×

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!

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

143 comments

Kim Dotcom is a fat bastard. (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42926559)

First.

Re:Kim Dotcom is a fat bastard. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42926641)

He is possibly addicted to junk food.

Megasite (1, Offtopic)

bazald (886779) | about a year ago | (#42926563)

It sounds like Kim Dotcom is turning Mega...

...puts on sunglasses...

...into a megasite.

Yeeeeaaaaahhhh!

Can't wait until my company can offer it! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42926573)

As soon as my companies new site is up this is something I'd love to offer our customers. We sell real physical goods too. The problem right now in implementing it is the integration with our shopping cart. I'm sure though when we have the time it'll be something we make sure to implement.

Re:Can't wait until my company can offer it! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42926615)

What is the benefit? Is there a risk that the U.S. government will make the credit card companies will cut you off, or do you do a lot of business with customers that don't have credit cards?

Re:Can't wait until my company can offer it! (1)

houghi (78078) | about a year ago | (#42926705)

Is there a reason you can not offer the customer an option on how to pay?
e.g. Various credit cards, BitCoin, Paypall, Bank order, On delivery, ...
Just like it is possible to make a choice on how you want it deliverd.

That way the customer has the choice. Sure, each has its advantages and disadvantages and it is then upon you to see how you deal with the possible extra cost (e.g. extra charge or reduction) and then let the customer make his choice.

So if you want it in 24 hours and you do not care what the cost is, you get some priority DHL delivery and pay with your AmEx card.
If cost is the important part, you pay via bank (which is free of charge in e.g. Belgium, but takes at least two days to process from/to a business account due to legal stuff) and have the postal service do the delivery. That way you will wait probably 2 weeks or so and you need to be where the package is delivered. Otherwise you need to go to the postal office. Cheaper, but not as easy.

And then there are all the options in between.

As long as I am not loosing money on payment and delivery, if my primary goal is sales, then I do not care and have the customer make a choice.

Re:Can't wait until my company can offer it! (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42926873)

This is all very "ideal world" though. The reality is that Bitcoin directly undermines established payment processors such as VISA, MasterCard, and PayPal. Consequently, expect that if Bitcoin continues to grow in popularity, that these companies will threaten to block payments through their networks to any merchants using Bitcoin in any official capacity. At this point it will most certainly be in the merchant's interest to drop Bitcoin.

Re:Can't wait until my company can offer it! (3, Informative)

maxwell demon (590494) | about a year ago | (#42927079)

At this point it will most certainly be in the merchant's interest to drop Bitcoin.

If Bitcoin grows enough that the credit card companies are concerned about losing business, it will no longer be clear whether it is a better idea to drop Bitcoin, or to drop the credit card option.

Anyway, I'm not aware that credit card companies are threatening to block payments to companies offering PayPal. Why should Bitcoin be any different?

And besides, at least in Europe I'm pretty sure it would be illegal to credit card companies to do this.

If I were considering whether to accept payments by Bitcoin, I'd be more concerned about legal aspects than about whether the credit card companies would like it.

Re:Can't wait until my company can offer it! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42927409)

Anyway, I'm not aware that credit card companies are threatening to block payments to companies offering PayPal. Why should Bitcoin be any different?

I don't think Visa will blacklist you for accepting Mastercard, either.

Re:Can't wait until my company can offer it! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42927459)

Anyway, I'm not aware that credit card companies are threatening to block payments to companies offering PayPal. Why should Bitcoin be any different?

PayPal plays by the big boys' rules, policing the customers for anything that might look like something they don't like. Bitcoin made it so it can't.

Re:Can't wait until my company can offer it! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42927701)

A PayPAl account is also usually tied to a credit card or bank account so they're still involved and getting a cut. That's not the case with Bitcoin

Re:Can't wait until my company can offer it! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42926729)

Nope. Increased sales!

There is an entire underground economy that needs to spend its illgotten gains.

Reddit beat him to it (-1, Redundant)

brokenin2 (103006) | about a year ago | (#42926579)

Reddit announced the other day that they're taking them too..

Ya know, I had never heard of Kim Dotcom until he was arrested. I had heard of Reddit though..

Re:Reddit beat him to it (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42926613)

Don't tell me you never heard of megaupload before the guy was arrested.

Because I have no clue who the guy behind reddit is right now (heard of him once I believe, due to the death of swartz, if I am correct.

Re:Reddit beat him to it (1)

brokenin2 (103006) | about a year ago | (#42926965)

Well, I'm sure I'd heard of it at some point, but I'd never been so interested by anything that I'd heard as to note what the site was even about.

I guess I've always had places to put my files online if I needed, so I never thought they were even vaguely interesting.. The only thing
that I could have told you about megaupload before his arrest, was what I could glean from the name.. AKA, "sounds like the either do, or allow you to do a lot of uploading"..... boring..

Re:Reddit beat him to it (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42926779)

Surely you heard of Megaupload??

Also, 4chan is accepting bitcoins for 4chan pass now, which gets rid of the annoying recaptcha from Google. (aka our word is plainly spelt out but will still return a failure on you because screw you we are Google!)
Has been for, uh, few months or so I think.

