Yeah, I don't think there'll be any restrictions on where I can transfer it to, as long as your registrar supports .gd domains.

Because otherwise I'll nab it myself again, and raise the price? 
If someone really cared, I'd be happy to part with it for $400 - $26 = $374 if they want to make it complicated.

Right now there's 1 mo left on it, and it's $26/yr at kalyhost, and ~$30/yr at most other hosts (hooray for expensive domains)

I own the short domain SV.GD, and as I'm using it very little, I've decided I'd sell it. The domain will be transferred from Kalyhost to the winner within a week of the auction finishing (possibly earlier).
I'm using a dollar price similar to other auctions on here, because of the unpredictable price.

The domain starts the auction at just $60, or a "Buy Now" of $400, and will end on the 12th of April 2013, 2013-04-12 at 00:00 UTC
Minimum increments of $1.

The dollar price must be paid in equal value of LTC or BTC.

BitPay - Extra professional

The idea that Gox is only running on 2 servers seems horrible. A service which has to handle so much load definitely needs to be scaled better; I really think they need to add more servers, as it's getting ridiculous especially when I'm also unable to cancel any open orders during the lag.

 

Seems your client is bugged, it's fine over here:


r9xrBLcNzcqQs9Hf5NaneRYhAHSoEv9Bmi

The coins will get mixed. That's why.
e.g. the bitcoinica thief came into a channel on IRC and gave away a large amount of the coins he had.
This resulted in wayyyyy too many people being a possible suspect, so he could then for example use blockchain's mixing service to make even more innocent people have those coins. After this has happened, there's no way of really knowing who the thief is.

r9xrBLcNzcqQs9Hf5NaneRYhAHSoEv9Bmi

I'm here. I'm experienced with PHP and Bitcoin sites using PHP.

I'm not wanting to forbid this act, it's just that it's a coin that shouldn't have really became so popular, I mean Balthazar even admitted that it was just to screw with the moderators:
https://btc-e.com/chat/history/12630

The new logo is definitely a huge improvement. Amazing work, the old logo was too dull and a bit smudged, and you've completely turned that around.

Mining so much before an official release to the non-russian world? I'd love to know how this would ever be okay, especially for a coin with such a high starting value (the Russian community would've made a good $20k minimum just for all the coins they mined before the English release ).

It shouldn't matter whether you're Russian, American, British, or Asian, releasing a coin which was kept hidden outside of a single country until a large amount of coins were mined is just horribly wrong.

Regional cryptocurrencies are a good idea in some cases, e.g. if RuCoin was built more around Russian culture as you say, more Russians may prefer to use it over Bitcoin; but of course Bitcoin was designed to be globally accepted, it wasn't really designed to be "American only", such "regional cryptocurrencies" would just weaken Bitcoins acceptance there. Rather than starting all these region-only coins, it would make more sense to make services in that country which accept Bitcoin, which would help to Bitcoin much more widely accepted.

It's no longer a CPU only coin, it can be mined with a GPU now.

I just bought Don't starve on steam for £10, and I got an extra giftable copy, I'm willing to sell it for around half price, which is ~0.5BTC
PM me for offers.

My OTC rep is available here: http://bitcoin-otc.com/viewratingdetail.php?nick=Someguy123&sign=ANY&type=RECV

Many of us at the litecoin community have been concerned about the huge increase in network hashrate, with a rising difficulty retarget... but how big is this hashrate boost?

This graph tells us, pretty damn big.
The network hashrate for litecoin has nearly doubled in just a few days after the block halving on Bitcoin!

If anyone is wondering where this graph came from, I made the graph myself using excel, with data from a script to extract information from the Litecoin block explorer http://explorer.litecoin.net (which I run)

Well... as far as I can see, it could be your ISP blocking 8333 OUTGOING (yes, some ISP's actually do this, e.g. SMB/NFS ports). So even though Canyouseeme reports that it is open and working, your bitcoin client can't actually establish a connection the other way.
I'd recommend to check with http://firebind.org - Use their java applet, and give it port 8333 TCP, it will check to see if you're able to send data to people on port 8333.
If this fails, you're best contacting your ISP, and asking them why you aren't able to connect to people using port 8333.

Well... blockchain.info's wallet DOES sign transactions in the browser, as well as encrypt/decrypt the wallet in the browser, so that blockchain.info doesn't have access to your funds. This is pretty much a bitcoin client in your browser, that's almost (or in some cases more) as secure as the official client.

This pretty much makes bitcoin able to be used purely from your web browser, the only thing it lacks is the ability to run as its own node, instead it forwards your transactions after signing them in the browser, to blockchain.info's own bitcoin daemon, which then releases it to the rest of the network.

For now it works, I haven't had any time to work on it, and nobody has reported any problems so far really.


My version is already on github, check the first post. If you mean xchrix's version, he hasn't replied since I've been contacting him for months, so I'm unable to grab the source from him.


If I have time, I'll add encryption support to +Coin sometime soon.