Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Bitcoin Releases Version 0.3

kdawson posted more than 4 years ago | from the nobody-to-prosecute dept.

Encryption 491

Teppy writes "How's this for a disruptive technology? Bitcoin is a peer-to-peer, network-based digital currency with no central bank, and no transaction fees. Using a proof-of-work concept, nodes burn CPU cycles searching for bundles of coins, broadcasting their findings to the network. Analysis of energy usage indicates that the market value of Bitcoins is already above the value of the energy needed to generate them, indicating healthy demand. The community is hopeful the currency will remain outside the reach of any government." Here are the FAQ, a paper describing Bitcoin in more technical detail (PDF), and the Wikipedia article. Note: a commercial service called BitCoin Ltd., in pre-alpha at, bears no relation to the open source digital currency.

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

How secure (2, Insightful)

Tisha_AH (600987) | more than 4 years ago | (#32869120)

I would like to see what sort of guarantees are in place for virtual currency

Re:How secure (5, Insightful)

sjames (1099) | more than 4 years ago | (#32869306)

Given that the gold standard is gone, I'd like to see those guarantees too. Your paper money is virtual as well.

Re:How secure (4, Interesting)

hitmark (640295) | more than 4 years ago | (#32869364)

i would say that any currency is backed by the goods and services one can buy with it.

the one way to make sure a currency is usable in daily trade is for it to be accepted as tax payment by local government.

Re:How secure (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32869376)

Don't forget, you can always use your paper money as toilet paper. That's why I keep a few American dollars in my wallet. You just never know when a washroom might run out of toilet paper.

Re:How secure (2, Funny)

longhairedgnome (610579) | more than 4 years ago | (#32869486)

That's...actually a good idea...

Re:How secure (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32869642)

That's...actually a good idea...

how do these big fat women always find the exact center of a doorway or an aisle so that no one can get around them while they plod along at 0.00001 mph until they're finally out of the fucking way? fuck a measuring tape, fuck a laser level, if you wanna find the exact center of something just watch where the fattie stands. they move like an old cow named Bessie that's chewing her cud. for some reason the law would actually prosecute you for kicking them out of the way, though granted it would take a hard kick to move all of that bulk any appreciable distance. if your foot should hit their ass you may not immediately get it back either and you'd definitely have to wash it thoroughly when you do.

Re:How secure (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32869732)

how do these big fat women always find the exact center of a doorway or an aisle so that no one can get around them

Practice. If they get too close to any wall their gravity might collapse it towards them.

Re:How secure (2, Insightful)

smash (1351) | more than 4 years ago | (#32869914)

i would say that any currency is backed by the goods and services one can buy with it.

this is find and dandy if it is a fixed quantity of goods and the currency is bound to that by law. eg, the gold standard.

in the current situation with the us dollar (world's "reserve currency", lol) being backed in this manner by thin air, there is nothing to stop the government simply creating more to get themselves out of debt (inflation) thus reducing the value of goods your single dollar can buy (what you SEE as inflation).

Re:How secure (3, Informative)

Teancum (67324) | more than 4 years ago | (#32869968)

i would say that any currency is backed by the goods and services one can buy with it.

the one way to make sure a currency is usable in daily trade is for it to be accepted as tax payment by local government.

More correctly, any fiat currency (to clarify things... as opposed to a commodity-based currency such as a gold, silver, or grain backed currency) is based upon the faith of those who participate in and use that currency to buy goods and services with it in the future.

That is a huge deal and is much different than simply the mere ability to buy goods and services. A government could collapse, the currency could be devalued, or that faith in general could be broken through a variety of other means.

Perhaps the most significant example of a faith-based currency (faith in the currency, not based upon religion) was the Iraqi Dinar. After the fall of Saddam Hussein, there were many people who thought that it was going to collapse just as other currencies issued by governments that no longer exist have also collapsed. The Nazi German Mark and the Confederate Dollar are both examples of currencies that inflated in value to infinity (aka became worthless). In the case of the Iraqi Dinar, the Iraqi people were both not exactly pleased with the American occupation, and there really wasn't anything to replace the currency. Surprisingly, due to scarcity (no more money was being printed as the government bureaus making the money were destroyed) and a desire by the Iraqi people to continue on economically, the Dinar actually increased in value. In other words, the Iraqi people continued to have faith in that currency to buy future goods and services.

While certainly governments getting involved with deliberately inflating currency can destabilize that currency, it is also true that at least for awhile a currency can remain stable due to the faith of the people possessing that currency to buy something with it in the future.

It should also be noted that this is true not just for fiat currencies "in the real world" but it also applies to virtual economies in video games and MMORPGs. Surprisingly even a single-player video game can still have this impact, where a player may hoard or spend with abandon any virtual money found based upon the principle that either the money is plentiful (or without stuff to buy) or of significant value based upon the supply of that money and the potential to obtain things with it. In the case of multi-player games, it becomes a huge issue if virtual markets open up for exchange of goods and "services".

Re:How secure (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32869686)

I would like to see what sort of guarantees are in place for the value of gold. Sure, it's reasonably rare (for now; just wait until it'll be economically feasible to extract the gold from sea water!), and it's got attractive chemical properties, but beyond that, gold is every bit (no pun intended) as much a fiat currency as paper money: it works because everyone shares the belief it's valuable.

Re:How secure (2, Insightful)

sjames (1099) | more than 4 years ago | (#32869724)

Agreed, but it's got thousands of years track record.

Re:How secure (1)

aliquis (678370) | more than 4 years ago | (#32869928)

Agreed, but it's got thousands of years track record.

So why not base/fix the currency on sex?

Re:How secure (0)

OeLeWaPpErKe (412765) | more than 4 years ago | (#32870006)

I wonder why that matters. Gold has a fixed value, since there is finite supply. The supply of gold cannot be reasonably extended by even trace amounts until our sun goes nova (again).

Of course, that goes for any element. Makes sense to pick a relatively rare one.

OTOH, presumably materials that are inherently useful would be better. Say uranium-235, or plutonium. I doubt the government would agree, but it would not be a fiat currency (if the government would allow it you can extract massive amounts of energy out of uranium in your kitchen. Nuclear power plants, in real life, don't have to cost more than 50$, the rest is government safety regulations at work. Furthermore, approaches like using your kitchen were how it was always done from 1910 to 1946 or-so).

Re:How secure (4, Informative)

FooAtWFU (699187) | more than 4 years ago | (#32869688)

Money is money because people believe it is money. Gold-backed currency needs to have people believing that the government is actually going to turn the currency into gold (and not, say, end the gold standard). And if you trust your government enough to do that, today's system isn't much more of a stretch: trusting the government to keep the value of your currency "relatively stable" without any particular commodity attached to it.

And commodity prices are subject to wild swings too, you know.

Re:How secure (1, Interesting)

nomadic (141991) | more than 4 years ago | (#32869892)

Gold-backed currency needs to have people believing that the government is actually going to turn the currency into gold (and not, say, end the gold standard).

It also requires people to hold a vastly inflated view of the value of gold because it is shiny.

