Left the mailing list out of the reply line again...
-- Forwarded message --
From: Mike Frank
Date: Sat, Jun 18, 2011 at 7:14 PM
Subject: Re: [EM] A secure distributed election scheme based on Bitcoin's
Proof-of-Work protocol
To: Warren Smith
Well, I suppose it's possible that
On Sat, Jun 18, 2011 at 7:46 PM, Jameson Quinn wrote:
>
> Why would you sell it below market price? You sell it at the market's bid
> price.
>
Well true, but the bid price is usually below the median price between
highest bid and lowest ask (in the middle of the spread). If you were not
trying to
2011/6/18 Mike Frank
> Shorting essentially just means borrowing the item to short, and then
> selling the borrowed item below market price.
Why would you sell it below market price? You sell it at the market's bid
price.
>
> You could certainly borrow bitcoins from someone (if they were will
I bet inTrade could be persuaded to sell BitCoin futures.
A future that pays out if BTC falls below a certain dollar amount could
serve the same purpose as shorting BitCoins.
- Andy
On Sat, Jun 18, 2011 at 4:02 PM, Mike Frank wrote:
> Shorting essentially just means borrowing the item to shor
Shorting essentially just means borrowing the item to short, and then
selling the borrowed item below market price.
You could certainly borrow bitcoins from someone (if they were willing to
loan them to you), and then sell the borrowed coins on an exchange.
However, the existing exchanges don't s
In the discussion of a proportional representation version of SODA it was
lamented that the non-
sequential version of PAV was computationally hard, and was suggested to make
use of the PAV
measure of goodness to pick the winning slate from all of the slates that
anybody cared to nominate.
Wh
By the way, re Jameson Quinn saying he'd short-sell bitcoins...
is it actually possible to short them?
--
Warren D. Smith
http://RangeVoting.org <-- add your endorsement (by clicking
"endorse" as 1st step)
and
math.temple.edu/~wds/homepage/works.html
Election-Methods mailing list - see http
> Barring algorithmic breakthroughs (like a discovery of a way to find SHA-256
> collisions that is much faster than brute search), it seems extremely
> implausible to me that any one entity would ever amass enough advanced
> technology to out-compute the entire Bitcoin mining community - or would
Forgot to CC the group...
-- Forwarded message --
From: Mike Frank
Date: Sat, Jun 18, 2011 at 1:49 PM
Subject: Re: [EM] A secure distributed election scheme based on Bitcoin's
Proof-of-Work protocol
To: Jameson Quinn
On Sat, Jun 18, 2011 at 1:14 PM, Jameson Quinn wrote:
> And
2011/6/18 Mike Frank
> On Sat, Jun 18, 2011 at 11:30 AM, Jameson Quinn
> wrote:
>
>> I agree, though again, I don't believe bitcoin are a worth what they go
>> for today. I would happily nakedly short bitcoin up to 10% of my net worth
>> today, on a 2 year option period, if I could do so conveni
On Sat, Jun 18, 2011 at 11:28 AM, Warren Smith wrote:
>
> Oh, I guess you'll say that if there were any faster implementation of the
> key
> algorithms like 10X faster on some better hardware or with better compiler
> or
> something, the market would have already found it?? Vomit.)
>
Yes. The m
I meant, the supply of bitcoins is limited to 21M BTC (not $21M).
On Sat, Jun 18, 2011 at 12:19 PM, Mike Frank <
michael.patrick.fr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 18, 2011 at 11:30 AM, Jameson Quinn
> wrote:
>
>> I agree, though again, I don't believe bitcoin are a worth what they go
>> for
On Sat, Jun 18, 2011 at 11:30 AM, Jameson Quinn wrote:
> I agree, though again, I don't believe bitcoin are a worth what they go for
> today. I would happily nakedly short bitcoin up to 10% of my net worth
> today, on a 2 year option period, if I could do so conveniently and without
> risk of gett
On Sat, Jun 18, 2011 at 11:46 AM, Andy Jennings wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 18, 2011 at 7:50 AM, Mike Frank <
> michael.patrick.fr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Even if the total resources deployed on the Bitcoin network were to
>> someday fall to such a low level that a single attacker could easily produce
On Sat, Jun 18, 2011 at 7:50 AM, Mike Frank wrote:
> Even if the total resources deployed on the Bitcoin network were to someday
> fall to such a low level that a single attacker could easily produce a
> forged chain of transactions, that would only mean that this attacker could
> double-spend th
2011/6/18 Mike Frank
> Bitcoin has experienced up-and-down fluctuations in value by more than 40%
> quite regularly. It dropped by more than 50% just last week.
Sorry, when I say "40% drop", I don't mean day-to-day or hour-to-hour
fluctuations. The 50% drop was off a peak that lasted at most 3
On 6/18/11, Mike Frank wrote:
> Bitcoin's security is not based on its price, it is based on the fact that
> compromising the system's security is compute-intensive - same as with every
> other cryptosystem.
>
> Even if the total resources deployed on the Bitcoin network were to someday
> fall to
Bitcoin's security is not based on its price, it is based on the fact that
compromising the system's security is compute-intensive - same as with every
other cryptosystem.
Even if the total resources deployed on the Bitcoin network were to someday
fall to such a low level that a single attacker co
Jameson Quinn wrote:
Bitcoin is a scam, but not for these cryptographic reasons. There are
plenty of people "mining" the proof-of-work chain for "new bitcoin", and
developing improved algorithms to do so. And even if there weren't,
anybody who suddenly developed a longer "all your bitcoin belon
> On the other hand, the first time it loses 40% of its value, it is toast.
Bitcoin lost 60% of its value on June 10th and 11th when it went from $30
per BTC to $10 per BTC in that two day period. Some referred to it as the
Bitcoin Depression. It returned to $20 per BTC the following day and has
b
> what unmet need does it address?
The Byzantine General's problem: http://paulbohm.com/bitcoin-decentralization/
Another way to look at the innovation in bitcoin is it provides a
"distributed notary service".
Duane
On Jun 17, 2011, at 11:25 PM, robert bristow-johnson
wrote:
>
> On Jun 17, 20
On 6/18/11, Mike Frank wrote:
> Bitcoin has experienced up-and-down fluctuations in value by more than 40%
> quite regularly. It dropped by more than 50% just last week. Yet, the
> longer-term trend is still that its value (and the computing power devoted
> to it) is increasing at more than 2x p
On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 10:07 PM, Warren Smith wrote:
> If I join an e-money scheme, then dammit I do NOT want to
> be cranking my computer day and night in a a desperate battle to stay
> secure by
> expending more cycles than the bad guys.
You don't have to do a big computation just to send or
Bitcoin has experienced up-and-down fluctuations in value by more than 40%
quite regularly. It dropped by more than 50% just last week. Yet, the
longer-term trend is still that its value (and the computing power devoted
to it) is increasing at more than 2x per month (10x per calendar quarter).
T
Bitcoin is a scam, but not for these cryptographic reasons. There are plenty
of people "mining" the proof-of-work chain for "new bitcoin", and developing
improved algorithms to do so. And even if there weren't, anybody who
suddenly developed a longer "all your bitcoin belong to us" chain would get
25 matches
Mail list logo
