Beta
×

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!

Finnish National TV Broadcaster Starts Sending Bitcoin Blockchain

timothy posted about 3 months ago | from the in-the-air dept.

Bitcoin 73

New submitter Joel Lehtonen (3743763) writes "The Finnish national digital TV broadcaster Digita is co-operating with startup company Koodilehto to start transmission of Bitcoin blockchain and transactions in Terrestrial Digital TV (DVB-T) signal that covers almost the entire Finnish population of 5 million people. The pilot broadcasting starts September 1st and lasts two months. The broadcast can be received by a computer with any DVB-T adapter (like this $20 dongle). A commercial production phase is planned to begin later this year."

cancel ×

73 comments

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

They should broadcast "Internet's Own Boy" instead (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#47437539)

A more useful service would be for them to broadcast The Internet's Own Boy: The Story of Aaron Swartz all the time.

Aaron Swartz, we will never forget you.

Aaron Swartz, we will always revere you.

Aaron Swartz, we love you.

Aaron Swartz, you will always be with us, in our hearts.

Aaron Swartz, we love you.

Re:They should broadcast "Internet's Own Boy" inst (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#47438345)

I'd prefer good zombie movie where Aaron Swartz has risen from the dead and is breaking into people's houses so he can hook up his laptop to their LAN to continue downloading from JSTOR.

now you lose even more money on bc (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#47437579)

Which came first, the ponzi scheme or the rube?

Re:now you lose even more money on bc (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#47437617)

Don't you see it's THE FUTURE of a LIBERTARIAN PARADISE. Like SOMALIA only with COMPUTERS.

Seriously though it's what happens when your education system fails to teach kids anything. Bitcoin's banks have followed exactly the same pattern as other currencies did centuries ago, before regulation stepped in to stabilise and prevent people getting shafted. Young idiots with a bit of technical knowledge but no understanding of anything else, and older wiseguys who know how to fleece the former, are diving in.

Re:now you lose even more money on bc (1)

marcello_dl (667940) | about 3 months ago | (#47437667)

Regulations said that the banknote you could exchange back for gold, cannot be anymore. Talk about not getting shafted, intrinsic value vs. depending on a system to tell value from useless paper is a terrible deal.

Re:now you lose even more money on bc (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#47437695)

Yeah, those bitcoins sure do have intrinsic value.

Re:now you lose even more money on bc (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#47437867)

Intrinsic value is not what keeps a currency strong. Devising a way to prevent cheap unlimited production of new currency is what we need. In the old days money was tied to gold - you can't simply print up more gold. These days the powers that be can steal the value of dollars you hold just by printing a new piece of paper with a big number written on it. The strength of bitcoin is that it is limited by design.

Re:now you lose even more money on bc (3, Informative)

DanielRavenNest (107550) | about 3 months ago | (#47438029)

The Bitcoin payment network has utility value, because it can perform a useful function (move value from place to place, fast, with low fees). The digital currency unit within the network has value derived from the usefulness of the network it is part of. By itself the currency unit is as useless as a UPS shipping label would be without the rest of UPS.

It should be evident that a network of relay and processing nodes, databases, user software, websites, and smartphone apps can have non-zero value. We could differ on exactly what the value is, but given how much people pay for similar items elsewhere, I don't think you can argue it is zero.

Re:now you lose even more money on bc (1)

ClickOnThis (137803) | about 3 months ago | (#47441105)

Your post is insightful and deserves modding up. However, I respectfully disagree with you and AC on whether Bitcoins have value. I claim they do.

IANAE, but it's my understanding that the intrinsic value of money is determined by what a buyer and a seller agree it's worth as payment for something, in a fluid economy with lots of buyers and sellers to encourage fairness. The Bitcoin network provides an infrastructure for transactions in such an economy. But without Bitcoins, you can't participate in it. So, I would say Bitcoins do have value, and they have that value because of the existence of the Bitcoin network. But to say that the network itself has the value in question is to overload the definition of value. At the risk of misusing terms of economics (again, IANAE) I'd say the network has utility (because it offers satisfaction in the use of Bitcoins) but not value.

