCoin in recent press, it could be heading towards hyperdeflation, where "People postpone buying indefinitely because they expect prices to fall further." In BitCoin, there will be no incentive to spend, which is kind of ironic and self-defeating for a proposed new money.
If I had 50BTC and thought that it would deflate incredibly, I'd be waiting until 0.00005BTC would pay my rent before I'd use it, I'd have a million "units" to play with.