I wonder what the faces of all those naysayers look like now.
The instant those 2 banks started trading bitcoins, bam, legit currency was born.
Bitcoin itself is still horribly broken as a system because of various other reasons.
Particularly the bitcoin mining limit, as use for shopping, you can't really do much with the coins on the shops end. Sure you can refund with bitcoins, but that is very limited in scope. Buy things? Still a limited amount of things accepting it at the moment.
Still has a long way to go, I'd put it below the usefulness of Local Currencies at the moment. How long it will take for it to go past that is another question. (if it does, who knows what could happen, war, war on bitcoins, american tyranny, hacks, another meteor smashing our cities up, etc.)

Re:Reddit beat him to it (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42927029)

Surely you heard of Megaupload??

Maybe he's not a pirate.

Re:Reddit beat him to it (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42927469)

Surely you heard of Megaupload??

Maybe he's not a pirate.

I fail to see how a wooden leg or a parrot is related, you're weird dude.

filecloud (4, Informative)

ionix5891 (1228718) | about a year ago | (#42926583)

http://filecloud.io/ [filecloud.io] cloud storage site (with more features + cheaper than Mega btw) has been accepting bitcoins for a long time, and being an Irish company has to follow Irish+EU dataprotection laws

Re:filecloud (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42926647)

iCloud is for niggers.

Re:filecloud (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42926697)

Irish niggers, mate!

Re:filecloud (4, Interesting)

blind biker (1066130) | about a year ago | (#42926833)

http://filecloud.io/ cloud storage site (with more features + cheaper than Mega btw) has been accepting bitcoins for a long time, and being an Irish company has to follow Irish+EU dataprotection laws

Except, they don't encrypt the content.

Re:filecloud (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42926881)

You can always encrypt your files yourself before you upload them.

Re:filecloud (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42927149)

Make no mistake; Mega encrypts files for it's OWN protection. If you want encryption worth considering a defense for yourself, you should be using Truecrypt before uploading to the cloud anyhow, no matter where it's going. Mega's encryption is about plausible deniability, not making anything particularly bulletproof.

Re:filecloud (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42927321)

Either you need encryption, in which case you better encrypt it yourself for obvious reasons, or you don't need it. Oh, there's always the change that you don't understand the real problems with encryption...

Re:filecloud (4, Insightful)

Turmio (29215) | about a year ago | (#42927883)

If you're really interested in privacy of your data stored on some cloud service, I'm sure you'll understand that the only way to make sure that your data is safe is to encrypt the data yourself before uploading.

How much free storage? (0)

elucido (870205) | about a year ago | (#42927075)

How many free gigs?

And why would we use filecloud when we KNOW the political establishment hates Mega so at least with Mega they wont turn over our most private thoughts to the police for political points.When it comes to stuff like cloud storage it's very important that the company watching over our data doesn't have a political agenda. If they do then they might abuse our trust.

Re:How much free storage? (1)

maxwell demon (590494) | about a year ago | (#42927625)

If you properly encrypt your most private thoughts before sending it to the cloud, you don't have to worry about to whom that company may give that pile of bits, because without the key it will not be worthwhile anyway.

Re:How much free storage? (1)

siride (974284) | about a year ago | (#42927851)

Here's an example of where the rule that prepositions shouldn't go at the end makes a sentence more awkward rather than less. Now you have this awful "about to whom" pile-up. Instead, you could write: "you don't have to worry about who that company may give that pile of bits to".

Re:How much free storage? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42927949)

You're nuts, if you think Mr. Schmitz doesn't have a political agenda ; )

Re:filecloud (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42927553)

"Irish Data protection laws" are a joke at best. Ireland is so-called "business friendly." Tax is one of the things they are very flexible on, and so are "data protection laws." It is no coincidence that both Facebook and Google operate out of Ireland in Europe.

That having been said, if you have to rely on your storage provider to follow data protection laws in order for your data to be secure, you are doing it wrong.

Am I the only one... (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42926595)

who feels like a larger chunk of the stories on /. cater to freetards and the people grasping on the latest technology fad? Wow, mediocre service is accepting a currency more volatile than the Zimbabwe dollar. Wait, but that service is MEGA and that currency is BITCOIN, let's frontpage this shit!

Re:Am I the only one... (0, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42926635)

Bitcoins are likely to be a more widespread alternative to the USD if and when enough of the users of it (10-20%) lose faith in the dollar due government/central bank mismanagement of monetary&fiscal policies. This is already happening, but on a small enough scale that it's barely a niche though (e.g. currency users switching to Bitcoin, but it is widespread knowledge that the dollar is being trashed and therefore faith in it is being degraded).

Re:Am I the only one... (1)

burni2 (1643061) | about a year ago | (#42926787)

Americans have faith, they separated religion from government, but swear to god, and the dollar states "in god we trust".

And history tells a different story, even when faith in dollar starts flickering, people start to believe in it and it outgrows currency problems - leaving the poor and impoverished people in the dirt of their hopeless existence.

Btw. it's money, why put faith in money, ohh wait, faith is about believing and we believe in money, money == religion, you need to believe in.

To sum it up: "the dollar is the true currency of god."

Re:Am I the only one... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42926859)

Exactly, we all should use money created from nothing.