Re:How secure (1)

smash (1351) | more than 4 years ago | (#32869944)

It doesn't matter what you can use it for, so long as it is a FINITE resource and isn't easily replicated. Gold costs labour and resources to extract. The government can't just whip up a million ounces out of thin air to inflate their currency with. That gold is a result of human labour and resources spent. Fiat (paper, electronic, non backed) money can easily be replicated for far less than the labour quantity required than the goods/services it can purchase. It is thus liable to abuse by a government via rampant inflation.

Back near the end of WW2 the german paper money was worth less than the firewood it could buy, so people were burning it to keep warm. The US is in real danger of that situation occurring over there in the next few years due to rampant government spending without the actual taxes to pay for it.

Re:How secure (2, Informative)

nomadic (141991) | more than 4 years ago | (#32869974)

It doesn't matter what you can use it for, so long as it is a FINITE resource and isn't easily replicated. . .That gold is a result of human labour and resources spent

A lot of worthless minerals are hard to extract I'm sure. What you're saying sounds even worse than just arbitrarily saying gold is valuable, you're saying all this work went into essentially creating something that is not really that valuable, and that work somehow added to the value?

Re:How secure (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32870016)

Gold itself isn't worthless. Aside from its more luxurious uses in jewelery and as bullion, it is a valuable metal used in many industrial processes. Printed circuit boards, for instance, often use an alloy involving gold for connecting components.

Re:How secure (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32869976)

At least 1oz of gold is worth 1oz of gold. In the case of dollars, a $100 bill is worth about the same as a $1 bill in tangible terms. You see, the same really neat paper (actually fabric) used to make the dollar plus the ink is the tangible worth. Sew a bunch together, and you can have a nice cape. Maybe you can affix some price to the pretty picture ... I don't know.

As long as the US gov't is around to say that the dollar is worth something (and they don't triple the number of dollars in circulation in a short amount of time), the dollar is worth more than it's raw materials.

This principle roughly holds for other fiat (look it up) currencies. At least gold is worth gold.

Re:How secure (1)

MikeFM (12491) | more than 4 years ago | (#32869950)

Money needs to be hard to replicate. I find it hard to believe in any digital currency that isn't managed by a centralized authority. The PayPal / Credit Card model seems the most realistic to me. It's shameful that our government doesn't provide a digital currency. The current system is akin to the days when any old bank would print their own currency. The government wants to tax Internet transactions.. well most of us pay 3+% to credit cards or PayPal.. if they'd provide their own implementation they could collect those fees without causing prices to rise.

Re:How secure (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32869998)

For something to be used as money it has to be liquid (easy to store/trade) and scarce. Either because people can't yet reproduce/mine it below its cost (gold/silver) or because some enforcement agency (the state) stops people from reproducing it faster than the people who control the currency. The rate at which the people in control create extra money causes inflation. When people are in control of the production of money, it is important for the public to have faith that those people will limit the rate of production (e..g banknotes, or bits in computers approved indirectly as money by a central bank)

Actually very little stuff is useful as money without a state, just because it is either bulky (e.g. oil) or easy to reproduce/forge.

Re:How secure (3, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32869836)

All money is virtual. Direct barter is the only thing that isn't, and even then only after the transaction has been completed. Precious metals are no different. The price of gold has gone up to 4x what it was a decade ago and it can drop again just as quickly. Clearly it isn't a reasonable, stable store of value. Also, traditionally the value of gold and other precious metals has generally been explicitly set by nations laws. For example the one sixteenth rule for the value of silver to the value of gold. So, although precious metals may have intrinsic value (the corrosion resistance of gold, its malleability and decent conductivity make it useful in many applications in small amounts, and silver is the most conductive metal and is vital in a number of chemical processes such as traditional photography) that has little relation to their traditional value, which has always been artificial. Sure, it's rare, but there are plenty of rare things in the world and some of them are considered valuable and others no-one cares about.

Re:How secure (1)

sjames (1099) | more than 4 years ago | (#32869900)

The thing is, you're comparing the value of gold against another currency. That currency is subject to a lot of inflation, so the value of gold going up indicates it's superiority as a container of value.

Re:How secure (2, Insightful)

smash (1351) | more than 4 years ago | (#32869956)

The price of gold has only gone up when measured in fiat dollars. What has really happened is that the value of your dollars (and the rest of the worlds fiat money) has gone down. The resources/labour expended (real cost) to extract an ounce of gold hasn't changed that dramatically in the past decade.

Obvious flaw: (4, Interesting)

tomhudson (43916) | more than 4 years ago | (#32869312)

from wiki []

Whenever a Bitcoin user makes a transaction, their node broadcasts the transaction to the network of nodes. When transaction data is received through a node, the node begins a proof-of-work calculation in an attempt to create a block containing the transaction. All nodes essentially race to create a block, as the first one to create a block gets Bitcoins as a reward. Once a node successfully creates a block, it broadcasts the block to the network. Other nodes receive the block, perform a proof-of-work check, and add it to their chain if it is valid. As more transactions occur, blocks are created and added ad infinitum. The longest proof-of-work block chain is acknowledged to be the oldest and most reliable account of the online transactions.

This mechanism is claimed to be virtually tamper-proof. For an attacker to manipulate the record, he must outpace all of the other nodes on the network to produce the longest proof-of-work.

The assumption that the longest one is the oldest and most reliable is invalid, Since anyone can peer, there's no reason that a peer can't fake itself as 20, 30, 100 peers, and, working on a very fast machine, produce a longer chain quickly than an older peer.

Re:Obvious flaw: (3, Insightful)

antifoidulus (807088) | more than 4 years ago | (#32869414)'ll disrupt their feelings of self-righteousness!

Re:Obvious flaw: (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32869552)

Not only that but, what's stopping someone or a group to do transactions with another "real/trusted/VIP/fake/scam" node to artificially increase its "value" and "reliability".

And what is the meaning of: "blocks are created and added ad infinitum" and in what context does that relate and fit in?

Even ignoring all those issues, what and who creates "Bitcoins". My guess is a group of scammers.

Re:Obvious flaw: (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32869654)

Simple - it means that they are wasting processor power instead of allowing the machines to either go into sleep mode or do some useful grid computing type work. Basically they spin the processor very hard trying to generate a "coin". Unfortunately since all the nodes do this but only one gets it, it basically comes down to "let's waste a lot of power". Stupid idea.

Re:Obvious flaw: (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32869846)

So botnets are the most trusted entities in Bitcoin. Epic fail.

Re:Obvious flaw: (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32869874)

Did you just ignore your own quote? The part that said:

For an attacker to manipulate the record, he must outpace all of the other nodes on the network to produce the longest proof-of-work.

The "very fast machine" would have to be faster than all the combined peers in the entire network, since they are all working together to counter his fast machine.

Re:Obvious flaw: (2, Interesting)

tomhudson (43916) | more than 4 years ago | (#32869940)

All he has to do is take the current longest - which the network provides, then have his own local botnet add 3 or 4 more from local peers, then broadcast have the 4 peers broadcase all 4 - including the desired one, which will be longer. Duh!

uhhh.... (2, Insightful)

girlintraining (1395911) | more than 4 years ago | (#32869122)

and the moment it's cracked the world economy collapses? Nah. Pass.

Re:uhhh.... exactly (1)

Tisha_AH (600987) | more than 4 years ago | (#32869148)

Or there will be a new form of organized crime that specializes in skimming off virtual money. The one real challenge will be in how you catch and prosecute such criminals since no nation has jurisdiction.

