×

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 Kiosks Coming To 5 Canadian Cities

timothy posted about 7 months ago | from the that-and-100-grams-of-moose-will-getcha-a-cup-of-coffee dept.

Canada 121

dreamstateseven writes "Canadian Bitcoin enthusiasts will be able to exchange Canadian cash for the digital currency through a kiosk that's similar to an ATM. Bitcoiniacs says it has ordered five Bitcoin kiosks from a Las Vegas-based company called RoboCoin and intends to roll them out across Canada in the coming months, with the first machine expected to land in Vancouver in early October. The kiosks allow users to select how much money they would like to spend, insert cash into the machine and then scan a QR code on their phone to transfer the Bitcoins to their wallet."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

121 comments

sage (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44792579)

Your rectum is looking a little rancid, as is my cock fetid. I think it's time to rejoice in the wonders of feces soup...

BitCoins to cash (2)

Arkiel (741871) | about 7 months ago | (#44792641)

Wake me up when this happens.

Re:BitCoins to cash (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44793057)

Yeah, these kiosks still make the user have to trade the Canadians fluties* for real money.

*Or whatever their currency is called.

Re:BitCoins to cash (1)

don (3029853) | about 7 months ago | (#44793617)

*Or whatever their currency is called.

Their currency is called Dollar, it's okay though, that was a tough one

Re:BitCoins to cash (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44793877)

Flutie sounds more fitting.

digital currency? (0)

noh8rz10 (2716597) | about 7 months ago | (#44794609)

after all the NSA news from last week, how can anybody take a digital currency seriously? Encryption is totally cracked. Whatever "safeguards" have been cracked. Sure, my bank account can be accessed online and presumably owned as well, but my bank account is ensured by the government - digital bits are not.

Re:digital currency? (2)

somersault (912633) | about 7 months ago | (#44795967)

Encryption is totally cracked

What the fuck are you talking about? All encryption, ever? Or just Bitcoin encryption? Do you know what "cracked" means in this context?

Re:BitCoins to cash (4, Funny)

Another, completely (812244) | about 7 months ago | (#44795799)

*Or whatever their currency is called.

Close. You were thinking of the fleury. Following the paper dollar notes being dropped from circulation in 1987, the public backlash led to derisive nick-names like "loony" for the new coins. This was resolved by renaming the currency by a popular vote on 26 May, 1989. Under the new system, 100 fleurys = 1 gretzky.

How about no? (0, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44792681)

This should be blocked by the government until Bitcoin is considered a legitimate currency, and therefore held to the same standards and regulations as an actual bank.

These guys should be charged with fraud for this crap. These are not "ATM" machines. What they give out is not an officially recognized currency. What they give out is not even a stable currency (I've seen Bitcoin halve, then double, then halve in value over the span of a few days), and there is NO INSURANCE through the government if the entire thing goes belly up (don't tell me that it won't- that's not the point, I'm insured through the Canadian Government who will cover a small amount of money if something happens to my bank).

The more I think about it, the more I think this is some seriously shady crap. You're basically trying to trick the public into buying into your currency and making them believe it's actually valuable for day-to-day use (it's not for 99% of the consumers). I mean, these machines sure as shit aren't going to have warning labels on the side that say "Hey, the market you're buying into could halve overnight, making your money worth half as much!". How many people actually using these machines are really going to know what they're getting into?

Re:How about no? (4, Insightful)

iamnobody2 (859379) | about 7 months ago | (#44792737)

these aren't going to be mistaken for ATMs, they take CASH. anyone who puts cash into a machine without knowing what they're doing deserves any risk they involved.

Re:How about no? (2)

moteyalpha (1228680) | about 7 months ago | (#44793341)

It is an effective model that others have followed sucessfuly. Insert yourself between the consumer and producer ( retail ) and take a share, then you have money for nothing. Is Master Card a currency? It is possible to establish a currency without state support, but that is how they make sure they get their cut. Whether it is fair or not to allow a state to siphon off value by printing money or not, it still remains that they will criminalize any behavior that would reduce that control. PayPal is another example, as well as others who have taken on the task of siphoning off a share of every transaction. I would guess they are stuffing money in the pockets of lobbysist like crazy, while bitcoin is not. It isn''t a dominant strategy, it is very much like an overly complicated barter scheme and companies pay too much to maintain their position at the public trough to allow any freeloaders on their freeloading .