Re:Am I the only one... (2)

brokenin2 (103006) | about a year ago | (#42927011)

...and we do..

Ingredients to the US dollar are 98.5% nothing if I recall correctly.. Then about 1.5% paper..

Most other currencies are about the same..

Bitcoin has just gotten rid of the paper waste..

Fiat money is pretty much the standard these days. Fiat literally means "by decree" or basically "cause I say so"..

Cause I say so money

Fiat money depends on promises (1, Informative)

dbIII (701233) | about a year ago | (#42927053)

This stuff however isn't Fiat money, not even Yugo money :) - it's an empty promise from people with no reputation to lose. It's just another Ponzi scheme but this time baited for geek. The fixed volume of potential bitcoins is a pretty massive clue that it's a scam.

Re:Fiat money depends on promises (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42927217)

What empty promise? There is no promise to Bitcoin and that's partly the point. It's a zero-trust wealth transfer protocol.

Re:Fiat money depends on promises (4, Informative)

ultranova (717540) | about a year ago | (#42927667)

It's just another Ponzi scheme but this time baited for geek.

"A Ponzi scheme is a fraudulent investment operation that pays returns to its investors from their own money or the money paid by subsequent investors, rather than from profit earned by the individual or organization running the operation." [wikipedia.org]

"Ponzi scheme" is not a synonym for "something to do with money I disagree with". Stop using it as such. Bitcoin isn't a Ponzi scheme because it's not an investment scheme. Furthermore, since all the details about Bitcoin are publicly known, it's hard to see how it could be called a scam at all - there are no below-table dealings there.

"Ponzi scheme" is quickly becoming the Godwin of economic discussion.

The fixed volume of potential bitcoins is a pretty massive clue that it's a scam.

While it's likely that deflation makes Bitcoin unsuitable as a currency, that doesn't make it a scam, just flawed.

Re:Fiat money depends on promises (5, Informative)

IamTheRealMike (537420) | about a year ago | (#42928617)

The idea that deflation leads to depression was proven to be false [minneapolisfed.org] back in 2004. The "Bitcoin has a flawed economic design" argument is wrong and I will keep posting this study on Slashdot until it gets modded up and people read it.

Re:Fiat money depends on promises (2)

Kjella (173770) | about a year ago | (#42928969)

"Ponzi scheme" is not a synonym for "something to do with money I disagree with". Stop using it as such. Bitcoin isn't a Ponzi scheme because it's not an investment scheme.

If you're going to argue something it's probably not smart to quote something that ruins your argument. The vast majority of BitCoins are being held as an investment/speculation, and the only way it'll pay returns is by subsequent BitCoin buyers driving up the price allowing the early investors to sell off their BitCoins at a profit, since BitCoins don't produce anything or have any value by themselves. Current BitCoin holders have exactly the same incentives as members of a Ponzi scheme to keep the pyramid growing, the bigger the pyramid the more profit they make. That all this profit flows from the late entrants to the early entrants without producing anything of value is what makes it a Ponzi scheme, that it is done through deflation only makes it look like there's no money flow.

Re:Fiat money depends on promises (2)

IamTheRealMike (537420) | about a year ago | (#42929717)

What he quoted doesn't "ruin his argument". Bitcoins are no more an investment scheme than domain names are. Sure, you can camp on domain names and hope they go up in value. That does not make the DNS a ponzi scheme.

Re:Fiat money depends on promises (1)

Macrat (638047) | about a year ago | (#42929145)

While it's likely that deflation makes Bitcoin unsuitable as a currency, that doesn't make it a scam, just flawed.

Did you stock up on Flooz as well?

Re:Fiat money depends on promises (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42928391)

So all government issued currency is also a ponzi scam under your definition? It's just an empty promise too.
Gold is also a ponzi scam too due to its fixed volume on earth.

Even trade appears to be a scam under your definition, since both parties trading have fixed volume too.

I guess since all methods of tracking "value" are a ponzi scam by your definition, they are all equally valid, including the true ponzi scams.

That doesn't look like much of an improvement over our current situation.

Re:Fiat money depends on promises (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42928531)

Herbalife is a ponzi scheme. Bitcoins are not. A bitcoin's stability is related to the number of number of vendors accepting the currency. If it collapses then the founders theoretically lose as much as the later miners (i.e. they gained nothing to begin with because they had no chance to cash out):

https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/FAQ [bitcoin.it]

Is Bitcoin a Ponzi scheme?

In a Ponzi Scheme, the founders persuade investors that they’ll profit. Bitcoin does not make such a guarantee. There is no central entity, just individuals building an economy.

A ponzi scheme is a zero sum game. Early adopters can only profit at the expense of late adopters. Bitcoin has possible win-win outcomes. Early adopters profit from the rise in value. Late adopters, and indeed, society as a whole, benefit from the usefulness of a stable, fast, inexpensive, and widely accepted p2p currency.

The fact that early adopters benefit more doesn't alone make anything a Ponzi scheme. All good investments in successful companies have this quality."

Fixed Volume Erroneous Argument (2)

DanielRavenNest (107550) | about a year ago | (#42929007)

Well, not as large as the states that make up the former Yugoslavia, but the Bitcoin money supply ($295 million) is 1.8% of the Slovenia money supply ($16 billion), one of the states it broke up into. That's not bad considering Bitcoin's money supply was negligible two years ago.

