Search content
Sort by
Showing 20 of 68 results by bitbrasil
Please stop using Bitcoin as donation money. People will start to associate Bitcoin with people begging for money.
So if I want to switch 100% to BTC and also to support Wikipedia financially, how do you think I should do it?
"Wikipedia is hosted and funded by the Wikimedia Foundation, a non-profit organization which also operates Wikipedia-related projects such as Wiktionary and Wikibooks. The Wikimedia Foundation relies on public contributions and grants to fund its mission."
Source:Wikimedia Foundation and the Wikimedia chapters
Wikipedia's mission is to centralize all information of the world. Can't you see how dangerous that is? Why would you switch to 100% decentralized currency to then support a site which plans to centralize all information in one place? makes no sense
What the hell does it mean ?
http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/201fa6/hello_from_jimmy_wales_of_wikipedia/cfyw1os
http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/201fa6/hello_from_jimmy_wales_of_wikipedia/cfyw1os
Quote
I think it would not be wise to put it on the bottom of every page. In the grand scheme of things the number of people using bitcoin is effectively zero. So we'd be showing what would effectively be a promotion for bitcoin in exchange for a very small net financial gain. That'd be great for lots of for-profit bitcoin businesses, and great for the bitcoin movement, but not really sensible for Wikimedia.
Yes, maybe someday if bitcoin becomes mainstream.
Yes, maybe someday if bitcoin becomes mainstream.
It means that trying to bribe wikipedia's founder is not going to work.
LOLLL people here are so delusional thinking that Wikipedia accepting BTC donations will do anything significant to Bitcoin's community
You lack basic understanding of how marketing works. And basic understanding of how a product succeeds en masse.
-B-
I think your marketing strategy is even worse.
Please stop using Bitcoin as donation money. People will start to associate Bitcoin with people begging for money.
I certainly am not sending not even one satoshi to the guy who is part of the 1% richest people in the world and who is responsible for centralizing information on the internet.
Think bigger picture man. This isn't about that. Its about BTC succeeding. Billions of people being liberated from centralized banking systems. Freedom from corrupt governments. Poorest people in the world performing remittances and getting to keep that $40 they would've given Western union. And your coins being worth $40,000 one day.
Nothing else matters.
Do it for that reason.
-B-
Bitcoin doesn't depend on wikipedia accepting BTC donations to succeed. Please... Wikipedia accepting BTC donations will be in the news for about 2 days and that's that, it's irrelevant
LOLLL people here are so delusional thinking that Wikipedia accepting BTC donations will do anything significant to Bitcoin's community
Guess what, if Wikipedia starts accepting BTC tomorrow, it will be in the news for a couple of days then it will fall into oblivion.
Average people couldn't care less what currency wikipedia accepts donations
Guess what, if Wikipedia starts accepting BTC tomorrow, it will be in the news for a couple of days then it will fall into oblivion.
Average people couldn't care less what currency wikipedia accepts donations
I sent him .1 .... will send him more later. If we don't get him at least 100 BTC I am going to be really upset with the bitcoin community. This is bigger than overstock. This is bigger than tiger direct. This is bigger than Mt. Gox. If you guys don't send him a barrage of donations we are going to be missing out on something huge. THINK about it...
I certainly am not sending not even one satoshi to the guy who is part of the 1% richest people in the world and who is responsible for centralizing information on the internet.
Wikipedia is great - but as with any centralized resource it can be easily manipulated by those with enough power. A decentralized wikipedia is a great idea.
There is already a decentralized wikipedia... The internet! Centralization will only occur if all people start promoting one site such as wikipedia as source of all information. Wikipedia is the Ghash.io of the internet
Why would I donate to a site that is responsible for centralizing information around the world? I can't believe people are helping information get centralized even more.
What is wrong with you? Wikipedia isn't centralization CONTROL, it's totally 100% free to everyone. No profits!! Volunteer based!A great cause, one of the best things to result from the internet, and the foundation for the future of a worldwide knowledge-base of humanity.
YOu make zero sense.. what being 100% free and volunteer based has to do with it being or not being centralized?
Wikipedia is information controlled by a few administrators, centralization of information is 1000X more dangerous than centralized currencies and central banks, and people like you are feeding this monster like stupid zombies.
Quote from: mysidia
Huh? Much information was always centralized in a few major encyclopedias and large publishers' publications!
Wikipedia is the encyclopedia that anyone can edit. So creation of content is being decentralized.
Wikipedia is the encyclopedia that anyone can edit. So creation of content is being decentralized.
So you're saying that because information was always centralized, it's good to keep it centralized?
And you obviously know nothing about how Wikipedia works. Anyone can edit? lololol anyone can edit until a sysop say you can edit.
Creation of content couldn't be more centralized, there's one and only one version of a given subject and which version gets published is dictated by a few sysops that have other buddies as sysops too.
Quote from: mysidia
It's all open publication license..... Anyone can download the database dump of all the content and share....
what exactly are you going to do with a db dump?