Re:uhhh.... exactly (1)

girlintraining (1395911) | more than 4 years ago | (#32869162)

Or reason to. In the 60s, people attempted to create non-government currency in this country. They were arrested and jailed.

Re:uhhh.... exactly (4, Funny)

Tisha_AH (600987) | more than 4 years ago | (#32869230)

Bitcom... Backed by the Greek treasury.

Re:uhhh.... exactly (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32869966)

and goldman sachs while goldman sachs by the fed.

Re:uhhh.... exactly (3, Interesting)

blackest_k (761565) | more than 4 years ago | (#32869522)

couldn't find anything on the 60's but this page from 2009 was interesting. []

with the currency being made of precious metal and not being legal tender the worst that happens is you go for scrap value.

Re:uhhh.... exactly (1)

sjames (1099) | more than 4 years ago | (#32869310)


Re:uhhh.... exactly (1, Insightful)

theaveng (1243528) | more than 4 years ago | (#32869350)

The dollars and euros are already on the verge of being virtual. Banks, corporations, and individuals rarely trade paper anymore; it's all done electronically as computer data. Even the ~1500 billion bailouts passed last year were done virtually - the Central Bank just appended a couple zeros to GMs, Bank of America's, and other private accounts. In effect they created money out of thin air.

BTW the Federal Reserve is not part of the government, just as Federal Express is not part of the government. The name is designed to deceive you but the Fed is still a private bank. It's a private corporate monopoly.

And finally, if you want to take money out of the hands of government to manipulate, inflate, or devalue, all you need to do is switch back to using precious metals - gold, silver, platinum. Governments and/or private central banks can not make metals out of thing air, thus they can not devalue your personal savings.

Re:uhhh.... exactly (3, Informative)

proxima (165692) | more than 4 years ago | (#32869822)

BTW the Federal Reserve is not part of the government, just as Federal Express is not part of the government. The name is designed to deceive you but the Fed is still a private bank. It's a private corporate monopoly.

No, the Federal Reserve is part of the government. Its chairperson and its governors are appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate. It was created by law but was granted substantial independence from political influence. By and large this is seen by economists as a good thing; independent central banks can fight inflation with more credibility if the major branches of government don't have the power to print money. What money the Fed does make -- profits, that is, after paying its own expenses -- the Fed pays back to the Treasury.

Your analogy to Federal Express is just wrong. You might make an argument for the USPS (at least in a historical context, if not how it exists now), but that is still tenuous. The Fed isn't private in any of the usual aspects: no other shareholders, profits returned to the Treasury, and its management is appointed by the typical President/Senate combo.

Re:uhhh.... exactly (1)

hedwards (940851) | more than 4 years ago | (#32869876)

The Federal Reserve is a private banking institution which is run by government appointees. It is not now nor has it ever been a part of the federal government. They just happen to be the ones that are authorized to represent the Federal Government in that respect.

Re:uhhh.... exactly (3, Informative)

proxima (165692) | more than 4 years ago | (#32869890)

The Federal Reserve is a private banking institution which is run by government appointees. It is not now nor has it ever been a part of the federal government. They just happen to be the ones that are authorized to represent the Federal Government in that respect.

You can say that all you want, but to quote the Fed itself [] :

The Federal Reserve must
work within the framework of the overall objectives of economic and
financial policy established by the government; therefore, the description
of the System as "independent within the government" is more accurate.

Congress designed the structure of the Federal Reserve System to give it
a broad perspective on the economy and on economic activity in all parts
of the nation. It is a federal system, composed of a central, governmental
agency--the Board of Governors--in Washington, D.C., and twelve re-
gional Federal Reserve Banks.

It is part of the government, but independent of the three branches.

Re:uhhh.... exactly (1)

smash (1351) | more than 4 years ago | (#32869970)

On the verge of? You think the US is printing 1.6 trillion US dollars per year (thats just the projected budget deficit in 2011) in reality?

Re:uhhh.... exactly (1)

TheoMurpse (729043) | more than 4 years ago | (#32869992)

the Federal Reserve is not part of the government

Well, that turns out to be wrong [] . But don't let my post stop you from repeating this nonsense!

I mean, founded by an act of Congress [] , run by Presidential appointees confirmed by the Senate [] ...

Re:uhhh.... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32869240)

It has come to my attention that the entire Linux community is a hotbed of so called 'alternative sexuality', which includes anything from hedonistic orgies to homosexuality to paedophilia.

What better way of demonstrating this than by looking at the hidden messages contained within the names of some of Linux's most outspoken advocates:

  • Linus Torvalds [] is an anagram of slit anus or VD 'L,' clearly referring to himself by the first initial.
  • Richard M. Stallman [] , spokespervert for the Gaysex's Not Unusual 'movement' is an anagram of mans cram thrill ad.
  • Alan Cox [] is barely an anagram of anal cox which is just so filthy and unchristian it unnerves me.

I'm sure that Eric S. Raymond, composer of the satanic homosexual [] propaganda diatribe The Cathedral and the Bizarre, is probably an anagram of something queer, but we don't need to look that far as we know he's always shoving a gun up some poor little boy's rectum. Update: Eric S. Raymond is actually an anagram for secondary rim and cord in my arse. It just goes to show you that he is indeed queer.

Update the Second: It is also documented that Evil Sicko Gaymond is responsible for a nauseating piece of code called Fetchmail [] , which is obviously sinister sodomite slang for 'Felch Male' -- a disgusting practise. For those not in the know, 'felching' is the act performed by two perverts wherein one sucks their own post-coital ejaculate out of the other's rectum. In fact, it appears that the dirty Linux faggots set out to undermine the good Republican institution of e-mail, turning it into 'e-male.'

As far as Richard 'Master' Stallman goes, that filthy fudge-packer was actually quoted [] on leftist commie propaganda site as saying the following: 'I've been resistant to the pressure to conform in any circumstance,' he says. 'It's about being able to question conventional wisdom,' he asserts. 'I believe in love, but not monogamy,' he says plainly.

And this isn't a made up troll bullshit either! He actually stated this tripe, which makes it obvious that he is trying to politely say that he's a flaming homo [] slut [] !

Speaking about 'flaming,' who better to point out as a filthy chutney ferret than Slashdot's very own self-confessed pederast Jon Katz. Although an obvious deviant anagram cannot be found from his name, he has already confessed, nay boasted of the homosexual [] perversion of corrupting the innocence of young children [] . To quote from the article linked:

'I've got a rare kidney disease,' I told her. 'I have to go to the bathroom a lot. You can come with me if you want, but it takes a while. Is that okay with you? Do you want a note from my doctor?'

Is this why you were touching your penis [] in the cinema, Jon? And letting the other boys touch it too?

We should also point out that Jon Katz refers to himself as 'Slashdot's resident Gasbag.' Is there any more doubt? For those fortunate few who aren't aware of the list of homosexual [] terminology found inside the Linux 'Sauce Code,' a 'Gasbag' is a pervert who gains sexual gratification from having a thin straw inserted into his urethra (or to use the common parlance, 'piss-pipe'), then his homosexual [] lover blows firmly down the straw to inflate his scrotum. This is, of course, when he's not busy violating the dignity and copyright of posters to Slashdot by gathering together their postings and publishing them en masse to further his twisted and manipulative journalistic agenda.