Re:now you lose even more money on bc (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#47441197)

This is a surprisingly fine post for Slashdot but you lost me with "... to encourage fairness". I can only assume that I'm infering from this something quite different to what you're implying. In my eyes, it's a kind of fairness at root which drives the desire for a currency which any person can trade with any other at a price they both agree to. It is pursuit of this fairness which leads to liquidity and a sound market price, not the other way around.

Re:now you lose even more money on bc (1)

ClickOnThis (137803) | about 3 months ago | (#47441249)

I think we agree (mostly.)

Note that I was referring to "a fluid economy with lots of buyers and sellers to encourage fairness." I didn't mean that liquidity leads to fairness, rather that fairness can flourish only in an environment of liquidity, i.e., one with numerous players who aspire to fairness, but who are motivated to pursue it by the presence of their fellow players.

To put it another way, even the noblest among us can be corrupted, but it's harder to succumb to such corruption when others are watching and keeping us honest.

Re:now you lose even more money on bc (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#47441699)

I think if the bitcoin network serves a need, people will use it.

Karel K., Twibright Labs [twibright.com]

Re:now you lose even more money on bc (1)

DanielRavenNest (107550) | about 3 months ago | (#47437993)

intrinsic value vs. depending on a system to tell value from useless paper is a terrible deal.

There is no such thing as "intrinsic value". All value is relative to human needs and desires, which are not only different for each person, but varies for the same person at different times. You can measure "utility value" for an item, based on its usefulness to people, but that changes over time. For example, horses as transportation have near zero or even negative utility in the modern world, since they cost more to own and operate than even the worst motorized transport, and there are many places you can't even use horses.

In the case of bitcoin, looking only at the digital coin gives the wrong answer. The coin only functions as part of the Bitcoin payment network. It is the network that makes it spendable, and therefore useful. The analogy I make is of a UPS shipping label. By itself it is just a bit of sticky printed paper, of no particular value. As part of the UPS shipping network it is much more useful, and therefore has significant value, as evidenced by what people are willing to pay for a label.

Re:now you lose even more money on bc (1)

bickerdyke (670000) | about 3 months ago | (#47438127)

intrinsic value vs. depending on a system to tell value from useless paper is a terrible deal.

There is no such thing as "intrinsic value".

There is. But it is usually limited to things as potatoes. There is no intrinsic value in gold as many people are misguided to believe.

Re:now you lose even more money on bc (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#47438341)

There is.

Nope. Value is subjective.

Re:now you lose even more money on bc (1)

marcello_dl (667940) | about 3 months ago | (#47439201)

I guess you didn't read with enough attention. Gold has intrinsic value because it does not depend on a system who says "that piece of paper is worth X". It is not the magic material that solves all problems, of course, but losing the conversion to gold is still LOSING no matter how you put it.

Re:now you lose even more money on bc (1)

angel'o'sphere (80593) | about 3 months ago | (#47439287)

Since when is it impossible to buy gold with your money?
If you believe gold has more value for you than money on the bank, just buy it.

Re:now you lose even more money on bc (1)

Jeremi (14640) | about 3 months ago | (#47441237)

There is. But it is usually limited to things as potatoes.

Even potatoes are valuable only in situations where there are people around who are interested in owning/obtaining/consuming potatoes.

Re:now you lose even more money on bc (1)

JustNiz (692889) | about 3 months ago | (#47438769)

Can you explain to me why gold has any more intrinsic value than say bitcoins or dollars? Are you personally able to eat gold?

Re:now you lose even more money on bc (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#47439169)

Are you able to repair teeth, make jewels, or make low impedance contacts using banknotes?

Re:now you lose even more money on bc (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#47442139)

Gold is bad for repairing teeth, plastic has a higher intrinsic value when repairing teeth. Gold can still be more valuable as a fashion statement but that isn't intrinsic.

Jewels.. intrinsic.. no, the value of Jewels are entirely subjective. That is why cheap plastic trinkets can be sold a "jewelry" for $50.