Re:How about no? (4, Informative)

Dunbal (464142) | about 7 months ago | (#44792791)

It's not fraud at all. They are not making any false promises. They say they will give you bitcoin in exchange for cash, and that is exactly what they do (less a modest commission I'm sure). It's not their fault if you haven't researched Bitcoin at all and get taken out by one of the swings in value.

Re:How about no? (4, Funny)

pla (258480) | about 7 months ago | (#44793125)

This should be blocked by the government until Bitcoin is considered a legitimate currency, and therefore held to the same standards and regulations as an actual bank.

These guys should be charged with fraud for this crap. These are not "ATM" machines. What they give out is not an officially recognized currency. What they give out is not even a stable currency (I've seen Bitcoin halve, then double, then halve in value over the span of a few days), and there is NO INSURANCE through the government if the entire thing goes belly up (don't tell me that it won't- that's not the point, I'm insured through the Canadian Government who will cover a small amount of money if something happens to my bank).

The more I think about it, the more I think this is some seriously shady crap. You're basically trying to trick the public into buying into your currency and making them believe it's actually valuable for day-to-day use (it's not for 99% of the consumers). I mean, these machines sure as shit aren't going to have warning labels on the side that say "Hey, the market you're buying into could halve overnight, making your money worth half as much!". How many people actually using these machines are really going to know what they're getting into?

This should be blocked by the government until Bitcoin is considered a legitimate currency, and therefore held to the same standards and regulations as an actual bank.

You have mixed levels here. The "dollar" (Canadian or otherwise) does not count as a bank, and has no standards and regulations imposed directly on the currency itself.

Now, if you want to demand that money-handlers/lenders/changers/etc dealing in BTC live up to similar regulations to those dealing in "real" money, hey, I would agree with you in spirit - Aside from the fact that those dealing in BTC will have a great deal of difficulty complying with AML regulations by design.

But you should at least strive to make a coherent argument, rather than something as absurd as "all cows must get SafeServ certified".

Re:How about no? (1)

pla (258480) | about 7 months ago | (#44793129)

WTF? On my last preview, I didn't have that entire block quote at the top. New "feature" for those of us who would prefer to manually quote what we want to respond to, or just a glitch?

Weird.

Re:How about no? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44794837)

You probably pressed the "quote parent" button by mistake. It's next to the preview button. Happens to me all the time, but I usually catch it in preview.

Buy Gold Coins! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44793805)

Then buy like Glenn Beck told you to.

Lacking faith in the currency? (4, Insightful)

Shoten (260439) | about 7 months ago | (#44792727)

It's interesting that they're willing to sell bitcoins...but not buy them. Sounds to me like they think that bitcoins will lose their value in due course. One could argue that they're only worried about the security implications of an ATM that gives cash in exchange for a digital currency, but if that were the case, then they'd have at least as much to worry about with just handing out bitcoins anyways (which aren't free).

Re:Lacking faith in the currency? (2, Interesting)

edmanet (1790914) | about 7 months ago | (#44792759)

They have to buy bitcoins in order to sell them, right? While I don't see the need for a bitcoin ATM, I do believe bitcoin is useful to the internet economy as a good method for micro payments. If Paypal or Google created this crypto coin idea, people would probably be more accepting and the conversion rate to fiat currency would stabilize. That's my .0002btc

Re:Lacking faith in the currency? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44792825)

Cant they just "make" them and see those?
"Micropayment" - overused term from the 90's? Isn't anything a payment regardless of how much it is for?

Why would "bitcoins" not suffer from some of the issues visa/paypal had when they looked at their "micropayment" business (more trouble then its worth)?

Re:Lacking faith in the currency? (1)

nomadic (141991) | about 7 months ago | (#44793167)

BitCoins are already fiat currency. In some ways they are more fiat than any other currency on earth.

Re:Lacking faith in the currency? (2)

Hmmmnmnmnm (514893) | about 7 months ago | (#44793253)

The word fiat means "by decree". A fiat currency is one that is decreed to have value by a government. Bitcoins derive their value by market consensus. They are the opposite of a fiat currency.