Sick, disgusting antichristian perverts, the lot of them.

In addition, many of the Linux distributions (a 'distribution' is the most common way to spread the faggots' wares) are run by faggot groups. The Slackware [] distro is named after the 'Slack-wear' fags wear to allow easy access to the anus for sexual purposes. Furthermore, Slackware is a close anagram of claw arse, a reference to the homosexual [] practise of anal fisting. The Mandrake [] product is run by a group of French faggot satanists, and is named after the faggot nickname for the vibrator. It was also chosen because it is an anagram for dark amen and ram naked, which is what they do.

Another 'distro,' (abbrieviated as such because it sounds a bit like 'Disco,' which is where homosexuals [] preyed on young boys in the 1970s), is Debian, [] an anagram of in a bed, which could be considered innocent enough (after all, a bed is both where we sleep and pray), until we realise what other names Debian uses to describe their foul wares. 'Woody' is obvious enough, being a term for the erect male penis [] , glistening with pre-cum. But far sicker is the phrase 'Frozen Potato' that they use. This filthy term, again found in the secret homosexual [] 'Sauce Code,' refers to the solo homosexual [] practice of defecating into a clear polythene bag, shaping the turd into a crude approximation of the male phallus, then leaving it in the freezer overnight until it becomes solid. The practitioner then proceeds to push the frozen 'potato' up his own rectum, squeezing it in and out until his tight young balls erupt in a screaming orgasm.

And Red Hat [] is secret homo [] slang for the tip of a penis [] that is soaked in blood from a freshly violated underage ringpiece.

The fags have even invented special tools to aid their faggotry! For example, the 'supermount' tool was devised to allow deeper penetration, which is good for fags because it gives more pressure on the prostate gland. 'Automount' is used, on the other hand, because Linux users are all fat and gay, and need to mount each other [] automatically.

The depths of their depravity can be seen in their use of 'mount points.' These are, plainly speaking, the different points of penetration. The main one is obviously/anus, but there are others. Militant fags even say 'there is no/opt mount point' because for these dirty perverts faggotry is not optional but a way of life.

More evidence is in the fact that Linux users say how much they love `man`, even going so far as to say that all new Linux users (who are in fact just innocent heterosexuals indoctrinated by the gay propaganda) should try out `man`. In no other system do users boast of their frequent recourse to a man.

Other areas of the system also show Linux's inherent gayness. For example, people are often told of the 'FAQ,' but how many innocent heterosexual Windows [] users know what this actually means. The answer is shocking: Faggot Anal Quest: the voyage of discovery for newly converted fags!

Even the title 'Slashdot [] ' originally referred to a homosexual [] practice. Slashdot [] of course refers to the popular gay practice of blood-letting. The Slashbots, of course are those super-zealous homosexuals [] who take this perversion to its extreme by ripping open their anuses, as seen on the site most popular with Slashdot users, the depraved work of Satan, [] .

The editors of Slashdot [] also have homosexual [] names: 'Hemos' is obvious in itself, being one vowel away from 'Homos.' But even more sickening is 'Commander Taco' which sounds a bit like 'Commode in Taco,' filthy gay slang for a pair of spreadeagled buttocks that are caked with excrement [] . (The best form of lubrication, they insist.) Sometimes, these 'Taco Commodes' have special 'Salsa Sauce' (blood from a ruptured rectum) and 'Cheese' (rancid flakes of penis [] discharge) toppings. And to make it even worse, Slashdot [] runs on Apache!

The Apache [] server, whose use among fags is as prevalent as AIDS, is named after homosexual [] activity -- as everyone knows, popular faggot band, the Village People, featured an Apache Indian, and it is for him that this gay program is named.

And that's not forgetting the use of patches in the Linux fag world -- patches are used to make the anus accessible for repeated anal sex even after its rupture by a session of fisting.

To summarise: Linux is gay. 'Slash -- Dot' is the graphical description of the space between a young boy's scrotum and anus. And BeOS [] is for hermaphrodites and disabled 'stumpers.'


What worries me is how much you know about what gay people do. I'm scared I actually read this whole thing. I think this post is a good example of the negative effects of Internet usage on people. This person obviously has no social life anymore and had to result to writing something as stupid as this. And actually take the time to do it too. Although... I think it was satire.. blah.. it's early. -- Anonymous Coward, Slashdot

Well, the only reason I know all about this is because I had the misfortune to read the Linux 'Sauce code' once. Although publicised as the computer code needed to get Linux up and running on a computer (and haven't you always been worried about the phrase 'Monolithic Kernel'?), this foul document is actually a detailed and graphic description of every conceivable degrading perversion known to the human race, as well as a few of the major animal species. It has shocked and disturbed me, to the point of needing to shock and disturb the common man to warn them of the impending homo [] -calypse which threatens to engulf our planet.

You must work for the government. Trying to post the most obscene stuff in hopes that slashdot won't be able to continue or something, due to legal woes. If i ever see your ugly face, i'm going to stick my fireplace poker up your ass, after it's nice and hot, to weld shut that nasty gaping hole of yours. -- Anonymous Coward, Slashdot

Doesn't it give you a hard-on to imagine your thick strong poker ramming it's way up my most sacred of sphincters? You're beyond help, my friend, as the only thing you can imagine is the foul penetrative violation of another man. Are you sure you're not Eric Raymond? The government, being populated by limp-wristed liberals, could never stem the sickening tide of homosexual [] child molesting Linux advocacy. Hell, they've given NAMBLA free reign for years!

you really should post this logged in. i wish i could remember jebus's password, cuz i'd give it to you. -- mighty jebus [] , Slashdot

Thank you for your kind words of support. However, this document shall only ever be posted anonymously. This is because the 'Open Sauce' movement is a sham, proposing homoerotic cults of hero worshipping in the name of freedom. I speak for the common man. For any man who prefers the warm, enveloping velvet folds of a woman's vagina [] to the tight puckered ringpiece of a child. These men, being common, decent folk, don't have a say in the political hypocrisy that is Slashdot culture. I am the unknown liberator [] .

ROLF LAMO i hate linux FAGGOTS -- Anonymous Coward, Slashdot

We shouldn't hate them, we should pity them for the misguided fools they are... Fanatical Linux zeal-outs need to be herded into camps for re-education and subsequent rehabilitation into normal heterosexual society. This re-education shall be achieved by forcing them to watch repeats of Baywatch until the very mention of Pamela Anderson [] causes them to fill their pants with healthy heterosexual jism [] .

Actually, that's not at all how scrotal inflation works. I understand it involves injecting sterile saline solution into the scrotum. I've never tried this, but you can read how to do it safely in case you're interested. (Before you moderate this down, ask yourself honestly -- who are the real crazies -- people who do scrotal inflation, or people who pay $1000+ for a game console?) -- double_h [] , Slashdot

Well, it just goes to show that even the holy Linux 'sauce code' is riddled with bugs that need fixing. (The irony of Jon Katz not even being able to inflate his scrotum correctly has not been lost on me.) The Linux pervert elite already acknowledge this, with their queer slogan: 'Given enough arms, all rectums are shallow.' And anyway, the PS2 [] sucks major cock and isn't worth the money. Intellivision forever!

dude did u used to post on msnbc's nt bulletin board now that u are doing anti-gay posts u also need to start in with anti-black stuff too c u in church -- Anonymous Coward, Slashdot

For one thing, whilst Linux is a cavalcade of queer propaganda masquerading as the future of computing, NT [] is used by people who think nothing better of encasing their genitals in quick setting plaster then going to see a really dirty porno film, enjoying the restriction enforced onto them. Remember, a wasted arousal is a sin in the eyes of the Catholic church [] . Clearly, the only god-fearing Christian operating system in existence is CP/M -- The Christian Program Monitor. All computer users should immediately ask their local pastor to install this fine OS onto their systems. It is the only route to salvation.