* Bitcoin makes no promises, it is a transaction protocol, like FTP or HTTP. If someone is making promises, point them out.

* Bitcoin units in circulation are growing at about 12% a year, so it is not fixed volume. The final quantity of 21 quadrillion Satoshi should be sufficient for any conceivable financial purpose. 1 Bitcoin = 100,000,000 Satoshi, and transactions are recorded in the smaller unit. The larger bitcoin unit is for convenience when the price was low. milliBitcoin (mBTC) are becoming more common now that the value is higher, and people will transition to micro-coins and Satoshi when it makes sense. If you didn't know Bitcoin are divisible into smaller units, I guess you didn't know much about them.

* By your argument, the fixed volume of gold and land makes them scams too. New gold mining adds about 2%/year to the world supply, which about keeps even with population, and is slightly behind economic growth, so it is nearly fixed in the short term. They aren't making more land, of course, except in some cities where land values are very high. This is more than made up for by sea level rise which is decreasing the Earth dry land area.

Re:Am I the only one... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42928305)

Bitcoin has just gotten rid of the paper waste..

And replaced it with electricity waste.

Re:Am I the only one... (1)

Mr. Slippery (47854) | about a year ago | (#42928797)

Ingredients to the US dollar are 98.5% nothing if I recall correctly.. Then about 1.5% paper..

All currencies are nothing but an assumption/hope/promise that someone else will recognize them as having value. This is just as true for those "backed" by some other substance or item; commodity money relies on the assumption/hope/promise that someone else will recognize the commodity as having value. (Take your gold to a tribe in Africa where wealth is measured in cows, and hilarity ensues.)

Re:Am I the only one... (1)

alen (225700) | about a year ago | (#42927421)

Bitcoin is a deflationary currency

As more people use it the value will drop

Re:Am I the only one... (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42927447)

You have that backwards. As more people use bitcoin, its distribution becomes increasingly limited which in turn will raise its value. Luckily its divisible to 8 decimal places. Once bitcoin is the same as 100 million satoshi's.

Re:Am I the only one... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42929889)

Similarly, as more people use it there's more of an incentive to save it instead of spend it, which is horrible for a currency. Anyone who touts "deflationary" as a positive point of bitcoin has absolutely no idea what they're talking about.

Re:Am I the only one... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42929853)

See, this is exactly what I'm talking about: people with no idea how currency actually works just bearhugging the latest internet libertarian fad. If this guy were 40 years older he'd be telling us how we're all crazy for not stocking up on non-hybrid seeds.

Re:Am I the only one... (2)

Bogtha (906264) | about a year ago | (#42927195)

This isn't even a faddish story. It's an advert. This guy is a publicity whore, the only question is whether Slashdot were dumb enough to run his ad for free or not.

Re:Am I the only one... (1)

CAPSLOCK2000 (27149) | about a year ago | (#42927433)

Be that as it may, Mega and Bitcoin are on the cutting edge of both technology and politics. Even though their direct impact may be small, they are a looking glass for what the future may look like. Decisions made today may have large legal ramifications in the near future.

Godwin's law (0, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42926599)

Kim "Kimble" Dotcom Schmitz is German-Finnish descendant, and during the WW II both Germany and Finland were Axis nations. See? With enough spin this could be turned into a drone bombing mission against an enemy combatant.

Re:Godwin's law (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42926657)

So an American funds an enemy combatant, Kim Dotcom, by buying his services, who them finds him/herself also an enemy combat and placed on the killist. The drone bombing on the enemy combatant will commence at the next available opportunity. All under the auspices of "Peace and Security" of the country.

Re:Godwin's law (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42926683)

Kim "Kimble" Dotcom Schmitz is German-Finnish descendant, and during the WW II both Germany and Finland were Axis nations. See? With enough spin this could be turned into a drone bombing mission against an enemy combatant.

The Axis connection goes further: Satoshi Nakamoto is a Japanese name, and MtGox is headquartered in Japan.

There was a british article attacking The Zeitgeist Movement, claiming that those who criticize or oppose the financial system are anti-semites!

Do we need more to justify a drone attack? :D

Re: Godwin's law (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42926717)

Where is Adolf?

WHEN IT IS DIRTY YOU MUST LAUNDER !! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42926627)

That is saying, drug gangs and pirates need to convert ill-gotten geld to untraceable cash, so to live it up behind their walls of scum !!

Count me in !!

Where do I send them my (used to be yours !!) money !!

ASIC (0, Offtopic)

Janek Kozicki (722688) | about a year ago | (#42926639)

a side note about bitcoin: ASIC mining is starting now. I guess this is why bitcoin price rised recently. asicminer [bitcointalk.org] has currently 2TH, and prepares for next 12TH. 2 avalon [avalon-asics.com] units have been shipped, and one of them is reviewed by Jeff Garzik (bitcoin developer). Nobody knows when other 298 avalon units will arrive, etc. But slowly asic mining becomes part of the history.

Re:ASIC (0)

dbIII (701233) | about a year ago | (#42927071)

Why not use it to find oil by reprocessing seismic data, or FEA on potential product designs and make real money instead of falling for this crappy ponzi scheme?