Re:Lacking faith in the currency? (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44793477)

A fiat currency is one that is decreed to have value by a government.

define:government
- the governing body of a nation, state, or community.
- the group of people in office at a particular time; administration.

Bitcoins derive their value by market consensus.

define:market consensus
- Market populism is a term coined by Thomas Frank for the concept that the free market is more democratic than any democracy. Frank himself does not believe this premise and sets forth arguments against it in his book One Market Under God.

Why fools are so quick to disassociate themselves from their fellow citizens that for the moment happen to be governmental agents I'll never understand.
"Government fiat" and "market consensus" mean the same thing, "WE THE PEOPLE have determined the currency to be valid."
Enough with the double speak and pretending.

Re:Lacking faith in the currency? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44794167)

Did you take time off of beating your wife to post here today?

Re:Lacking faith in the currency? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44795109)

not even close.
With Bitcoin I may choose to use it while my countries currency is forced on me.

Re:Lacking faith in the currency? (0)

lxs (131946) | about 7 months ago | (#44794903)

No no no no no. The term "fiat currency" means:

I am the very model of a Slashdot libertarian
I post on things I know not of and act quite the contrarian
I read Any Rand I own bitcoins a human very rare I am
For I am the very model of a Slashdot libertarian

Ron Paul is quite by far my favorite octogenarian
Even though his politics are mostly antiquarian
He lets me smoke my pot in peace that really is quite cool of him
Therefore I am the very model of a Slashdot libertarian.

Re:Lacking faith in the currency? (1)

tftp (111690) | about 7 months ago | (#44793193)

Bitcoin is unusable for micropayments (as if anyone cares about those.) The reasons are simple. First, each BTC is very expensive (tens of US Dollars each.) Second, the fee for payment is pretty expensive. Mathematically it is small, 0.5 mBTC, but it is enormous when you want to send 1 mBTC (0.126 USD as of today.) In theory, small transactions (both in bytes and in BTC) shouldn't have the fee, but... the fee is charged anyhow.

One can rebuild the client without the fee, but then your transaction will take forever to be included into the block [bitcointalk.org] . Which means that it's still useless - you paid yer money but you've got nothing in return, until "the check clears."

Re: Lacking faith in the currency? (2)

Brian Göss (3052289) | about 7 months ago | (#44793427)

Bitcoin is well suited to micropayments. Mike Hearn has a micropayment scheme in his Bitcoinj implementation: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=244656.0 [bitcointalk.org] It's a rather elegant example of true innovation in this heavily researched topic (note that the NSF and DARPA funded research on digital currency in part to try and solve the massively high volume, low value transactions they anticipated the internet would require...for things like paying a very small amount for a very small but of content). Digital currency (pegged to the US dollar) used to be purchasable in the mid 1990's at a US bank. It flopped mostly because it came before anyone really did much payment via the Internet. The best private industry has come up with is the equivalent of handing over your private encryption keys (cc #) and putting a middle man in to skin off the top and attempt to control the fraud that results from this crazy design. If you want to truly learn something about the open source project called Bitcoin, take a look at btcedproject.org and the udemy course (you'll need an account...or you can login via Facebook like I just did here to post): https://www.udemy.com/bitcoin-or-how-i-learned-to-stop-worrying-and-love-crypto/ [udemy.com]

Re: Lacking faith in the currency? (1)

tftp (111690) | about 7 months ago | (#44794127)

you can login via Facebook like I just did here to post

I'm afraid you have to surrender your geek card immediately :-)

Re: Lacking faith in the currency? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44795137)

he never had one. He has a FB Profile instead.

Re:Lacking faith in the currency? (1)

Agent ME (1411269) | about 7 months ago | (#44794047)

First, each BTC is very expensive (tens of US Dollars each.)

How is that relevant? You can use less than a whole BTC, as you seem to acknowledge in your post. You can just call 1 BTC as 1000 mBTC if you want. Complaining that 1000 mBTC is expensive is like criticizing the US Dollar because hundred dollar bills are expensive.

Re:Lacking faith in the currency? (1)

tftp (111690) | about 7 months ago | (#44794121)

It is relevant for micropayments. They are small - from 1 cent to 10 cents, as theorized (they don't exist.) Since each BTC is large (1000 mBTC == USD$ 126) the micropayment in BTC will be between 0.1 and 1 mBTC.