Quote from: mysidia
And so far, nobody's created any peer-to-peer Distributed Wiki protocol alternative to even try to replace using a centralized website, yet.
WP is still a step away from centralization; however.
WP is still a step away from centralization; however.
Why you are stuck with peer-to-peer in your head? YOu can have decentralized information using good old internet protocol for that.
Why would I donate to a site that is responsible for centralizing information around the world? I can't believe people are helping information get centralized even more.
Wikipedia is centralization of information. Information should be decentralized too.
Trollololo
dumbololol you can't even explain how wikipedia is not centralized...
Wikipedia is centralization of information. Information should be decentralized too.
The amount of idiots on this sub-forum is staggering.
i think you are one of those who take wikipedia information for granted or believe the myth that anyone can edit a page without problems. Try checking the history of controversial subjects pages, the version that gets published is the version that some mods think are best, that's all.
But even then I think you are too idiot to explain how wikipedia is not centralized information.
Good point QuaestionAuthority (BTW, love your nick 
)
Here's an interesting article about this problem http://bitcoinmagazine.com/8274/the-psychology-of-decimals/
) Here's an interesting article about this problem http://bitcoinmagazine.com/8274/the-psychology-of-decimals/
Excellent article. Let's hope that the lack of perception of how the average public thinks doesn't kill BTC.
If someone doesn't understand how to use the basic metric system they need to go back to the 1st grade and learn it. Better they don't use BTC at all! They surely will get robbed blind. 
Nobody is proposing a substitution to the metric system. What's being proposed is to simplify the usage of the metric system. Simplification is also tought at school, I think you missed the class.
What confuses people more, changing from 21 million to 21 billion or asking people to buy a coffee for 0.0015BTC? Imagine when BTC reaches 10,000USD, a coffee for 0.00015? really?
It's just redenomination, it won't lose value. People are not used to deal with infinitesimal values. And for most people, they couldn't care less how many BTC total are there.
If Bitcoin wants to be used by the masses, it needs to become more similar to their realities.
It's just redenomination, it won't lose value. People are not used to deal with infinitesimal values. And for most people, they couldn't care less how many BTC total are there.
If Bitcoin wants to be used by the masses, it needs to become more similar to their realities.
Re: Move Bitcoin's radix point 3 steps to the right to improve BTC acceptance
I think Bitcoin needs a currency system reform.
Really? Do you think that will happen any time soon? You would be better off if you stopped wasting your time trying to change Bitcoin, and created a coin of your own. BrasilCoin perhaps? I can see it now! 
I'm sure you helped many people lives telling them what they have to do with their time.
Who is going to write the code, you?
Obviously you have absolutely no idea how ridiculous your suggestion is, what it involves, and why it will never happen. This thread is a complete waste of everyone's time, including yours. I was just pointing that out, hopefully by sacrificing a few minutes of my time, I can prevent many others from wasting time on this thread. Time that would be better spent on something more productive.
You spend far too much time trying to manage other people's lives. Guess what, one of my favorites pastimes is arguing with stupid trolls on the internet. Sue me.....
Copying my post from this thread: http://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=8282.140.
I think that instead of coming up with names for 0.001 and 0.000001 bitcoins we should seriously consider changing the value of 1 bitcoin. I propose that what now is 0.000001 bitcoins becomes the new bitcoin. If we want bitcoin to be widely used we have start thinking about how to make things simple for Average Joe. So, a couple of reasons why this would be better:
I don't think that it's too late to make a change like this.
I think that instead of coming up with names for 0.001 and 0.000001 bitcoins we should seriously consider changing the value of 1 bitcoin. I propose that what now is 0.000001 bitcoins becomes the new bitcoin. If we want bitcoin to be widely used we have start thinking about how to make things simple for Average Joe. So, a couple of reasons why this would be better:
- Bitcoin sounds like a small amount.
- While milli- and micro- is very simple to understand for a scientific community, "a thousand" and "a million" is understood more intuitively by Average Joe. So instead of having "a microbitcoin", "a millibitcoin" and "a bitcoin" in everyday use it would be better to have "a bitcoin", "a thousand bitcoins" and "a million bitcoins".
- No currency that I have used have smaller amounts than 0.01 main units. Using the new definition of a bitcoin the smallest possible amount would be just that, 0.01 bitcoins.
I don't think that it's too late to make a change like this.
I agree...
http://edition.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/africa/02/02/zimbabwe.dollars/
"Zimbabwe removes 12 zeros from currency"
Will Bitcoin have the same problem?
"Zimbabwe removes 12 zeros from currency"
Will Bitcoin have the same problem?
NO it's the opposite problem for Bitcoin. Bitcoin is deflating not inflating.
Re: Move Bitcoin's radix point 3 steps to the right to improve BTC acceptance
I think Bitcoin needs a currency system reform.
Really? Do you think that will happen any time soon? You would be better off if you stopped wasting your time trying to change Bitcoin, and created a coin of your own. BrasilCoin perhaps? I can see it now! I'm sure you helped many people lives telling them what they have to do with their time.