Secondly, this message is for every man. Computers know no colour. Not only that, but one of the finest websites in the world is maintained by a Black Man [] . Now fuck off you racist donkey felcher.

And don't forget that slashdot was written in Perl, which is just too close to 'Pearl Necklace' for comfort.... oh wait; that's something all you heterosexuals do.... I can't help but wonder how much faster the trolls could do First-Posts on this site if it were redone in PHP... I could hand-type dynamic HTML pages faster than Perl can do them. -- phee [] , Slashdot

Although there is nothing unholy about the fine heterosexual act of ejaculating between a woman's breasts, squirting one's load up towards her neck and chin area, it should be noted that Perl [] (standing for Pansies Entering Rectums Locally) is also close to 'Pearl Monocle,' 'Pearl Nosering,' and the ubiquitous 'Pearl Enema.'

One scary thing about Perl [] is that it contains hidden homosexual [] messages. Take the following code: LWP::Simple -- It looks innocuous enough, doesn't it? But look at the line closely: There are two colons next to each other! As Larry 'Balls to the' Wall would openly admit in the Perl Documentation, Perl was designed from the ground up to indoctrinate it's programmers into performing unnatural sexual acts -- having two colons so closely together is clearly a reference to the perverse sickening act of 'colon kissing,' whereby two homosexual [] queers spread their buttocks wide, pressing their filthy torn sphincters together. They then share small round objects like marbles or golfballs by passing them from one rectum to another using muscle contraction alone. This is also referred to in programming 'circles' as 'Parameter Passing.'

And PHP [] stands for Perverted Homosexual Penetration. Didn't you know?

Thank you for your valuable input on this. I am sure you will be never forgotten. BTW: Did I mention that this could be useful in terraforming Mars? Mars rulaa. -- Eimernase [] , Slashdot

Well, I don't know about terraforming Mars, but I do know that homosexual [] Linux Advocates have been probing Uranus for years.

That's inspiring. Keep up the good work, AC. May God in his wisdom grant you the strength to bring the plain honest truth to this community, and make it pure again. Yours, Cerberus. -- Anonymous Coward, Slashdot

*sniff* That brings a tear to my eye. Thank you once more for your kind support. I have taken faith in the knowledge that I am doing the Good Lord [] 's work, but it is encouraging to know that I am helping out the common man here.

However, I should be cautious about revealing your name 'Cerberus' on such a filthy den of depravity as Slashdot. It is a well known fact that the 'Kerberos' documentation from Microsoft is a detailed manual describing, in intimate, exacting detail, how to sexually penetrate a variety of unwilling canine animals; be they domesticated, wild, or mythical. Slashdot posters have taken great pleasure in illegally spreading this documentation far and wide, treating it as an 'extension' to the Linux 'Sauce Code,' for the sake of 'interoperability.' (The slang term they use for nonconsensual intercourse -- their favourite kind.)

In fact, sick twisted Linux deviants are known to have LAN parties, (Love of Anal Naughtiness, needless to say.), wherein they entice a stray dog, known as the 'Samba Mount,' into their homes. Up to four of these filth-sodden blasphemers against nature take turns to plunge their erect, throbbing, uncircumcised members, conkers-deep, into the rectum, mouth, and other fleshy orifices of the poor animal. Eventually, the 'Samba Mount' collapses due to 'overload,' and needs to be 'rebooted.' (i.e., kicked out into the street, and left to fend for itself.) Many Linux users boast about their 'uptime' in such situations.

Inspiring stuff! If only all trolls were this quality! -- Anonymous Coward, Slashdot

If only indeed. You can help our brave cause by moderating this message up as often as possible. I recommend '+1, Underrated,' as that will protect your precious Karma in Metamoderation [] . Only then can we break through the glass ceiling of Homosexual Slashdot Culture. Is it any wonder that the new version of Slashcode has been christened 'Bender'???

If we can get just one of these postings up to at least '+1,' then it will be archived forever! Others will learn of our struggle, and join with us in our battle for freedom!

It's pathetic you've spent so much time writing this. -- Anonymous Coward, Slashdot

I am compelled to document the foulness and carnal depravity [] that is Linux, in order that we may prepare ourselves for the great holy war that is to follow. It is my solemn duty to peel back the foreskin of ignorance and apply the wire brush of enlightenment.

As with any great open-source project, you need someone asking this question, so I'll do it. When the hell is version 2.0 going to be ready?!?! -- Anonymous Coward, Slashdot

I could make an arrogant, childish comment along the lines of 'Every time someone asks for 2.0, I won't release it for another 24 hours,' but the truth of the matter is that I'm quite nervous of releasing a 'number two,' as I can guarantee some filthy shit-slurping Linux pervert would want to suck it straight out of my anus before I've even had chance to wipe.

I desperately want to suck your monolithic kernel, you sexy hunk, you. -- Anonymous Coward, Slashdot

I sincerely hope you're Natalie Portman [] .

Dude, nothing on slashdot larger than 3 paragraphs is worth reading. Try to distill the message, whatever it was, and maybe I'll read it. As it is, I have to much open source software to write to waste even 10 seconds of precious time. 10 seconds is all its gonna take M$ to whoop Linux's ass. Vigilence is the price of Free (as in libre -- from the fine, frou frou French language) Software. Hack on fellow geeks, and remember: Friday is Bouillabaisse day except for heathens who do not believe that Jesus died for their sins. Those godless, oil drench, bearded sexist clowns can pull grits from their pantaloons (another fine, fine French word) and eat that. Anyway, try to keep your message focused and concise. For concision is the soul of derision. Way. -- Anonymous Coward, Slashdot

What the fuck?

I've read your gay conspiracy post version 1.3.0 and I must say I'm impressed. In particular, I appreciate how you have managed to squeeze in a healthy dose of the latent homosexuality you gay-bashing homos [] tend to be full of. Thank you again. -- Anonymous Coward, Slashdot

Well bugger me!

ooooh honey. how insecure are you!!! wann a little massage from deare bruci. love you -- Anonymous Coward, Slashdot

Fuck right off!

IMPORTANT: This message needs to be heard (Not HURD [] , which is an acronym for 'Huge Unclean Rectal Dilator') across the whole community, so it has been released into the Public Domain [] . You know, that licence that we all had before those homoerotic crypto-fascists came out with the GPL [] (Gay Penetration License) that is no more than an excuse to see who's got the biggest feces-encrusted [] cock. I would have put this up on Freshmeat [] , but that name is known to be a euphemism for the tight rump of a young boy.