Now that we established that, the transaction fee is 0.5 mBTC. It is not a percentage of the payment, it's a fixed fee. How much would you like to use a payment system that takes from 50% to 80% of your payment just for the privilege of using it? Most of your money will be spent on BTC network services. This is why BTC, as it is defined today, is not good for small payments. BTC is optimized for large payments that are rare. Billions of small payments will just flood the network, and it will slow down. The decentralized nature of BTC results in huge amount of network traffic, computations, and wasted energy.

Re:Lacking faith in the currency? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44794361)

the transaction fee is 0.5 mBTC

What transaction fee?

https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Transaction_fees [bitcoin.it]
"Transaction fees may be included with any transfer of bitcoins from one address to another. ...
Transaction fees are voluntary on the part of the person making the bitcoin transaction, as the person attempting to make a transaction can include any fee or none at all in the transaction"

Re:Lacking faith in the currency? (2)

tftp (111690) | about 7 months ago | (#44794719)

What transaction fee?

THAT transaction fee. The one that is in practice necessary for anyone to pay attention to your transaction. Is there anyone in the world that owes you six confirmations of your transaction within ten minutes? Click on the link that I provided. You don't have to add a fee; and the miners don't have to service your request. It's not like they are a bank, with you as a customer. There is no contract. The rose-colored glasses are off; BTC is no longer a network of friends, and the miners are not doing it for fun - they are doing it for profit; why wouldn't they click a checkbox that says "increase my income?"

Re:Lacking faith in the currency? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44792769)

It's interesting that they're willing to sell bitcoins...but not buy them.

Know how I can tell you didn't read the article?

Re:Lacking faith in the currency? (1)

Shoten (260439) | about 7 months ago | (#44793679)

It's interesting that they're willing to sell bitcoins...but not buy them.

Know how I can tell you didn't read the article?

(emulating snarky tone)

Know how I can tell you don't know investing or economics?

I think you're forgetting the concepts of short and long investing, or thinking they are somehow the same. People who think a certain instrument...be it houses, a precious metal, or tulips...will take short positions on it, buying some based on short-term fluctuations and then selling. They will buy *very* little, and only in ways that they control...which would not be the case if they took cash at these machines. If they do that, then all of a sudden, they can become an outlet for dumping that would occur in the event of a crash in the value of bitcoins. This is something you don't allow, if you're convinced that a crash will come. But in the short term, there *is* money to be made, as long as you're willing to limit your position (and risk). And the irony of this way of doing business is that unless you grow (and thus invalidate your own safeguards), you actually become more liquid as you go, thus further improving your safety.

Much like Gold (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44792779)

Gold, that wonderful investment that will save the world.

What, say that again? You will take my soon to be worthless cash for GOLD! You must be crazy. You yourself told me cash would soon be worthless and GOLD will save the planet from poverty.

Re:Much like Gold (3, Informative)

Dunbal (464142) | about 7 months ago | (#44792799)

Gold is a safe haven not an investment.

Re:Much like Gold (1)

Frosty Piss (770223) | about 7 months ago | (#44792835)

Gold is a safe haven not an investment.

Those like myself that invested in significant amounts of gold ( > 50,000 US ) disagree.

Re:Much like Gold (1)

Dunbal (464142) | about 7 months ago | (#44792937)

Fair enough. I bought loads of it when it was around $400 an ounce to protect part of my capital. I don't see that as an investment. I also have no plans on selling it. And I sleep very well at night, even with the economy lagging the way it is.

Re:Much like Gold (2)

Kosmatos (179297) | about 7 months ago | (#44793153)

Help me understand. You bought gold, to protect your capital. But do you have the actual gold? Or do you just have a receipt that you own a certain amount, trusting that this document will be recognized?

Even if you do have the actual gold, I'm skeptical about how much you can actually use it in times of need.

Re:Much like Gold (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44794211)

It'll be real soon enough!

Re:Much like Gold (1)

Dunbal (464142) | about 7 months ago | (#44795901)

I have actual, physical, solid gold. I have silver too. Silver is more practical than gold for "everyday" use. But you're right, gold "funds" and gold "certificates" are useless. The only problem with the metal is storing it.

