Talk:Myths: Difference between revisions
Shrewdwatson (talk | contribs) |
JohnTobey253 (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 13: | Line 13: | ||
IMHO this chapter is superficial. Compare Bitcoin to electronic fiat currencies. --[[User:Shrewdwatson|Shrewdwatson]] 17:57, 23 April 2011 (GMT) | IMHO this chapter is superficial. Compare Bitcoin to electronic fiat currencies. --[[User:Shrewdwatson|Shrewdwatson]] 17:57, 23 April 2011 (GMT) | ||
How about this: The electricity spent in hashing is not wasted. It creates a product of value to the Bitcoin economy. The product is a supersignature on the complete list of transactions to date (the [[Block chain]]). This supersignature attesting to the chain's completeness is Bitcoin's defense against double spending. (Paragraph) Many sources of energy vary in their availability in ways that do not match the variations in demand. The law of supply and demand should soak up a lot of energy that is currently "wasted" before it makes a big dent in the otherwise usable energy supply. (Perhaps cite estimates of the break-even point for mining profitability that imply near-zero-cost electricity.) | |||
Revision as of 16:21, 28 April 2011
Terrorism
From the linked Wikipedia page:
- The USA PATRIOT Act defines terrorism activities as "activities that (A) involve acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the U.S. or of any state, that (B) appear to be intended (i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population, (ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion, or (iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping, and (C) occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the U.S."
This definition is broad enough that it could probably be applied to the Bitcoin system. IANAL but I imagine lawyers could pretty easily demonstrate that Bitcoin is 'dangerous to human life' because the Four Horsemen can use it for evil [drug-dealers, money-launderers, terrorists, and pedophiles.] It can 'influence the policy of a government by coercion' by removing options such as Federal Reserve dollars. (C) might be tricky to prove. PLATO 22:34, 23 March 2011 (GMT)
- besides the one attorney general that made a snide remark about terrorism in the LibertyDollar case, i don't think that this is in any way a 'common misconception', so i'd question whether we need to have the 'terrorism' section at all.--Nanotube 04:02, 24 March 2011 (GMT)
I agree. All yes for removing terrorist stuff? EvanR 00:10, 30 March 2011 (GMT)
Bitcoin mining is a waste of energy and harmful for ecology
IMHO this chapter is superficial. Compare Bitcoin to electronic fiat currencies. --Shrewdwatson 17:57, 23 April 2011 (GMT)
How about this: The electricity spent in hashing is not wasted. It creates a product of value to the Bitcoin economy. The product is a supersignature on the complete list of transactions to date (the Block chain). This supersignature attesting to the chain's completeness is Bitcoin's defense against double spending. (Paragraph) Many sources of energy vary in their availability in ways that do not match the variations in demand. The law of supply and demand should soak up a lot of energy that is currently "wasted" before it makes a big dent in the otherwise usable energy supply. (Perhaps cite estimates of the break-even point for mining profitability that imply near-zero-cost electricity.)