Come to think of it, the whole concept of 'Source Control' unnerves me, because it sounds a bit like 'Sauce Control,' which is a description of the homosexual [] practice of holding the base of the cock shaft tightly upon the point of ejaculation, thus causing a build up of semenal fluid that is only released upon entry into an incision made into the base of the receiver's scrotum. And 'Open Sauce' is the act of ejaculating into another mans face or perhaps a biscuit to be shared later. Obviously, 'Closed Sauce' is the only Christian thing to do, as evidenced by the fact that it is what Cathedrals are all about.

Contributors: (although not to the eternal game of 'soggy biscuit' that open 'sauce' development has become) Anonymous Coward, Anonymous Coward, phee, Anonymous Coward, mighty jebus, Anonymous Coward, Anonymous Coward, double_h, Anonymous Coward, Eimernase, Anonymous Coward, Anonymous Coward, Anonymous Coward, Anonymous Coward, Anonymous Coward, Anonymous Coward, Anonymous Coward, Anonymous Coward. Further contributions are welcome.

Current changes: This version sent to FreeWIPO [] by 'Bring BackATV' as plain text. Reformatted everything, added all links back in (that we could match from the previous version), many new ones (Slashbot bait links). Even more spelling fixed. Who wrote this thing, CmdrTaco himself?

Previous changes: Yet more changes added. Spelling fixed. Feedback added. Explanation of 'distro' system. 'Mount Point' syntax described. More filth regarding `man` and Slashdot. Yet more fucking spelling fixed. 'Fetchmail' uncovered further. More Slashbot baiting. Apache exposed. Distribution licence at foot of document.

ANUX -- A full Linux distribution... Up your ass!

Re:uhhh.... (1)

hedwards (940851) | more than 4 years ago | (#32869860)

I'd recommend against using any major currency then, probably go back to either gold or bartering. The US Federal Reserve "prints" money primarily by adding a fictitious amount of money to their computer systems, which is then available to lend to other banks. At no point does the money actually exist, but it counts towards inflation anyways. And yes, having people screw with that has the potential for enormous trouble should they get it wrong.

Wow, that looks entirely legit! (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32869156)

The Wikipedia article (beyond the fact that the article is on the most unreliable data source outside of a Soviet propaganda factory) is sourced entirely to This /. article is sourced entirely to Wikipedia and

So it's slashvertising AND garbage. Three cheers for kdawson.

Re:Wow, that looks entirely legit! (5, Funny)

Tisha_AH (600987) | more than 4 years ago | (#32869220)

Pshaw! The only true reliable source of information is the guy who appears on late night television with that goofy suit with $ signs all over it who talks about getting free money from the government.

It must work, look at how many politicians we have.

Compared to that guy, Wikipedia is still in diapers.

Re:Wow, that looks entirely legit! (1)

Sycraft-fu (314770) | more than 4 years ago | (#32869670)

I'm convinced you could abuse Wikipedia to invent something and get most people to think it was legit. Wikipedia's checking seems to be entirely based around if something is sourced, not the quality of the source. So you set up a website, maybe two, and put up whatever bullshit you want. From those websites you link to a blog to two to give them some credibility. You have a few blogs that go around in self referential circles as blogs like to do, a couple referencing a Wikipedia article. You then write the article, citing the websites.

You now have "proven" information according to many net types. The Wikipedia article checks out, it is fully sourced. Doing some back tracing the sites have to be legit, after all the reference some blogs, and those blogs link to a wiki on it! If you can then get someone like /. or what not to report on it, it'll be "fact" to many people. for that matter the sites can then reference the story as additional credibility.

A clever person who followed the whole chain would realize it was circular, but nobody is likely to do that. Also since you get a lot of circular crap in the blog world, it is even less likely to be noticed. Anyone who comes across the information you are claiming will run to Wikipedia to check it out, and Wikipedia will keep the article there as it is good according to their standards.

Maybe one of these days I'll try doing it.

Re:Wow, that looks entirely legit! (1)

HungryHobo (1314109) | more than 4 years ago | (#32869920)

alternatively you just get a job as a journalist, pull some "facts" out of your arse every now and then and include them in what you write.
Don't give any source.
in theory the paper you're writing for is supposed to try to avoid bullshit for the sake of their reputation but unless it's going to get them sued they won't give a shit.

or read wikipedia, include whatever you read in your articles and as a bonus someone can now cite your article as a source.

Shitty journalism is a far far bigger problem than bullshit on wikipedia.

To paraphrase Keef Richards... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32869170)

Be safe from the instability caused by fractional reserve banking and bad policies of central banks. The limited inflation of the Bitcoin system's money supply is distributed evenly (by CPU power) throughout the network, not monopolized by the banks.

Yeah, get back to me when I can pay my fucking rent with it!

/.ed already, FAQ at sourceforge (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32869182)

working link to Bitcoin Technical PDF: (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32869618)

Ummmmmmm (2, Insightful)

Immostlyharmless (1311531) | more than 4 years ago | (#32869212)

Does anyone understand this at all? It's slashdotted already so can someone explain what

nodes burn CPU cycles searching for bundles of coins, broadcasting their findings to the network.

means? This sounds like something I would do in an RPG? Where does it find these 'bundles of coins'? Am I just being obtuse about all of this? O_O

Re:Ummmmmmm (3, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32869362)

New currency can be generated by solving difficult math functions (cryptographic functions)

Since these functions take a certain amount of energy (electricity) to complete, the value of the currency is driven towards the price of electricity.

It's similar to mineral mining: on average you have to spend a certain amount of time and effort to mine a certain amount of gold, and this tends to set bounds on the value of the gold.

Re:Ummmmmmm (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32869708)

so they are kind of like carbon debits then.

Re:Ummmmmmm (2, Insightful)

noidentity (188756) | more than 4 years ago | (#32869584)

I love how the Wikipedia article just assumes you know what the hell this is or how it would serve as money. Unless this currency is like gold or silver where the quantity in existence is essentially fixed, I'm not interested, since it'll be subject to inflation, and thus price inflation. We already have tons of currencies to choose from if we want monetary inflation.

Re:Ummmmmmm (1)

hedwards (940851) | more than 4 years ago | (#32869902)

That's not entirely correct, close but not quite. You get inflation/deflation when the supply of money deviates from the amount of economic activity. Money is just a placeholder for the things that you can buy with it as it tends to be inconvenient to always be dealing in whole cows and hundreds of eggs to buy everything. So, you can indeed get a similar effect with gold or silver, it's just susceptible to other sources of manipulation such as the gold and silver taken out of circulation for technological products.

Re:Ummmmmmm (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32869982)

OK, what part of cryptographically fixed @ 21 million bitcoins don't you understand?

Re:Ummmmmmm (4, Insightful)

HungryHobo (1314109) | more than 4 years ago | (#32870008)

In practice the quantity of gold/silver/etc available is not fixed.

Tomorrow someone builds better mining equipment and suddenly there's 5 times as much available.

A ship loaded with a significant quantity sinks over the mid atlantic trench?
well in practice it has gone beyond where humans can practically access it and so might as well no longer exist.

Alternatively someone might build some kind of Von Neumann machine which can extract your precious metal from seawater or mine asteroids and suddenly the value of your precious metal would drop close to zero.