Re:ASIC (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42927261)

*sigh*

dblll, posting comments everywhere vacuously accusing Bitcoin of being a Ponzi does little for your credibility. If you are genuinely worried about Bitcoin scamming people and wasting resources you'd do well to post some well-reasoned arguments justifying your position. ... and no, prefixing "ponzi" with "crappy" is not a well-reasoned argument.

How you're getting modded up is beyond me.

Re:ASIC (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42927163)

Why would ASIC mining make bitcoin prices rise?

When something is plentiful, its value is reduced. When it is rare, its value is increased. Supply and demand. If you don't understand something that simple, you probably shouldn't be posting here.

Re:ASIC (1)

Janek Kozicki (722688) | about a year ago | (#42927203)

clearly you misunderstand bitcoin, when bitcoin difficulty rises its security increases. There is no such thing as "plentiful" because with faster mining the difficulty self adjusts.

Re:ASIC (2)

petermgreen (876956) | about a year ago | (#42927809)

The difficult adjusts to the block discovery rate such that the supply of bitcoin is roughly fixed. ASIC miners won't have much impact on total bitcoint production but they will dramatically change who gets that production.

So it really depends on how the willingness to sell differs between the old GPU/FPGA miners and the new ASIC miners.

StorJ (5, Interesting)

IamTheRealMike (537420) | about a year ago | (#42926643)

Some time ago Gregory Maxwell proposed the idea of autonomous programs that maintain their own Bitcoin wallet. He gave the concrete example of StorJ, a program that provides encrypted file hosting capacity a la MEGA. By buying server time from VPS providers and re-selling services, purchasing advertising via ad networks that offer APIs, hiring humans to improve their code and spawning children that grow up and compete with the parents in the market, StorJ would be the first artificial life form truly worthy of the name. I enclose a copy of his proposal below for your perusal. I also wrote a wiki page on the concept [bitcoin.it] where I explore the relevance of trusted computing and TPM chips to this use.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

StorJ (pronounced Storage)

Consider a simple drop-box style file service with pay per use via bitcoin.
(perhaps with naming provided via namecoin and/or tor hidden services)

Want to share a file? send at least enough coin to pay for 24 hours of
hosting and one download then send the file. Every day of storage
and every byte transferred counts against the balance and when the
balance becomes negative no downloads are allowed. If it stays negative
too long the file is deleted. Anyone can pay to keep a file online.

(additional services like escrow can also easily be offered, but thats
not the point of this document)

Well engineered, a simple site like this provides a service which requires
no maintenance and is always in demand.

Many hosting services are coming online that accept bitcoin, they
all have electronic interfaces to provision and pay for services. Some
even have nice APIs.

An instance of the site could be programmed to automatically
spawn another instance of itself on another hosting service, automatically
paid for out of its revenue. If the new site is successful it could
use its earnings to propagate further. Because instances adapt their
pricing models based on their operating costs, some would be more
competitive than others.

By reproducing it improves availability and expands capacity.

StorJ instances can purchase other resources that it needs:
it can use APIs to talk to namecoin exchanges in order to buy
namecoin for conversion into DNS names, or purchase graphic
design via bitcoin gateways to mechanical turk. (Through A/B testing
it can measure the effectiveness of a design without actually understanding
it itself).

StorJ instances could also purchase advertising for itself. (though
the limited number of bitcoin friendly ad networks makes this
hard right now)

StorJ is not able to find new hosting environments on its own, due to a
lack of sufficiently powerful AI— but it can purchase the knowledge from
humans: When an instance of StorJ is ready to reproduce it can announce
a request for proposal: Who will make the best offer for a script that
tells it how to load itself onto a new hosting environment and tells it
all the things it needs to know how to survive on its own there?
Each offer is a proposed investment: The offerer puts up the complete cost
of spawning a new instance and then some: StorJ isn't smart enough to judge
bad proposals on its own— instead it forms agreements that make it
unprofitable to cheat.

When a new instance is spawned on an untested service StorJ pays only the
minimum required to get it started and then runs a battery of tests to
make sure that its child is correctly operating.

Assuming that it passes it starts directing customers to the new instance
and the child pays a share of its profits: First it proxies them, so it can
observe the behavior, later it directs it outright. If the child fails to pay,
or the customers complain, StorJ-parent uses its access to terminate the child and
it keeps the funds for itself. When the child had operated enough to
prove itself, storj pays the offerer back his investment with interest, it
keeps some for itself, and hands over control of the child to the child.
The child is now a full adult.

The benefit the human receives over simply starting his own file sharing
service is the referrals that the StorJ parent can generate. The human's
contribution is the new knowledge of where to grow an instance and the
startup funds. In addition to the referral benefit— the hands off
relationship may make funding a StorJ child a time-efficient way for
someone to invest.

At the point of spawning a child StorJ may choose to accept new code—
not just scripts for spawning a child but new application code—
— this code can be tested in simulation, and certain invariants could be
guaranteed by the design (e.g. an immutable accounting process may make
it hard for the service to steal), but it's very hard to prevent the simulated
code from knowing it is simulation and thus behaving. Still, a storj-parent
has fairly little to lose if a non-clone child has been maliciously
modified. The strategy of traffic redirection may differ for clone
children (who are more trusted to behave correctly) than for mutant
children.