Re:Much like Gold (1)

GoodNewsJimDotCom (2244874) | about 7 months ago | (#44792981)

Yup, when people are scared of their other options, they pile into gold, then gold goes up, and a profit is to be had for the first group to predict a scare.

My question is, and this is an open question that I'm not sure if there is an answer to or not is: Is there still a lot of gold in Fort Knox compared to when we were on the gold standard. My guess would be that the nation used that gold for covert ops when we went fiat. Once the money was found solvent, suddenly that was like having a Fort Knox worth of free money! And knowing modern day politicians and the people sponsoring modern day politicians, they all want a bunch of money if they can get to it.

Does anyone know if there is gold in Fort Knox still? Or is this one of those questions that isn't supposed to be asked or answered? If so, I apologize for asking it, but I'd be enlightened to know anything about this situation.

Re:Much like Gold (2)

egamma (572162) | about 7 months ago | (#44793119)

Does anyone know if there is gold in Fort Knox still? Or is this one of those questions that isn't supposed to be asked or answered? If so, I apologize for asking it, but I'd be enlightened to know anything about this situation.

147.3 million troy ounces [usmint.gov]

And, if you don't believe the government, the Mint is audited by KPMG [usmint.gov]

Re:Much like Gold (1)

GoodNewsJimDotCom (2244874) | about 7 months ago | (#44793161)

Thanks bud for the information. The more you know. I didn't want to google it and run across dozens of conspiracy sites.

Having a fort full of gold is good in dire emergency. It sounds to be about 200 billion dollars.

Re:Much like Gold (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44793585)

Get out while you can, gold is going to crash under $500 by 2020.

Gold for jewelry has fallen out of fashion in favor of titanium, carbide, and other durable and flashy metals. Other than jewelry gold has very limited uses, almost exclusively in obscure sensitive electronics. The recent prices of gold have driven most users to find alternatives which, unlike jewelry trends, permanently decreases industrial demand. Highly conductive nanoparticles are a good example of developing technologies that will replace gold usage. Lower demand directly translates to lower price.

The longer gold stays high the more this generation and the generation to come will seek out alternatives. by 2020 most people and businesses will simply have no need for gold and the price will completely collapse. The devil's metal:Silver does this with frightening regularity and should be seen as a road map for how gold will perform. today at $1,390 the price has already collapsed from the all-time high near $1,924 an ounce reached on September 6, 2011 and the trend shows no signs of slowing down. Down $500 in 2 years, gold will be $800 by 2016 and $400 by 2020.

Re:Lacking faith in the currency? (5, Informative)

cOle2 (225350) | about 7 months ago | (#44792803)

If you read the article linked, you will know that these machines will both sell and BUY bitcoins.

Re:Lacking faith in the currency? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44792805)

Bitcoin up or down, there is always money to be made in the transaction fee. What...you thought you were going to get free or going/instant market rate bit coins?!?!

transaction fees (4, Insightful)

King_TJ (85913) | about 7 months ago | (#44793223)

Yep, you just hit on what I think is pretty much "key" here.

When you look at all of the (often ridiculous) alt-coins out there on the exchanges, you realize developers can create a new one out of thin air, based on the source code used to design a previous coin, give it a new name, and voila - it's out there.

The truth is though, investors are only buying the things because they're cheap (think "penny stocks" here) and because at least early on, it's possible to buy enough of the sum total of the coins in existence so you can play "pump and dump" schemes -- forcing the price up temporarily with big purchase orders, and cashing in for a tidy little profit when you sell them all off again ASAP.

The online exchanges are more than happy to list these worthless "joke coins" though because they get a cut of each transaction, no matter what happens. As long as someone is willing to put in buy and sell orders, it's worth offering.

Of course, bitcoin has established itself far more than these other alt-coins (perhaps simply the privilege of being first with the idea?), and is actually accepted as currency for a number of goods and services -- but the same thing applies. If you're helping the currency change hands, you're always earning a profit off the top, no matter if the coin's value is headed up or down. It's the best "investment position" of all from the standpoint of safely making a steady profit.

Re:Lacking faith in the currency? (1)

msobkow (48369) | about 7 months ago | (#44793001)

Sounds to me more like they're interested in tapping into the "Silk Road" market, seeing as they take cash.

