This doesn't need that, as the rules of the machine can determine when and under what circumstances the datagram is repeated.  Similar to how packet radio works, only slower.


It'd be usefull anyway, but particularly during a Internet blackout of a limited term.  If the Internet is permnently and irreversablely destroyed, Bitcoin won't work anymore; but if that were to ever happen, I think I might have bigger problems.

I've thought about very low value bitcoin tipping for forwarding, but I don't know how to do it.  Any suggestions?

Yeah, that video has been there for years.  I've been stalling because I was hoping it would amount to more than vaporware.

Did that attempt hurt?

Unlike yourself, I didn't claim to know of any relationship between any particular claims and the real number of bitcoin users.  I honestly don't know if there are more or less than 1 Million users.  I mentioned it to highlight your lack of evidence.  Referencing the logic and "data" of others, who don't have any evidience of their own, doesn't constitute evidence either.  You do this a lot, make grand arguments that you cannot support.  I'm surprised you're not either a lawyer, a politician or a preacher.

Mostly lazyness.  In another year I'll change it to a Rand Paul 2016 avatar.  I've met Rand, but not his father.  Really nice guy, and taller than he looks on tv.  I've also met Dennis Kucinich, who is also a fine fellow, but is much shorter than he appears on tv.

In fact, I've shaken the hands of several current and former politicos.  Not all of them struck me as fine people.  Have you ever had the feeling, upon meeting someone for the first time, of this strange sensation that you would be wise to never be in the presence of this person without witnesses?  I most certainly have, and most of the time this was when I was meeting either a politican for the first time, or a violent convict. One such person is the current US representative in my own district.  He gave me the creeps.

He was a character.  Don't assume his actor isn't still here.

Don't you mean that the reference section would be classified and the rest of the library would just be fiction?

Funny how no one metions that you referenced your own opinions about the numbers of users.  Coinbase alone has almost 1 million accounts, not addresses.  Truthfully, we can't know how many users there are, which is kinda the point.

This is provablely not true.  Karl Marx is credited with inventing the term "capitalism" and providing the basic definition, "Private ownership of the means of production".  While this traditional form of property rights trends towards a particular line of political thought, even Marx didn't mark capitalism as a political philosophy.  That was one of the core problems with it that he stated, as it wasn't really a political plan, and instead simply a default state of a society.  He viewed this default state to be less than optimal, and that applying some social enginnering to the economic system would result in reduced poverty.  However, Karl Marx was far from an economic theorist, and completely missed the most important issues.  First off, defining capitalism and socialism as he did doesn't alter the nature of the society; for there were publicly owned corporations within England during the Industrial Revolution (the society that he based his observations upon) and we've seen that private possession (the more important distinction) of the means of production (capital) cannot be designed out of any society, even an ideal socialist one.  A corporation is, by design, a socialist business hierarchy, since the means of production is owned collectively by the shareholders, yet the shareholders do not have possession of the means of production, the employees of the corporation do.  While the shareholders can also be employees, even being a member of both 'classes' of people does not entitle an individual to make any business decision alone about any particular piece of corporate property.  The root meaning of "ownership" is that the "owner" of that property gets to decide what is done with said property; be it land plowed up to plant corn or built upon, a car that can be rented out or not, or a toy that can be thrown away; whoever can make that decision is the owner.  In practice, a corporation has no owner, and only the regulation that pertains to that industry has the ultimate say about what becomes of the corporate property.  So in the end, corporations, as products of the state, are also owned by the state.  Rail against the corporate "capitalism" that you see all around you, but the fact is that what you see isn't capitalism even as Karl Marx defined it, it's just another accidental form of socialism.

That would be a use case, but certainly not the only one.


That would require a back channel, if you needed to know.  Such a back channel could be a datacast stream from a DRM station (if you're patient) or an alternative service, such as Iridium Burst.