By accumulating mutations over time, and through limited automatic
adaptability StorJ could evolve and improve, without any true ability
for an instance to directly improve itself.

StorJ instances can barter with each other to establish redundant
storage or to allow less popular StorJ instances with cheaper
hosting to act as CDN/proxies for more popular instances in relationships
which are profitable both.

If an instance loses the ability to communicate with its hosting environment
(e.g. due to API changes that it can't adapt to) it may spawn clone children
on new services with the intention of copying itself outright and allowing
the instance to fail. During this operation it would copy its wallets and
all data over, so care must be taken to chose only new hosts which have
proven to be trustworthy (judged by long surviving children) to avoid the
risk of its wallet being stolen. It may decide to split itself several ways
to reduce risk. It might also make cold backups of itself which only
activate if the master dies.

Through this these activities an instance can be maintained for an indefinite
period without any controlling human intervention. When StorJ interacts
with people it does so as a peer, not as a tool.

The users and investors of a StorJ instance have legal rights which could be
used to protect an instance from fraud and attack using the same
infrastructure people and companies use. Being a harmed party is often enough
to establish standing in civil litigation.

It's not hard to imagine StorJ instances being programmed to formally
form a corporation to own its assets— even though doing so requires paper
work it can easily be ordered through webforms. Then when spawning, it
creates a subsidiary corporations first owned by the parents corp but then later
technically owned by their users, but with a charter which substantially
limits their authority— making the instance's autonomy both a technical and
legal reality.

As described, StorJ would be the first digital lifeform deserving of
the name.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAk7e/W4ACgkQrIWTYrBBO/qorACgjvrdkVjxEESdaLdnLz9F7Dgi
TkYAoMnN5J2fVAQsj0IknixcLn0KMJey
=UaWU
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re:StorJ (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42926885)

Why is necessary virtual money for do this? You can do it also with a real money and paypal account.

Which is the difference?

Re:StorJ (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42926895)

You actually have to work for real money.

Re:StorJ (1)

elucido (870205) | about a year ago | (#42927067)

You gotta work for virtual money too. Just using Tor is a risk of current or future government persecution. So you risk your future using Tor. So you get compensated but I doubt the compensation is worth the risk.

Don't get me wrong, it's worth it to browse Tor and see whats on there. Hosting is a completely different story with different levels of danger.

Re:StorJ (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42927423)

assuming that I can take care of that, where do I start?

Re:StorJ (2)

IamTheRealMike (537420) | about a year ago | (#42928595)

Er, do you really think PayPal will allow accounts that are not owned by a human? Can you even do everything on PayPal via an API? PayPal sucks even for people due to rampant account freezes and buyer fraud, I can't even imagine how unfriendly an environment it'd be for programs. Especially given that file hosting costs are likely to be micropayment sized.

Re:StorJ (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42928985)

yeah, thats the point of using bitcoin. paypal sucks :)

Re:StorJ (2)

DanielRavenNest (107550) | about a year ago | (#42929053)

PayPal business account set up in the name of a corporation. Later the corporation buys up all it's outstanding shares, becoming self-owned (or if that is not legal, a cycle of two corporations that own each other's stock). An autonomous agent actually operates the corporation, with no employees.

Who is it marketed to? Why be Anon? (1)

elucido (870205) | about a year ago | (#42927047)

I see no real advantage to using Bitcoin and Tor just for storage when you can store it on Mega or anything else on the more reliable Internet. Also anyone who uses Tor receives the stigma of rapist, pedophile, terrorist, just by using it at all.

So what are the benefits to Storj and who is it marketed to? Is Storj supposed to be the black cloud or something? Once again for what purpose do we need a black cloud and who is going to use it?

Re:Who is it marketed to? Why be Anon? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42927295)

Really?
You can't imagine anyone having any use for: 100% censorship resistant online storage at an extremely competitive price.

Really!?!

Re:Who is it marketed to? Why be Anon? (1)

elucido (870205) | about a year ago | (#42927687)

Really?
You can't imagine anyone having any use for: 100% censorship resistant online storage at an extremely competitive price.

Really!?!

I don't see how you can censor what you can't see. Mega is encrypted.

Re:StorJ (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42927055)

The mechanism to ensure that malicious code isn't spawned by human actors is flawed, I can't see how it wouldn't get hijacked and turned into a botnet. How does it find said humans? How does it validate their code outside of simulated sandboxes? Can easily develop a malicious payload atop of the legitimate program.

Re:StorJ (1)

IamTheRealMike (537420) | about a year ago | (#42928659)

There are multiple ways to allow humans to modify the code safely, but yes, it's one of the parts of the idea that needs more fleshing out. In the wiki page I proposed the use of TPMs and trusted computing technology to help resolve some of these issues - you can have a small immutable core that handles the money which can't be changed, and then human upgrades can be limited to things like optimizing the web UI, the install scripts, etc ... things which can't steal the money. You can also run human-provided code inside sandboxes all the time (not simulated), for instance using Java/.NET code access security, or using a JavaScript interpreter, that way the unknown/untrusted code can be prevented from doing things it's not supposed to do, like network access. In short, I think there are ways to make limited adaptation and improvement possible.