Whenever someone invents a cheaper way to mine gold you're going to experience price inflation as the gold in your safe becomes less valuable.

gold is only special to people who delude themselves that it's somehow special.
Food, clean water, tools, feminine hygiene products, useful information.
If you're convinced fiat currencies are going to collapse these are what you should be filling your underground bunker with, not some shiny metal which will only be worth anything if people believe it has any intrinsic value.

Re:Ummmmmmm (3, Interesting)

xaxa (988988) | more than 4 years ago | (#32869682)

I've installed the software (from Sourceforge) and I still don't really understand it.

I have an address to receive payments (1D3ojVLNgD7D5WEKdq37m291N3Cai5CHTU) but it seems I'll have to wait a while to generate a "coin" myself. When that's done I don't know what I'll do with it -- how could I spend it? Why would you accept it?

Re:Ummmmmmm (1)

14erCleaner (745600) | more than 4 years ago | (#32869786)

It's basically a decentralized barter exchange, using electronic signatures to validate the currency. I see no reason this would be preferable to any number of already-available systems for valuing goods (like, say, US dollars), unless you're an anti-government paranoid.

Re:Ummmmmmm (1)

hedwards (940851) | more than 4 years ago | (#32869910)

Because it's more convenient for international transactions. You have people swapping them across borders and only have to convert the money once, when one wishes to cash out. Rather than each and every time there's a transaction across currency types.

With Scale Will Come Gov Intervention (4, Insightful)

cmholm (69081) | more than 4 years ago | (#32869238)

As someone pointed out, this article is light enough on source material that it may count as more of a slashvertizement. That said, if Bitcoin, or any micropayment and/or e-cash plan scales beyond a certain level, it's gonna attract both criminals and government interest and intervention, much as age-old Islamic halawa [] got a lot more notice when used by gangs like Al-Qaeda.

Re:With Scale Will Come Gov Intervention (1)

sbayless (1310131) | more than 4 years ago | (#32869422)

There are other possible problems, aside from the legal ones. Don't get me wrong, this is a neat idea; the laissez-faire anarchist in me is salivating. But its not immediately clear if the claims these guys are making are valid (or even possible). One warning flag though: I can't help but notice their prediction of expected deflation (from the wiki article). Before you go invest real money in this (however it is one would go about doing that...), you'd better be sure this isn't a very clever pyramid scheme.

Re:With Scale Will Come Gov Intervention (1)

Threni (635302) | more than 4 years ago | (#32869460)

Exactly. In the UK, if you make money you have to pay Income or Capital Gains tax, depending on how it was `earned`. Something which part-time eBay sellers sometimes seem to forget.

Re:With Scale Will Come Gov Intervention (1)

hedwards (940851) | more than 4 years ago | (#32869918)

In the US, you have to pay income or capital gains on all income. Well subject to a few provisos. Doesn't matter whether it's gold, USD, CAD, eggs or just exchanged work, it still counts as income.

Re:With Scale Will Come Gov Intervention (1)

smash (1351) | more than 4 years ago | (#32869994)

If i buy something for $1000 new and sell on ebay for $900 used, i am not making money, and thus should not pay tax. I already paid tax when i received the original $1000 to buy the item with. You pay tax on PROFIT, not loss.

Slashdotted... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32869248)

Too bad, I really wanted to know what this was about.

soory does not make sense (2, Funny)

mjwalshe (1680392) | more than 4 years ago | (#32869252)

>>Analysis of energy usage indicates that the market value of Bitcoins is already above the value of the energy needed to generate them, indicating healthy demand.

This does not mean anything - it strikes me this is the internet version of the guy we used to have in the UK who walked up and down oxford street with a placard warning against the dangers of lust and passion caused by fish, meat, bird, cheese, egg, peas, beans, nuts and sitting,

Presumably later on they start talking about the Gold Standard, Jews and the Illuminati.

Back under your bridge! (1)

SteveFoerster (136027) | more than 4 years ago | (#32869784)

That's trollish. Many people favor a gold standard without being conspiracy theorists.

Inflation at the speed of Moore's Law (1)

Siker (851331) | more than 4 years ago | (#32869256)

The FAQ seems slashdotted, but if the currency is based on CPU time, inflation would not only be high (how many years between doubling of CPU capacity?) but also rather erratic. Every time Sony released a new 'super computer caliber' gaming station inflation would shoot up as the price of CPU time just went down.

Re:Inflation at the speed of Moore's Law (5, Informative)

BlueSTARS (1853516) | more than 4 years ago | (#32869406)

I've been involved with the Bitcoin project for a while, and there are steps in place to prevent this. Essentially, the network tries to maintain block generation at a rate of six blocks per hour (one every 10 minutes) by checking every 2856 blocks (nominally 2 weeks) if the rate was too high or too low. At that point, all nodes adjust their hash target such that it gets more or less difficult to generate blocks. The net result is that more nodes or faster nodes can only really influence the market for 2856 blocks. There is discussion about reducing this number to lower that time, as well. If you'd like to discuss this with some Bitcoin participants, drop by the IRC channel: #bitcoin-dev on Freenode. I'm Lachesis on IRC.

Spain 1-0 (1)

Singularity42 (1658297) | more than 4 years ago | (#32869268)


Value Estimation is Wonky (2, Interesting)

Cylix (55374) | more than 4 years ago | (#32869272)

A base value for bitcoins is assumed to be the energy used to create it. The system itself appears to be far more profitable when operating at am exchange entity or trader. ie, the ability to control the effective value of the coin in question. Which lends the whole process to feeling more like a pyramid scheme than anything else. Now, if you wanted a lossy system that was anonymous and had morally bankrupt exchange locations it would be useful anywhere an anonymous transaction is a must.

On the flip side, because wealth is always being generated for free, a purpose built rig which excels at generating coins more efficiently would essentially be a living cash machine. This would in effect mean that the coin itself has no actual value. It's worthless because it cannot be returned to the previous state. This is somewhat important to me when a system is based on the trade of goods.

In terms of actual exchange it introduces to much latency to ensure the transaction is actually valid. In terms of instant gratification the whole thing begins to break down.

The good news is that anybody is certainly free to use it. Unfortunately, because anyone can print money (even small amounts) I'm not going to be giving up any of my items today.

kdawson strikes again! (3, Insightful)

Jack9 (11421) | more than 4 years ago | (#32869280)

Could we just get a random reddit submitter instead? Please?

Re:kdawson strikes again! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32869344)


Re:kdawson strikes again! (2, Interesting)

Rick Richardson (87058) | more than 4 years ago | (#32869560)

Uncheck any author name to exclude their stories from your Slashdot homepage.

x CmdrTaco        kdawson       x samzenpus
x Soulskill     x StoneLion     x timothy

Re:kdawson strikes again! (0, Troll)

exley (221867) | more than 4 years ago | (#32869776)

I've thought about doing that many a time, but Slashdot just wouldn't feel like Slashdot to me anymore without one dedicated troll editor. I know you can make that case for (m)any other editors, but kdawson is by far the king of schlock on here.

Re:kdawson strikes again! (3, Interesting)

amirulbahr (1216502) | more than 4 years ago | (#32869908)

Any idea how to do this for the Slashdot RSS feed?

Fuck Allah!!! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32869294)

Islam is nothing more than an excuse to be a murderer and a tyrant. The followers of Islam are a blood thirsty bunch who are either unwitting slaves or ego maniacs who want to keep people repressed.