Re:Lacking faith in the currency? (2)

Sponge Bath (413667) | about 7 months ago | (#44793213)

And because they take cash anonymously, they will probably run into government harassment in the name of money laundering. I noticed bitinstant stopped taking money anonymously citing government pressure.

Re:Lacking faith in the currency? (1)

ShanghaiBill (739463) | about 7 months ago | (#44793133)

It's interesting that they're willing to sell bitcoins...but not buy them.

A grocery store is willing to sell you a bottle of milk. But if you take a bottle of milk into a grocery store, they won't buy it.

Re:Lacking faith in the currency? (1)

tftp (111690) | about 7 months ago | (#44793203)

Milk is not money. Money is supposed to be universally exchangeable. That's the whole purpose.

Re:Lacking faith in the currency? (1)

Agent ME (1411269) | about 7 months ago | (#44794067)

How is this Score:4? Has no one read the article?

The kiosks allow users to select how much money they would like to spend, insert cash into the machine and then scan a QR code on their phone to transfer the Bitcoins to their wallet. It also allows users to redeem their Bitcoins for cash.

Then what? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44792777)

1. Insert cash
2. Scan QR code with phone to add BT to wallet
3. ???
4. ???

It will be interesting to see if they can do it (2, Interesting)

Karmashock (2415832) | about 7 months ago | (#44792833)

The real trick here will be to get a two way system of CASH to bitcoins. From a physical untraceable medium of exchange to a digital one.

Many governments of course have a problem with it. We'll see what happens.

I am of two minds about it.

I think the average person should be able to do this sort of thing. I also want the government to be able to track and trace this stuff if they really need to do it.

I guess, I want there to be some way to track it but I want it to be complicated, time consuming, and generally not worth it unless they REALLY want to know. If there were some terrorists going to blow up thousands of people... I'd want there to be a way to stop that. But I generally want to be personally left alone to do what I want.

This sounds a lot like my ideas on cake. (2)

earls (1367951) | about 7 months ago | (#44793135)

Everyone should be able to have it, and eat it too.

Re:This sounds a lot like my ideas on cake. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44794139)

I would like to subscribe to your newsletter on "cake". Thank you.

Re:It will be interesting to see if they can do it (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44793383)

What you are asking for is technically impossible and this impossibility will only become more obvious and "real" as technology improves. Today, people have little power and few tools when it comes to storing or transferring wealth. Most of the time, they must ask a big company to do what they need on their behalf. In the future, assuming people continue to have access to near enough cheap, libre communication and information storage, and access to improvements in technology that enables these things, people will have many more options when it comes to storing and transferring wealth.

To bury one's head in the sand here is akin to the unthinking denial of the media cartels on copyright. Essentially the same mechanic is in play but data sharing requires less sophisticated technology and so seems to be a good 15 years ahead of distributed money management.

Re:It will be interesting to see if they can do it (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44794021)

"What you are asking for is technically impossible..."

Not even close.

Zerocoin.
http://blog.cryptographyengineering.com/2013/04/zerocoin-making-bitcoin-anonymous.html

Coinjoin.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=279249.0

Not only is real anonymity possible, it's in the pipeline as we speak.

"From a physical untraceable medium of exchange to a digital one."

Yup. On the way...

Re: It will be interesting to see if they can do i (1)

tom229 (1640685) | about 7 months ago | (#44793981)

So you want to have your cake and eat it too? Welcome to the general mentality of our generation.

The simple truth is that social freedom is not free. It comes with a price. And the opposite of freedom, control, comes with consequences. You either need to be willing to pay the price of freedom, or live with the consequences of control. You can't have both. I wish more people understood that.

Re: It will be interesting to see if they can do i (1)

Karmashock (2415832) | about 7 months ago | (#44795355)

So I need to accept anarchy or despotism?

There is no possibility of having reasonable counter measures to hostile forces AND civil rights?

Give me an f'ing break.

What are you advocating for here? Mass human enslavement? Or are you advocating for the dissolution of human society itself?

Reevaluate your argument. Its irrational and politically counter productive.

In the words of my generation... your comment is retarded. Try again.

Before you presume to be offended, I'll point out you came off as hostile to me without any provocation from me. So I'd ask you to take this rebuke as fair turnabout.