That leaves low impedance contacts, but that is wrong, gold isn't used as plating for contacts because of low impedance. In fact it is a worse conductor that copper. Gold is used because it is an exposed surface that is susceptible to corrosion. Audiophiles use it mainly because it is more expensive so they can brag about it (Pretty much same as jewelry to them.) but the result is more material transitions and higher impedance so the sound is theoretically worse. (I doubt you can measure it with any conventional instruments.)
So while it can be argued that gold has an instinct value higher than copper in connectors that are susceptible to corrosion a construction that avoids the issue has an even higher value. Note that perceived sound quality is subjective so the actual value will be from saved energy.

Typically the intrinsic value of gold is insignificant compared to the perceived value of gold and that makes it really bad to use as a currency.
Aluminum is way better in that sense since its value is almost completely based on its usability as a metal.

"gold standard" transformed to "lead standard" (1)

maitas (98290) | about 2 months ago | (#47466761)

Although USD lost it "gold standard", but replaced it with "lead standard". That is the real intrinsic value. The US government wants taxes to be payed un USD. If you dont pay your taxes, the have a lot of weapons that fires lead that forces you to pay your taxes in USD.
Thas the real "intrinsic value" for USD, that Bitcoins lacks.

Re:now you lose even more money on bc (1)

itzly (3699663) | about 3 months ago | (#47437721)

There's no reason why parts of the bitcoin ecosystem couldn't be regulated.

Re:now you lose even more money on bc (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#47437749)

But there is a reason not to re-invent the wheel.

Re:now you lose even more money on bc (1)

itzly (3699663) | about 3 months ago | (#47437787)

What reason would that be exactly ? As I see it, bitcoin has a number of unique properties, which can offer an advantage over other ways to transfer money. It also has some disadvantages, so it would not make a good candidate to replace current fiat money systems. However, bitcoin can happily coexist with fiat money, and people can chose whichever method they prefer for each transactions. They may still buy their groceries with fiat money, but maybe make an international payment for some software design work in bitcoin.

Re:now you lose even more money on bc (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#47437835)

As I see it, bitcoin has a number of unique properties, which can offer an advantage

Proceed.

Re:now you lose even more money on bc (1)

itzly (3699663) | about 3 months ago | (#47437939)

For instance: low cost, quick and easy way to transfer money to a person in another country. Alternatives would be paypal (quick and easy, but expensive), or wire transfer (slow and possibly expensive), or credit card (quick and cheap but not easy if neither party is a registered merchant). Another advantage is the lack of charge back (but obviously that can work as a disadvantage for the other party).

Re:now you lose even more money on bc (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#47438077)

Not sure what you're talking about. In Europe it's been possible to do fast, free, cross-border transfers for a while now. Domestic transfers between current ("checking") accounts are already legislated to take no more than 2 hours, but in practice take a few minutes before the amount is visible in the destination account. There is also legislation to prevent most cross-border transactions within the EU from costing more than domestic transactions. [europa.eu] Charge-backs not possible.

And if you think Bitcoin transfers are free, you're conveniently ignoring the non-negligible CPU time involved in verification vs simply changing two numbers in a database.

Basically you're complaining about how behind the times US banks are.

Re:now you lose even more money on bc (1)

itzly (3699663) | about 3 months ago | (#47438151)

I'm talking about the fact that my latest international SEPA payments still took more than a day, rather than 2 hours. Also, in the weekends and holidays many banks refuse to do business. I'm also talking about other countries than just the SEPA area. And no, that's not just the US. Also China, Japan, Korea, Russia and India, for example.

And if you think Bitcoin transfers are free, you're conveniently ignoring the non-negligible CPU time involved in verification vs simply changing two numbers in a database.

I never said it was free. Just that it's low cost. So low cost in fact, that I can conveniently ignore it.

Re:now you lose even more money on bc (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#47438327)

And yet an interbank national transfer can take a couple of days (ING.nl). And no transactions on non workdays.

Re:now you lose even more money on bc (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#47438791)

How about a transaction processed on Saturday, money taken from account there and then, not reaching destination account (same bank) until Tuesday,
Same transaction carried out on Monday, instantaneous...

fscking banks...

Re:now you lose even more money on bc (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#47440475)

Okay, you just a gave potential advantage to about 0.0000000000001% of all financial transactions. I doubt that alone is a good enough reason for people to start using Bitcoins over an existing system already in place.