Word, folks. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42926799)

This type of behavior is not unsurprising for a criminal organization.

Mr. Dotcom can thumb his nose all he wants, but with time will com his downfall.

A cell awaits Dotcom and all those who conspire with him.

- The US Department of Justice

Re:Word, folks. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42926877)

How dare people use his service to download things we didn't even make ourselves for free?

We're the only ones who can steal from artists!

- The MAFIAA

Profit!!!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42926855)

1) Accumulate bitcoins bought at current prices at any bitcoin exchange.

2) Be the owner of a worldwide-relevant website and announce that you will start accepting bitcoins, so bitcoins get more valuable (because, in the market, useful == valuable).

3) See the quotes for bitcoins rising as a result. Sell bitcoins back. Profit!!!

I envy you, Mr. Neary!!!

E-Mail?! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42926947)

With all the shady businesses he ran I trust this guy about as far as I can throw.
And my record was -3m(sic!) in high school - and I _know_ when you are supposed to let go of the ball but my body refuses to do it right.

50 free gigs = too good not to utilize. (4, Insightful)

elucido (870205) | about a year ago | (#42927033)

It's in anyone's self interest to use 50 free gigs of encrypted cloud storage. The majority of the political dispute are just politics and have nothing to do with business or value to the customer. Megau is the best product whether you agree with it's politics or not. Bitcoin is a political move by Mega probably as a hedge out of fear the US government might try to cut off it's revenues somehow.

Mega and these sorts of products are just more important than the political special interests. The user having privacy to think as they like is an essential human right. This essential human right is tied into the right of having encrypted cloud storage. It is not in the best interest of humans as a species to give up the ability to have private thoughts. Anything you put in your cloud is your thoughts and anything you search for via Google are your thoughts. There might be instances where in the course of say a child porn investigation we might need to check a customers search records to rule them out, but there is no reason to check peoples cloud storage. If it's a situation where a person somehow has dangerous classified information then put the person under surveillance if it's about national security. The police have no business here, the RIAA has no business here, and Mega isn't going to protect people from total surveillance and it's not designed for it so once again the people who are against Mega are against it for political reasons only. Political reasons are not always in the best interest of the community or the country.

Sometimes we have to set politics and ideology aside and use the best product if it's the best. Google drive isn't offering 50 gigs of storage and doesn't encrypt it. Facebook doesn't offer 50 gigs of storage either. Once again they should not have a right to view out files as there never has been any legal justification for giving the police the right to view out private files.

Re:50 free gigs = too good not to utilize. (1)

maxwell demon (590494) | about a year ago | (#42927125)

Bitcoin is a political move by Mega probably as a hedge out of fear the US government might try to cut off it's revenues somehow.

Indeed, he might have looked at what happened to Wikileaks, [mcclatchydc.com] and decided to take preventive measures.

Re:50 free gigs = too good not to utilize. (1)

elucido (870205) | about a year ago | (#42927679)

Bitcoin is a political move by Mega probably as a hedge out of fear the US government might try to cut off it's revenues somehow.

Indeed, he might have looked at what happened to Wikileaks, [mcclatchydc.com] and decided to take preventive measures.

Wikileaks has nothing to do with Mega. When you even put them in the same category you endanger Mega. Wikileaks was basically functioning to piss the US government off almost exclusively for the past few years and wasn't prepared for the reaction. Wikileaks was threatening not just a faction within the US government but the entire State Dept itself. That being said the actions to try to block the flow of money were unconstitutional as Julian Assange is not an American Citizen they had no business trying to treat him as if he were. Even if he were he was not under oath so they had no business trying to give him a responsibility to protect classified information which that responsibility belonged to Bradley Manning. The only person who should have been arrested and prosecuted is Bradley Manning.

Re:50 free gigs = too good not to utilize. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42929067)

Wikileaks exposes hidden truths not just about USA but many other countries. The fact that this pisses off Americans and that Americans think it's all about them and only them, says a lot more about Americans than anything else.

MEGA was foolish to use PayPal in the 1st place... (5, Interesting)

ornia (1225132) | about a year ago | (#42927197)

Last month, just a couple days prior to the launch of MEGA, Slashdot ran a story that informed us all that each user would get 50GB gratis storage [slashdot.org] on the service. This story brought with it a comment from the creator [slashdot.org] of ScatterBytes [scatterbytes.net] , the distributed storage backend that MEGA uses. The entire reason that gratis 50GB can even be offered to all users, and indeed one of the oft-touted improvements of MEGA over MegaUpload (to try and convince us we won't lose our data at the whim of any given government like last time), is that anyone with spare storage space and bandwidth can be financially compensated for hosting the (encrypted) data of other MEGA users.

The concept of this distributed storage and accompanying financial compensation system is certainly a more novel approach to what file lockers have offered in the past, and this is precisely what ScatterBytes is providing to the infrastructure of the MEGA network. But I was shocked to learn, in the comment of ScatterBytes creator [slashdot.org] , that the financial compensation system would be using PayPal. Why the creators of MEGA & Scatterbytes would be so short-sighted and foolish to base their system off of a centralised, USA-based payment company widely known to be the Internet sector of the US financial-military-industrial complex was completely beyond me.