Re:It will be interesting to see if they can do it (1)

ultranova (717540) | about 7 months ago | (#44794043)

If there were some terrorists going to blow up thousands of people... I'd want there to be a way to stop that. But I generally want to be personally left alone to do what I want.

As the last 10+ years have proven beyond any shadow of doubt, that's not possible. You either have the Lidless Eye watching everything you do and occasionally catching bad guys, or you don't. Even if we assume a hypothethical intelligence agent who's absolutely immune to corruption, they still have no magical ability to tell whether you're a terrorist or not until they've already searched you.

Re:It will be interesting to see if they can do it (1)

Karmashock (2415832) | about 7 months ago | (#44795319)

I don't think you appreciate what I'm saying.

I am saying it is fine if the government can breach the security and get the information.

It just have to be complicated and labor intensive to such an extent that they don't do it unless they have probable cause.

I don't see why everything has to be easily searchable by automated computer systems when what we're tracking is a minority of a minority of a minority.

Re:It will be interesting to see if they can do it (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44794859)

I don't see why they would. All they have to do is regulate it and then, as we've been learning from recent news, the NSA will have an even bigger window into everyone's riveting choices of ice cream and ass hair tweezers.

And Slashdot still does not accept Bitcoins. (2, Insightful)

elucido (870205) | about 7 months ago | (#44792837)

Until we can donate with Bitcoins how serious should we take all these pro Bitcoin articles if the site itself doesn't trust the technology?

Re:And Slashdot still does not accept Bitcoins. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44793039)

Why would anyone want to donate to slashdot?

Re:And Slashdot still does not accept Bitcoins. (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44793111)

Why would anyone want to donate to slashdot?

Because it is a glorious utopia of libertarian disinformation, propaganda, and nerds in their basements whining about things they barely know anything about! Who could want anything more?

Re:And Slashdot still does not accept Bitcoins. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44793601)

Until we can donate with Bitcoins how serious should we take all these pro Bitcoin articles if the site itself doesn't trust the technology?

I would say about as serious as Unicode.

already have electronic token currency (0)

rubycodez (864176) | about 7 months ago | (#44792867)

Most US and Canadian dollars and euros and yen are just numbers in a computer. Why do we need bitcoin, you can only buy trendy overpriced crap from a relatively few places with it. and its value recently is volatile as hell [blockchain.info] Fuck bitcoins.

Re:already have electronic token currency (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44793747)

No middle men. You can move money directly without getting hammered with bank/ATM and PayPal fees.

Re:already have electronic token currency (1)

Agent ME (1411269) | about 7 months ago | (#44794089)

The important part about bitcoin isn't that it's digital. That's been done many times. The revolutionary part is that it's decentralized. There is no government, organization, or corporation controlling it. There is no one who can freeze your account. There is no one who can set limits on your account. There is no one who can control who you can send money to. There is no one who can turn up the mint rate and destabilize the market.

Re:already have electronic token currency (1)

Animats (122034) | about 7 months ago | (#44794871)

There is no one who can freeze your account. There is no one who can set limits on your account. There is no one who can control who you can send money to. There is no one who can turn up the mint rate and destabilize the market.

If only that were true. Ask the users with thousands of dollars stuck in Mt. Gox, or worse, one of the "exchange" or "online wallet" companies that went bust. Sure, you can ship Bitcoins around, but there are serious liquidity problems doing anything with them.

Re:already have electronic token currency (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44794899)

Give that a couple of years. Politicians have this strange habit of writing stuff on a piece of paper (or computer screen) and seeing it magically change reality on a dime depending on who's sober enough to show up in congress to vote yes for it.

I get the idea behind bitcoin, and it's a hell of a lot of fun to watch, but enter realism: At the end of the day, you have quite an Orwellian, totally fiat thing that only needs the 'swipe of the pen' to turn into the end of all forms of economic privacy if it becomes the primary mode of payment (not likely, but this is hypothetical).

Imagine what a bitcoin style currency could accomplish in the hands of a despotic government wherever it might be. All dissidents' biometrics are stored in a giant database, and the law states that all Bitcoin ATMs must disallow transactions by anyone on the naughty list. In Nazi Germany, we would have called these people 'Jews'. It's cool to have super high tech controls on who can access your account, but you always run the risk of giving up liberty for security, and really, the only thing that can change bitcoin into that would be a stroke of a politician's pen before he heads to his 7 martini lunch.

