Really? I thought both were. Under which jurisdiction are .com domains then?

They can block IPs outside of their jurisdiction for those who live inside their jurisdiction, just like the Great Firewall.

Come on, the guy predicted dollar parity in February months before it happened! Of course it is a "weather forecast", but he was very accurate on that one.

Just watched Gavin presentation. Very nice!

Nice.
I don't think I can apply to the offer though, mainly due to time constraints.

Do you know there is a java keystore (JKS) file type that you can use to store key pairs? You could add them there in standard formats like PKCS12, PEM etc... These way they could be exported/imported not only by the library, but by external tools as well.
And, just for curiosity, why not JDBC instead of XML? You'd probably have better performance and flexibility that way... if you really want to output a XML file, I guess there might be some XML-database with JDBC drivers somewhere on the internet.

I remember the people from XWiki had a project for making it P2P. XWiki Concerto: http://www.xwiki.com/xwiki/bin/view/BlogFr/XWiki+Concerto

XWiki is a programmable wiki.

If you had just installed, maybe your client was still downloading the block chain. That may take some hours.
But it's true, the unconfirmed transactions should have been displayed right from the beginning as far as I know... maybe while downloading the block chain the client ignores the notifications about new transactions? This would make some sense, since downloading the chain consumes lots of bandwidth, better not mind about new transactions.

Great then, we agree that there should be no IP, just contracts.


There are several ways producers of content may assure their earnings. People would still find a way to escape, but it would be a minority. For example, watermarking digital content like movies delivered to movie theaters or downloaded. Software could be delivered in closed markets like what's happening for mobile applications. Web applications are another way to charge for software without actually delivering it. Advertises could be embedded or displayed before allowing the download of music/video. Musicians may earn their lives making shows. There are many ways...

Then the contract may be enforced. That's the closest you can get to IP, through voluntary contracts.

But that's not IP, at least not how state laws make it be. You could enforce your contract over the person that agreed on it. But if this person disrespects the contract and sell this music to somebody else, you could not enforce anything on this third person who had nothing to do with you.
Like, a marriage contract may have some clause stipulating punishments to a spouse in case of adultery, but not to the lover! 

Despite being scarce or not, the intellectual property debate should end with the fact that causing a positive externality to somebody else's property doesn't give you any right whatsoever over him or his property.

Say, for instance, a musician is playing something on the street you're passing by. Let's assume for all effects that both you and him have all the right to be there where you are doing whatever you're doing.

Suppose the music is the musician's creation. We can says it belongs to him, as the instruments he uses to play. By extension, we could even say that the sound waves he produces with his labor and property belong to him. But as soon as this waves hit your ears and affect your brain, they're causing an externality to your property. Positive externality if you like the music, negative if you don't.
But even if it's positive, that doesn't give the musician any right over you. He can't force you to pay something for the benefits you're having from this music, and I bet, for this example, most people agree.

Just change your ears and brain for your recorder, and the example keeps valid. But, for some reason, people claim once your recorder receive the positive externality caused by the musician work, you owe him something or you can't fully dispose of your property as you could before.... this makes no sense. Causing positive externalities to other people's stuff doesn't grant you any right over these people's stuff.

Voilà autre chose que je trouve bête.

Et le pire, je ne me doute pas qu'un jour les producteurs bio vont réussir à avoir des subventions pour baisser leur prix. Peut-être ils les ont déjà en faite...

Ce texte est fabuleux. C'est le meilleur texte contre le protectionnisme que j'ai déjà lu.

D'accord. Moi, j'ai. C'est pour ça que je trouve cette histoire de monnaie locale bête. C'est économiquement inférieur.


Oui, tout le monde a le droit à ses tabous, le problème c'est que c'est une petite minorité qui voit la démocratie comme la dictature de la majorité qu'elle est. Tu nourris un sentiment comme ça et ce que tu auras c'est des gens qui votent pour des hommes politiques qu'utilisent la force pour leur protéger des tout ce qui est étranger.
D'ailleurs, le protectionnisme n'irait jamais loin si n'était pas pour la force de l'état, vu qu'il est économiquement négatif. Fin, si volontaire on peut dire que le plaisir de satisfaire son tabou est un bénéfice économique valable, mais il y a une limite jusqu'à où les gens vont préférer continuer à sacrifier des avantages pratiques dans leur vies pour des sentiments comme ça.

Pourquoi?
Tous les fois que j'en ai entendu parler, elles étaient défendues par un discours protectionniste.

Une monnaie globale et décentralisée, comme était l'or, me semble l'idéal. Espérons que les bitcoins y arrivent un jour.

Many bitcoin sites are made by geeks in their spare time, so don't expect many professional web designs.
Regarding physical address, what for? E-mail + public key isn't enough?

Anyone could force everyone to pay transaction fees, that's true.
That wouldn't make only the attackers transaction get included, though. Those paying more fees would be included first.

What I wonder is if miners implement intelligent ways of discarding transactions if their transaction pools gets too big...

For you to have an idea, from January 1980 to June 1994 (last month before Real), the Brazilian monetary base expanded 2.303.797.693.883%. That's an average of 518% per year.
On the other hand, from July 1994 until April 2009, almost the same period, the monetary base expanded "only" 1.938%.

That's what actually "saved" Brazil, not a terminology trick.

Source: http://tinyurl.com/6jdvruq
He uses official data.

Perception might have some importance, but holding back the printers is what really counts.
After Real adoption, they stop expanding the monetary base so crazily as before. Taxes raised a lot and government had to sell some stuff in order to keep the budget.

Not true. There are fees for tiny amounts transactions and there is a maximum size limit for blocks.

I guess the place isn't defined yet, right?
If by Central Europe they mean Switzerland or south of Germany, I'm not that far. (I live in the south of France). There are others who may be more used to do this kind of thing, like the financial analyst of this forum who predicted the parity in February (S3052? Don't remember the numbers). He lives in Switzerland if I remember well.

Anyway, if you don't find anyone better, contact me. I believe I know bitcoins technical and economical concepts well enough, but I have never presented anything to "high-profile financial business".