Fuck Mohammad, Fuck Allah, Fuck Islam!!!

And if you're a Muslim? FUCK YOU!!!

Re:Fuck Allah!!! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32869352)

Second that!

'And if you're a Muslim? FUCK YOU!!!'

Anonymous virtual currencies all die off (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32869358)

Seriously guys, it has been done to death hundreds of times.

They all died off. There's so many I don't even remember names.

Why did they die? Because whenever something like that reaches a meaningful size, something called "anti money laundering" kicks in.
This hits especially in payment processing. Companies are in practice prevented from processing anonymous payments. You cannot even go to a jewelry store with a suitcase with $20m in it and walk out of there with your pockets full of diamonds.

And if you have money to spend but nowhere that accepts it? Guess what, your money is worthless.

Bitcoin IRC (2, Interesting)

BlueSTARS (1853516) | more than 4 years ago | (#32869448)

The webmaster is resizing the host at Rackspace now. The site should be back up soon. Until then, feel free to come talk with the Bitcoin community about this on IRC: #bitcoin-dev on Freenode.

Paging Whoopi Goldberg (2, Informative)

YrWrstNtmr (564987) | more than 4 years ago | (#32869454)

Can we have another round of Flooz [] , please?

Still creating artificial scarcity? (5, Insightful)

lennier (44736) | more than 4 years ago | (#32869504)

So this system requires CPUs to burn scarce, real electricity in order to generate virtual electronic tokens whose only purpose is to simulate the scarcity of rare metals, so that we can continue to use the old 'exchange value' economic model in the realm of information where by definition, it does not apply.

This seems like basing an economy on burning one's food crops to prove wealth and using the ash to buy things. I'm sure it would 'work', for some definition of work, but it doesn't seem particularly... efficient. Or sensible. Granted, humans do indulge in self-destructive behaviour, but do we really have to port all our bad habits into the digital world?

Is there some actual upside to this system which I'm not getting?

Re:Still creating artificial scarcity? (1)

BitterOak (537666) | more than 4 years ago | (#32869628)

So this system requires CPUs to burn scarce, real electricity in order to generate virtual electronic tokens whose only purpose is to simulate the scarcity of rare metals, so that we can continue to use the old 'exchange value' economic model in the realm of information where by definition, it does not apply.

Not to mention that Moore's Law would cause runaway inflation. And wouldn't people with access to supercomputers (University profs and students) become disproportionately wealthy?

Re:Still creating artificial scarcity? (1)

smash (1351) | more than 4 years ago | (#32870014)

At 100% every 18 months, it will soon be less inflationary than the US government's fiscal policy (if not already)?

A step in a different direction (1)

OrangeTide (124937) | more than 4 years ago | (#32869676)

At least they aren't mining rare metals that make up less than 1% of the earth's surface, or cutting down trees and using a great deal of energy to pulp and dry them.

What would you suggest for an economic basis for universal exchange, if not paper or precious metals?

Re:A step in a different direction (1)

smash (1351) | more than 4 years ago | (#32870018)

getting rid of fractional reserve banking perhaps?

Re:Still creating artificial scarcity? (1)

MonChrMe (1849782) | more than 4 years ago | (#32869692)

If I were to base my entire understanding of the system on your post (read the Article? On Slashdot?) I'd imagine this is like Folding@Home, but you get paid for your machine time? Doesn't make sense on modern computers - when it finds its level it's unlikely that you'd receive as much as you spent on the additional power. But for those of us running older machines with poor power management, it makes more sense to run something like that in the background - we're using the electricity anyway, so may as well do something useful with it. I guess I should go read that article. :)

More information (5, Informative)

bencoder (1197139) | more than 4 years ago | (#32869536)

Since the site is down and the summary is light on information, let me try and summarise this a bit better, from what I've picked up, so I might be wrong on some of the details):

Nodes connect to each other in a P2P network.
The nodes perform hashing problems, attempting to find a number that hashes to a value with a certain number of 0's at the start (binary zero's, aka, the number has to be below a certain value)
The network assigns bitcoins to those nodes who have found solutions to the hashes.
After a certain amount of time the difficulty of finding the hashes increases(an extra 0 is added to the hash solution required)
This increase in difficulty continues until eventually there will be 21million bitcoins and no more can exist.

We are currently in the inflationary stage, so the supply of bitcoins is increasing. once all 21 million have been assigned, then it will become deflationary, as no new coins can ever be created and coins that are lost are lost forever.

bitcoins can be divided into 100 million pieces, so the limit of 21 million coins is not a major stumbling block.

Essentially it's a way to create a decentralised currency with a hard limit on how much is available, ensuring that it cannot be inflated by a central government simply printing more cash or adding some numbers to a computer system.

Re:More information (1)

fat_mike (71855) | more than 4 years ago | (#32869806)

I bet most central governments can do a better job than the answer to this question:

What's the current total amount of Bitcoins in existence?

"The number of blocks times the coin value of a block. The coin value is 50 bc per block for the first 210,000 blocks, 25 bc for the next 210,000 blocks, then 12.5 bc, 7.25 bc and so on. As of October 30th 2009, there are about 26,000 blocks in the block chain, which means 26,000 * 50 bc = 1,300,000 bitcoins in existence. You can see the up-to-date number of blocks in the status bar of the Bitcoin main window."

That was nine months ago. It hasn't been updated and what they're saying is "you'll only know once you download and install our software thus adding more coins".

Sniff, Sniff....I smell a pyramid scam.

Re:More information (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32869948)

So, what you're basically saying is that right now, there's a landrush where the available resources are being divided among the early adopters - and afterwards, they'll be the haves and everyone else will be the have-nots?

Why would I, as a prospective have-not, want to use this system? For that matter, what is it good for, anyway? Suppose I'm an artist (I actually draw occasionally in my spare time, so it's not that far-fetched an example) and I get commissioned by someone to do a picture. They want to pay me with this.

Should I accept? Why? What can I actually *do* with the money afterwards? If I take, say, Paypal, I actually end up with cash in my pocket (after paypal fees), and I can go to a store and buy something - food, gadgets, whatever. If I end up with bitcoins, what can I do? Pay other fools who were naive enough to accept this stuff?

If you can't byte it it isn't real. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32869570)

I'll stick to pigs as a unit of currency. Far more negotiable.

Awesome... (4, Funny)

thestudio_bob (894258) | more than 4 years ago | (#32869650)

Cool, I can say it will cost you "2 Bits" and people won't stare at me like I'm some sort of old geezer.

Re:Awesome... (1)

Stumbles (602007) | more than 4 years ago | (#32869740)

Wish I had mod points.

How's that for a disruptive technology? (2, Insightful)

exley (221867) | more than 4 years ago | (#32869782)

Oh that's right... It isn't. But hey, thanks for trying to post something all edgy or controversial or whatever the hell you think it is, kdawson.

How to become irrelevant (0, Offtopic)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 4 years ago | (#32869862)

Step 1. Create a new economic system only geeks will care about
Step 2. Support Windows only

Stone money (1)

leswt (1807216) | more than 4 years ago | (#32869882)

There is an interesting example of money that requires a lot of effort to create but is totally useless Google: yap island stone money Speaking of useless, prior to the 20th century, there was no practical use for gold
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?