Re:now you lose even more money on bc (1)

killkillkill (884238) | about 3 months ago | (#47438145)

In fact, much of it is. There are many many laws on the books that already cover digital currencies. Just ask the people who have been arrested for transacting too much without a licence. Financial regulations and consumer protection laws still apply.

The ecosystem is also self-regulated in many ways. I don't mean in the whole sense of that loaded phrase, but simple things like the rules to create and maintain the money supply and rate of that creation or the fact that you can transact without the need for a bank that needs the oversight. Bitcoin, done right, doesn't have someone else in a position to abuse trust of leaving you money in their hands.

I'm sure there are things that need tweaked, but the "Wild West" notion attributed to Bitcoin has more to do with a lack of understanding of how it works by users than a lack of rules to govern it's use.

Download only? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#47437619)

So how precisely is this useful? It allows both Alice and Bob to confirm Alice indeed sent X BTC to Bob. But if Alice is going to send Bitcoins to Bob anyway, then she need to have some means of uploading the details of her transaction.

Download only? (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#47437665)

The point of the service is you can use cheap and small receivers on embedded systems to confirm transactions, for example for vending machines etc. The mobile internet coverage is not as wide as radio signal, nor is it as cheap.

Re:Download only? (1)

itzly (3699663) | about 3 months ago | (#47438153)

If there's no internet coverage, how does the customer make the transaction ?

Re:Download only? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#47438417)

It's much less data. The blockchain is gigabytes and contains all transactions. Sending a transaction can be done via a cheap GPRS connection (or even SMS)

Re:Download only? (1)

itzly (3699663) | about 3 months ago | (#47438613)

You don't need to send the whole blockchain to confirm a transaction. Just keep the block chain on a well connected server, and let the server send a quick SMS to the vending machine when the coins show up on a certain wallet address.

Re:Download only? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#47437683)

The blockchain is big, and it's the same for everyone, so broadcasting it is efficient. It also has the benefit of giving everyone a view of the blockchain that is independent of the individual position in the network, which could make some attacks more difficult.

Re:Download only? (5, Informative)

Albanach (527650) | about 3 months ago | (#47437759)

The summary was quite lacking. For those not wanting to rtfa, here's what it says under why broadcasting the blockchain in a way that can be picked up by low cast receivers is or might be useful. An AC post below also mentions that TV coverage may be better than mobile internet coverage.

This scheme makes it easy to construct affordable receivers that do not need mobile data connections in order to follow bitcoin traffic and to react to the received bitcoin payments. This would make it possible to build bitcoin counterpart for cash payment terminals, anything from a cash register to a coin operated self-service laundry. If the receiver application follows only transactions relevant to itself, it will be possible to build it using even an ARM microcontroller.

Also, it allows an alternative way to access the bitcoin network in cases where only a very low speed Internet connection is available. And, for all the tin foil hat wearers out there, this is a way to connect to bitcoin network without a trace! You only need online access when you want to make transactions yourself.

The data stream can contain other information, such as exchange rates between bitcoins and traditional currencies.

Re: Download only? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#47438133)

So a vendor will need an bitcoin wallet for each system in the field maybe even at sites with 2-3 or more ones in less you have a local network and An pay station liked to all systems on site unlike for vending and needing to set and manage all of the acounts is a lot stuff to keep track of. Also what about refunds

Re: Download only? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#47438647)

So a vendor will need an bitcoin wallet for each system in the field maybe even at sites with 2-3 or more ones in less you have a local network and An pay station liked to all systems on site unlike for vending and needing to set and manage all of the acounts is a lot stuff to keep track of.

The vendor already have to keep track of each system. This might even be seen as a good thing from the point of view of the vendor. Imagine being able to see how much stuff you have sold from each machine without having to have a data connection to each machine. That would make it much easier to predict when you need to restock the various machines.

Re: Download only? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#47439277)

This is actually quite easy;

If you set up each vending machine with a BIP32 deterministic wallet, and use a predictable
key derivation, such as YYYY-MM-DD-HH-ID then you can easily scan and sweep coins
from each vending machine remotely, without ever needing to connect to them over a network.