Just because something seems like an alternative to something you dislike, doesn't mean it would be a better solution than the one you've got now. I'm still waiting for better, cause bitcoin doesn't really do it for me: Not that it should be illegal or persecuted.

Re:already have electronic token currency (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44794921)

Also, don't you think entities like the NSA would be salivating at the thought of having all of the 'counter culture' archetypes transacting in digital currencies that they had access to? (read the news stories lately about what kind of stuff they've been up to)

There are 'alternative currencies out there' on a regional or local basis that I'd think are a better idea. Bit Coin is too vast and intrusive to be a viable alternative to currency as it currently sits. Gold is also problematic for other reasons (as a 'primary currency').

A lot of the time you have to take utopian 'silver bullets' with a grain of salt. Always a grain of truth in there somewhere, but a heavy dose of ideological fantasy (that usually ends in a nightmare).

Smartphone: 35 USD per month (1)

tepples (727027) | about 7 months ago | (#44793021)

My dumbphone can't scan QR codes or run a wallet. How would using Bitcoin help me afford the hundreds of dollars per year that it would cost me or someone else in my situation to upgrade to a smartphone?

Re:Smartphone: 35 USD per month (1)

Ancient123 (724901) | about 7 months ago | (#44793257)

You mean the ~$50 it costs to buy a used phone off craigslist and use it as a portable computing device with no phone service (and therefore no re-occurring cost)... If you can't manage that then bitcoin probably isn't the problem.... Honestly if you are using bitcoin then you probably have friends with an unused android device they could just give you....

Re:Smartphone: 35 USD per month (1)

Agent ME (1411269) | about 7 months ago | (#44794103)

I don't live in Canada. How are these Bitcoin kiosks going to help me or someone else who can't even get to them?

There are 5 Canadian cities? (1)

Kohath (38547) | about 7 months ago | (#44793051)

I thought it was just Vancouver and Montreal, with nothing but polar bears and bleached reindeer skeletons in between.

Re:There are 5 Canadian cities? (1)

egamma (572162) | about 7 months ago | (#44793131)

Toronto's the capital. Calgary's a pretty cool city. That's 4...

Re:There are 5 Canadian cities? (1)

garyoa1 (2067072) | about 7 months ago | (#44793219)

Toronto is the capital of what? Canada? You don't get out much, do you.

Re:There are 5 Canadian cities? (1)

Livius (318358) | about 7 months ago | (#44793983)

Toronto is the capital of what?

The Province of Ontario.

So Toronto is a capital of something.

Re:There are 5 Canadian cities? (1)

mirix (1649853) | about 7 months ago | (#44793229)

Ottawa is the capital. If you include the greater area and Gatineau (across the river), they have a population of around 1.2M, rounding out the top 5. (calgary is about a tie in population).

Re:There are 5 Canadian cities? (1)

H0p313ss (811249) | about 7 months ago | (#44793481)

Sixth on this list [wikipedia.org] smaller than Calgary by 10%.

Thinking Toronto is the capital is like thinking New York is the capital of the United States, when it isn't even the capital of New York State.

Re:There are 5 Canadian cities? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44793157)

If you lived in Toronto you'd know that there's really only 1 Canadian city. Vancouver and Montreal are just pretending to be cities.

am i the only one (1)

muphin (842524) | about 7 months ago | (#44793065)

am i the only one who thinks, hey lets steal this machine, plug it in at home, break it open and then get unlimited amounts of bitcoins?

Re:am i the only one (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44793317)

am i the only one who thinks ... unlimited amounts of bitcoins?

no, i'm sure there are thousands more misinformed people too

Re:am i the only one (1)

Agent ME (1411269) | about 7 months ago | (#44794113)

With that logic, why not break it open and then get unlimited amounts of dollars?

(They don't load it with unlimited bitcoins for the same reason they don't load it with unlimited amounts of dollars. There aren't infinite of either.)

scan a code? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44793641)

I guess scanning a QR code is easier than typing in a 30 alpha-numeric public key. anyways, I did not know that Bitcoin is popular.

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...