- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Bitcoins were hacked yesterday?
Posted on 4/4/13 at 5:19 pm to Korkstand
Posted on 4/4/13 at 5:19 pm to Korkstand
quote:
Is the idea valuable, or the implementation?
I think both are. You can enter into agreements even in the absence of law that reward the idea man, but I digress.
quote:
The rules placed on it make them necessarily scarce. And the rules are necessarily arbitrary.
I thought I read somewhere that the rules can be changed if the majority of machines on the network agreed (maybe I misunderstood).
quote:
Whether it's by design or "natural" doesn't matter.
If the rules can be changed it definitely matters.
But whether or not the scarcity is permanent, that still really doesn't explain why a bitcoin has value. There are plenty of things in the world that are both scarce and worthless.
2
Posted on 4/4/13 at 5:56 pm to ZereauxSum
quote:I agree with you, and my stance on the value of IP says the same.
I think both are. You can enter into agreements even in the absence of law that reward the idea man, but I digress.
quote:As far as I understand, yes, this can happen. Each participating machine builds upon the longest "blockchain". I believe forks in the chain happen occasionally, and both may be built upon until there is a clear "winner". The transactions in the losing chain are then verified again in the winning chain. If someone wanted to change the rules, they would have to put more computing effort into it than everyone else combined in order to win this race. I am not 100% on this, but I think what would happen at this point is that there would be 2 separate bitcoin networks fighting over which transactions are legit. I'm not sure if the legit network would eventually concede defeat, or if they would just exist together but separate, and people could go with either one and double-spend their coins. I just don't know enough about it, but whatever would happen it would be disruptive and probably destroy it.
I thought I read somewhere that the rules can be changed if the majority of machines on the network agreed (maybe I misunderstood).
quote:As I kind of talked through just now, an attempt to game the system would probably destroy it, and little to nothing would be gained. It's designed to make honest participation most beneficial to yourself and the network as a whole.
If the rules can be changed it definitely matters.
Posted on 4/4/13 at 7:54 pm to ZereauxSum
Yes, the rules can be changed. But also there can be events that result in forks in the road. And some of the bitcoins will take a fork that leads to who knows what for those bitcoins. Most certainly those bitcoins will no longer be accepted back on the main fork. If enough forks occur people will want to know the provenance of their bitcoins in order to determine utility. That will require running confirmations back to the original mining for 100% certainty. How long will it take to perform these title searches? What sort of delays will it impose on transactions?
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News