Much like a cash machine, refunds are impossible once the product has been dispensed.
Unlike a cash machine, you dont need to worry about change or partial payments, or
fake coins or other complexities.

Also, the receiver would need to validate the blockchain not just receive it, in case a local transmitter
tries to overpower the real signal. It would also have to keep somedepth of rollback buffer, for when
the chain forks and corrects.

The hard part is making it real time. If only whole blocks are sent, the problem is the average 10 minute confirmation time.
If the UTXO is also sent, then it can be near instantanteous as the network allows.

Re:Download only? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#47439677)

Thanks for that man.

bad summary (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#47437709)

They might want to mention why someone might do such a thing... and no I won't RTFA, this is slashdot. Include the important stuff in the summary.

More details (1, Funny)

nospam007 (722110) | about 3 months ago | (#47437753)

Finnish TV sending money over the airwaves to their customers? :-)

BTW I had a Scandinavian girlfriend at some time, but I don't know exactly which country she was from, but definitely not from Finland, because each time when we were having sex, she yelled: No, no, I'm not Finnish!

Re:More details (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#47437811)

Mine was more patriotic. Whenever I flipped mine over she'd shout, "Norway!" I'd ask her if she was enjoying it, and with tears in her eyes, "Oslo!"

Re:More details (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#47437941)

hey guys, keep your day jobs.

Re:More details (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#47438129)

Nobody expects a layman to give a surgeon's medical commentary, but hell will freeze over before a guy's able to crack a bad joke without someone butting in and pointing out they're not the next George Carlin.

But thanks to global warming, even if hell freezy, hell eventually thawy, and then Helsinki.

Re:More details (1)

Applehu Akbar (2968043) | about 3 months ago | (#47437989)

Mine was crazy about Lappland.

Re:More details (3, Funny)

tero (39203) | about 3 months ago | (#47437933)

Julian, is that you?

Re:More details (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#47438173)

Finland is not Scandinavia you dumb yank.

Re:More details (1)

nospam007 (722110) | about 3 months ago | (#47438561)

"Finland is not Scandinavia you dumb yank."

That's what I said, she was Scandinavian, not Finnish.

And I'm Eurotrash no Yank.

Re:More details (1)

angel'o'sphere (80593) | about 3 months ago | (#47439263)

Depends on the definition as there is no 'official' one.
Geographically: Norway, Sweden and north Finland (perhaps the geographical one can be considered the 'official' one?)
Cultural and language: Norway, Sweden and Denmark (as laymen seem not to know that a) north Finland speaks partly swedish and b) Denmark is geographically not connected)
On the other hand the true laymen just put all into one basket and add Denmark as well as Finland to Skandinavia. No idea why, but I would bet the majority of germans would put all 4 into that 'cathegory'.

Re:More details (2)

TeknoHog (164938) | about 3 months ago | (#47440113)

*sigh*

The Nordic countries comprise Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway and Sweden. Scandinavia is basically your geographic definition; it's not quite clear cut, though, but we mostly care about being Nordic. Finland is the odd one out in terms of linguistic roots, but we share most of our culture with the Nordics -- we were basically a province of Sweden for centuries, and gained independence after a brief stint with Russia.

For some odd reason people elsewhere say "Scandinavian" when they mean "Nordic".

I wonder where you get the part "north Finland speaks partly swedish". There is a vocal Swedish-speaking minority in Finland, but they mostly live on the coast of the Baltic Sea. Might be some Swedish/Norwegian speakers up North, but there you also have the Sami people of Finland, Norway and Sweden mixing up things and blurring the political boundaries.

Re:More details (1)

angel'o'sphere (80593) | about 3 months ago | (#47441941)

I have a good idea what nordic is :) after all we germans consider us close related.
Regarding languages I read a year ago a quite funny book from Mikael Niemi, as /. can not unicode I don't paste the original name, roughly translated it is called "Popmusic from Vitulla".
Vitulla is a swedish town close to the finish border. In that novel the author traveled around in north Sweden and north Finland and mentioned that on both sides both languages where spoken ... but ofc it is more a novel than a book of facts.
It is a very funny, but slighly difficult constructed book ... worth a read!