Not with a full client, no.  The white paper does describe a 'light' style client with a reduced security model that could do offline transactions with limitations.  For example, the device would need to be able to communicate with the other light client, which is one use case of my proposal.  Additionally, the light client would need occasional access to a gateway node, in order to update it's wallet.dat; otherwise it would eventually run out of spendable inputs.


It's not really intended as a 'fallback' method.  It's intended as a primary communications method between portable, hardware based light clients; i.e. the kind that are not simply an app on a smartphone.  Additionally, it's intended as an efficient & mostly automatic digital communications mode.  Imagine if you had a device that could send and receive texts to/from people that you have already met IRL to a distance of 5+ miles radius in a single hop, but could also use multi-hop methods to cross a moderate sized city.  Without any kind of ongoing licesnsing or service fees.  A pocket sized device that is a cross between a texting FRS radio and a hardware wallet, that may or may not have a cell service data plan of it's own.  There are other use cases for a 'slow mesh' as well.

The filing isn't quite done, but I have the frequency allocation proposal finished.  It's filling number with the FCC is 0158-EX-PL-2014, if anyone is interested.  I filed it as an experimental license application, because there really wasn't a better method.  The FCC doesn't have a method for suggesting completely new ideas.

I'm thinking of calling it a "slow mesh" until I have a better name for it.  Any ideas?

Consider it a trial by fire.  If you can't figure it out, they don't want your help.

Automaticly, but not immediately.

bump

That's a strange statement, since I've been using as currency for four years.

There is also a significant difference in the practical maximum amount of velocity between the current credit based financial systems and what Bitcoin can maintain.  Assuming that the transaction volume issues can be solved or worked around, bitcoin can turn over it's entire currency base every hour.  The US dollar credit system, for example; while transactions can be completed nearly instantly (like Visa) the final settlement of those transactions still require weeks on average.  Furhermore, velocity is limited in the private realm as well, since there is a delay of about a week from the time an employee earns his wages to the time he can receive, deposit and cancel his paycheck.  The net effect of higher velocity is similar to inflation, so not as much bitcoin would be required to service the world's transaction needs as is present in the fiat currency totals.  Keep in mind, that although the employee is unlikely to get paid more often than weekly, if Walmart was accepting bitcoins at the registers and paying their employees as well, it's entirely plausible that the employee who gets paid in bitcoin today for last week's work will still be getting paid out of bitcoins spent at the register the same day as his payday, gathered up automaticly from registers across the world.

Addressing only this point.  This is Adam Beck's perspective on this only.  He is likely correct, but if the alt-coin killer feature is obvious after implementation, Bitcoiners will quickly choose to either migrate to the new coin (selling their stake in Bitcoin, and therefore losing interest in the outcome) or advocate for the change to be completed quickly.  Or both at the same time.  In the long run, it doesn't really matter which is true, or whether or not Bitcoin remains the cryptocurrency of choice.

I don't think you really understand what problem Stratum addresses.

Yes, it would take more power than a Part 15 device is permitted.  My suggested power limits are way over  Part 15 limits, which is why I need to have a proposal at all.  If I could use Part 15 power limits and make it work, I wouldn't need the blessing of the FCC.  This was the root problem of a great many of the mesh networks that have been tried before, Part 15 device power levels just can't get any useful distance.  Combined with the fact that 2.45 GHz is an awful band for range anyway, and 900 Mhz isn't a whole lot better.  There is a corrolary between interference and range; because (generally speaking) the lower the frequency, the lower the attenuation rate of the ground wave.  This is why a legal limit CB transceiver can communicate over the visible horizon, and anything over 30 Mhz generally cannot.  Since such bands can travel farther via groundwave, you are more likely to experience manmade interference regardless of the current reflectivity of the ionosphere.

BTW, the first 6 channels of the 2.45 Ghz wifi band overlaps a ham radio band, and some hams use Part 95 power limit rules to make some truely awesome mesh networks from commercial gear.

http://www.broadband-hamnet.org/