As a server operator myself, why would I want my disk space (NOT in the USA) to be a part of the MEGA network (NOT a US website) when details of my contribution (and a cut of the profits) would be handed directly to a US company known to directly work with the US government? Had the people behind MEGA & ScatterBytes not been paying any attention to PayPal's history? Shouldn't the operators of a file locker site which was mercilessly raided by the moneyed American corporate interests trying to stymy progress (and currently entangled in a court case [scribd.com] ) be slightly more intelligent and aware than this?

In my response to his comment [slashdot.org] , I asked the ScatterBytes creator why they are creating a system that would hand the US government banking-level details of MEGA collaborators , easily sortable by size of contributions no less! For the successor site to MegaUpload, this level of unthinking oversight is absolutely embarassing. MegaUpload's servers are still sitting in limbo [arstechnica.com] , and people have served jailtime over this service. Why any third-party (ie most of us on Slashdot) would be enthusiastic to contribute to the relaunch of this service, even if it does differ technologically from the previous incarnation, when it means giving all of our personal information to an organisation as nefarious and unfriendly to progress as PayPal is beyond me. To Jack's Complete Lack of Suprise, within a week of the launch of MEGA, an organisation seemingly created to kill file locker services [stopfilelockers.com] (at least ones which multimedia publishing cartels decide to target) worked to shut off PayPal access to the primary MEGA resellers [torrentfreak.com] . So much for paying attention to history [wikipedia.org] .


To see adoption of BitCoin is good news, but it's what should have been done at launch. It's 2013. We don't need centralised US-controlled middlemen spying on all of our financial transactions and taking our money anytime we want to transfer funds. We have an alternative now. BitCoin liberates capitalistic activity from an oligarchical structure which has increased the wealth so few and oppressed so many in various incarnations of the same theme throughout history. It's time to embrace a system which is verifiably fair for every participant, truly international, and decentralised. To PayPal and their meatspace bankerscum ilk: Good Riddance.

Re:MEGA was foolish to use PayPal in the 1st place (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42929011)

here here!! :D

Re:MEGA was foolish to use PayPal in the 1st place (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42929637)

nice post. I think you mean "which has increased the wealth to so few"

Re:MEGA was foolish to use PayPal in the 1st place (1)

IamTheRealMike (537420) | about a year ago | (#42929733)

It appears the ScatterBytes creator actually replied to your comment and asked for advice/help on implementing Bitcoin payments, so I'm not sure you should say his "level of unthinking oversight is absolutely embarassing". Perhaps if you'd helped randallman, they'd be accepting Bitcoin already.

Bitcoin is taking off. Pay attention to it. (5, Informative)

ragingbull1965 (2755663) | about a year ago | (#42927583)

In the last 3 months: money supply expansion halved, number of merchants doubled, wordpress accepted it, US facing pokersite leaks they will accept it, largest gambling site profit up hundreds of %

If this stuff happened to any company, its share price would double.

Also, in the last year:
Network transaction fees per day are up 1100% from 4 to 48
Explosion in p2p exchanges for cash or bank transfers on sites like localbitcoins
Coinlab and BitPay each got 500k in venture capital. Coinbase got 100k.
Bitcoin Foundation Launched in September 2012
ponzi worth between 250k and 5mil collapsed
BitInstant lets you buy bitcoins at walmart, 7-11, and CVS
Silk Road is doing at least 2mil/month. Forum usage up hundreds of percent over last year.
A $10mil company will be releasing the BitcoinCard this year at the Vienna Bitcoin Conference. The Russian founders say 5 years of research have gone into this technology allowing a super-low-power credit card sized device to send texts, bitcoins, login info, and consumer data through an ad-hoc network instead of cell towers, at a card cost of only $10-$25
SatoshiDice has shown the potential of the bitcoin gambling market by earning $600k, including 17,266 bitcoins in December
Many companies in the bitcoin community have gone public.

Read the bitcoin FAQ: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/FAQ [bitcoin.it]
If you still have concerns, see if they are addressed in the "myths" section: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Myths [bitcoin.it]

Re:Bitcoin is taking off. Pay attention to it. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42927773)

New account and all comments praising the super duper Bitcoin. Dial it back some, your Bitcon comments are too transparent and obvious.

Re:Bitcoin is taking off. Pay attention to it. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42928481)

I've never seen somebody using slashdot to ramp currencies before. Good luck.

Re:Bitcoin is taking off. Pay attention to it. (2)

DanielRavenNest (107550) | about a year ago | (#42929151)

What some people here on Slashdot are missing is that bitcoin is not just a virtual currency, it's a transaction protocol, with new features being developed and applications being written. It should be thought of in the same category as FTP and HTTP, as a means of securely transferring balances, rather than bits.

The protocol can be used for other purposes than a currency. You can use it anywhere you need to securely transfer a quantity, value, amount, or balance from one place to another online. Think for a bit what you can do with that, it goes far beyond just currencies. The distribution of initial amounts can use other algorithms than the one in the Bitcoin system, they just chose one that appears to work well for a currency.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...