Re:More details (1)

TeknoHog (164938) | about 3 months ago | (#47444807)

I've seen the movie and I've read other works by Niemi. Be careful with the spelling, it's Vittula, where "vittu" means "cunt", and the -la is a suffix for making it a toponym. OTOH, "vitulla" means "on top of a cunt" or "by using a cunt". Also, the original place is called Vittulajänkä, where "jänkä" is a kind of Northern wetland.

The language aspect is interesting, because it takes place in an area of Sweden where they speak Meänkieli, a dialect of Finnish. Swedish authorities consider it a separate language, for the purposes of preserving the special minority status, thus making an interesting case of the language vs. dialect problem.

I don't doubt that Swedish is spoken/understood near the Swedish border on our side, but that probably happens in every border zone around the world. The real Swedish-speaking areas, where many people don't speak Finnish, are found at the coast.

Re:More details (1)

angel'o'sphere (80593) | about 3 months ago | (#47447839)

I noticed there was a movie in the making ... did not know it is done!
I hope it will be shown in germany as well!
I guess it was a funny thing?

Re:More details (1)

TeknoHog (164938) | about 3 months ago | (#47448513)

Apparently, it has been released in Germany, at least the DVD: http://akas.imdb.com/title/tt0... [imdb.com]

Re:More details (1)

angel'o'sphere (80593) | about 3 months ago | (#47450729)

Thanx for the info, I will look into it.

Re:More details (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#47441315)

geographically only northwest part of finland is part of scandinavia... scandes, scandinavian mountainrange is located in sweden&norway and little bit in nw parts of finland.

Swedish speaking minority in finland is around vaasa and helsinki and åland... in north theres no swedish speaking minority at all...
btw considering that sami people are proto-finns before last ice-age, they share same genetic markers as finns but they took different route during iceage and ended up living in northern parts of norway,sweden and finland.

Re:More details (1)

jon3k (691256) | about 3 months ago | (#47438789)

He's not a yank, you can tell from his grammar. "I had a Scandinavian girlfriend at some time". At one time, for some time, etc, but never "at some time".

Re:More details (1)

itzly (3699663) | about 3 months ago | (#47438819)

And yanks never make grammatical errors...

Re:More details (1)

jon3k (691256) | about 2 months ago | (#47512835)

It's much more likely it's a grammatical error by a non-native speaker. It's a pretty standard grammatical error for non-native speakers to make, but you almost never see it from native speakers.

Re:More details (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#47438801)

Finland is not Scandinavia you dumb yank.

Technically part of Finland is Scandinavia (lies in Scandinavian peninsula) or if it isn't then both Sweden, Norway and Denmark either are because they aren't completely in that peninsula.

Re:More details (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#47438877)

The problem with "scandinavia" (aside from our weather) is that it means so many different things: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scandinavia

Re:More details (1)

jones_supa (887896) | about 3 months ago | (#47439215)

I just use "Nordic countries" these days to avoid confusion.

Re:More details (1)

angel'o'sphere (80593) | about 3 months ago | (#47439281)

But that would include the Icelands and lots of islands as well and probalby Greenland :)
And in a few decades perhaps even Alaska, muhuhuha!

Re:More details (1)

jones_supa (887896) | about 3 months ago | (#47439289)

That's fine.

Re:More details (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#47439255)

I was going to point out the same thing, but without the unnecessary rudness

What's the point? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#47437883)

Is there a point to this stunt? It just sounds like more mindless bitcoin boosterism to me.

Go to :
https://twitter.com/shit_rbtc_says
for some of the funniest bitcoin nonsense you've ever read.

government will not allow it (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#47438897)

It cannot be controlled or taxed, So soon the legistlators will make bitcoin illegal. For the benefit of the consumers of course. They are just slow.

Bitcoin: the ultimate waste of resources (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#47438947)

Now the waste that was artificial computing problems with no scientific or tangible value moves to wasting broadcast time too. Bitcoin makes me thankful for VISA and Paypal, which is hard to make me do. At least VISA will reverse phoney charges, settle disputes, and comply with court orders.

(* note, tangible as opposed to intangible)

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?