I think you unfortunately have to be a legal immigrant in this day and age.  You can get a SIN# (same as SSN#) as an illegal immigrant, but it's going to start with a 9, which banks will no longer allow without additional documentation.  Aside from that, 2 pieces of ID, a utility bill, and you have a bank account.

EDIT:  You have TD Bank in the US, correct?  Contact them, and say you want to open a Canadian account.  Should be easy.

Wow, what a massive slippery slope to go down, and one I think the Bitcoin community should avoid at all costs.  How or why is the community as a whole responsible for deciding who is and isn't allowed to own Bitcoin?  You actually used Gadaffi as an example, which proves my point perfectly, because there's 10s or even 100s of millions of people out there who would happily argue against you on that.  It's pretty tough to make the argument that Libya is better off now versus under Gadaffi, when everyone had free education, electricity, house upon marriage, etc.

Who decides what addresses should be blacklisted?

Who's in charge of the processes and regulations required to blacklist an address?

Is there an appeals process of any kind?

How can we be sure the ownership of said address hasn't changed hands during investigation process?

What happens when the Russian mafia gets $80mm worth of Bitcoin frozen, and proceeds to send some people over to the mining farm(s) to handle the blacklisting issue?  Or even worse, a militant group like ISIS?

Will owners of DNMs have their coins frozen?  If so, why?  I don't personally do drugs, but don't have a problem with someone purchasing a little cocaine off the internet.

How about the FBI?  Do we get to freeze the coins they confiscated, as it could easily be argued the FBI stole them from their rightful owners.

How about the US Department of Defence?  After all, they're the largest arms dealer on the planet, and indirectly kill more humans than any other organization in existence, so are they allowed to own Bitcoin?

How about the Chinese government?  They're well known for silencing free speech, so should we allow them to have Bitcoin?

Who gets control over the frozen Bitcoins?  Where do they go, and who decides that?  Just permanently lock them, give them to the Red Cross, or?

Why would the Bitcoin community open its door to the massive amount of possible corruption this would include?

This whole idea of freezing / blacklisting coins is horrible, and filled with holes.

http://motherboard.vice.com/en_ca/read/the-canadian-senate-announced-its-bitcoin-report-in-a-totally-appropriate-way

Thanks Canada.

I'll admit, Synala in and of itself is new to the market.  However, by no means am I new to Bitcoin development, nor is this the first Bitcoin related system I've developed.

I can also virtually guarantee the security of your funds.  Even if a hacker roots your server, and manages to decrypt everything within the database, they're still not going to have access to your funds.  I've been using the same technology for two years now, and have yet to have a single satoshi stolen from me, from any of my "hot wallets".

http://synala.com/

Will have you up and running with bitcoin payments in time, extremely secure, easy to use, etc.  Any questions, just let me know.

Another option for you is Synala, which is available free of charge from http://envrin.com/synala

Simply upload the contents of the .zip file to your server, open in your browser, follow the easy setup process and you'll be up and running accepting Bitcoin is no time.  If you have any questions regarding it, please don't hesitate to ask.

Nothing?  Hmmm...  wrong forum maybe.

We're happy to announce the release of both, Synala and our Offline Signer.  Both are absolutely free of charge, and open sourced on GitHub for your viewing / modification.  Synala allows you to quickly, easily and securely accept Bitcoin payments online.  It fully supports multiple BIP32 wallets, multi-signature transactions, offline signing, user registration, products, invoices, and more.

On top of this, our Offline Signer is a quality desktop application written in Python that seamlessly integrates with Synala, and allows you to securely sign all transactions offline, helping ensure the safety of your funds.  It's also developed to be easily integrated with any existing online system that handles Bitcoin transactions, if they would like to provide offline signing to their users as well.

You can view full details, and download either program at the below URLs:

Synala:  http://envrin.com/synala

Offline Signer:  http://envrin.com/offline_signer

Thank you in advance, and any questions / concerns / suggestions, please don't hesitate to mention them.  We're all ears.

Life?  That's bullishit.   Why the fuck aren't a good portion of the CIA in prison?  It's well proven they're the biggest drug dealers on the planet.

Nevermind, thanks to the help of andytoshi, I got it figured.  Was missing a 0x4c at the beginning of the redeem script.

Wondering if anyone can help.  I can sign 2-of-2 txs no problem, but having an issue with 2-of-3.  Below is an example transaction I put together.  I have the signatures for pub keys #1 and #3 in the redeem script.  I don't know, what am I supposed to put for that second signature I don't have?  I've tried everything from leaving it blank, to simply '00' to '0100', etc.  Nothing works, as bitcoin core always throws some type of error upon sending it.

Any help would be greatly appreciated!

Public -> Private is basically impossible, so nothing to worry about there, if someone gets your public key.

Private -> Private is obviously possible though.  More than likely they would just loop through the keys.

As a side note, make sure whatever you're using to sign transactions is legit.  If you sign your transactions using malicious code that specifies the nonce to use for signing, then yeah, they'll be able to obtain your private key after gathering some signatures from the blockchain.

I do quite a bit of BIP32 work these days, and Electrum seems to be the de-facto wallet that everyone loves.  So I'm trying to sync the online BIP32 systems I develop with Electrum.  This way funds will hit the online system, plus also be picked up by Electrum, so from the client's POV the funds will be going directly into their Electrum wallet, making them happier than a clam.  I notice when I put a BIP32 public key into Electrum, it'll auto-generate and watch the first 20 addresses.

Questions are:

1.) What key index structure is used to generate the addresses?  As long as I ensure the online system uses the same key index structure, both the online system and Electrum should generate and watch the same addresses.

2.) How do I increase that 20 auto-generated addresses to say 100?  My concern is there will be times when 20 addresses in a row go unused, which will break the sync.

3.) At what point does Electrum generate a new batch of addresses to watch for?  Does it wait until all addresses have had funds sent, or how does it handle that?

4.) Is there maybe any type of import functionality, where I can input a CSV file of inputs, and Electrum adds them to the wallet?  This would be the fool proof way, because then I can just have a "Download Inputs" button in the online system, which clients can import into their Electrum wallet.

5.) I can't seem to find any docs on plugin development.  Can someone point me in the right direction?  I have an offline signer (http://github.com/peterscott78/offline_signer) that I would like to integrate with Electrum -- clients can plug in their sends, they go into a pending queue within Electrum, then when ready they can download a JSON file for signing via my app.

Any help or advice would be greatly appreciated.  If it helps, please don't hesitate to get technical, as that's fine with me.

Thanks!

Might have to splurge, and send that whopping $0.03 fee next time.

Personally, I think it's just a matter of education for the most part, plus us developers making tools / services that make it easier and more available to the masses.  Year after year, taxes go up, inflation takes a bite, and wages stay stagnant.  People are getting squeezed more and more, and it's unsustainable.  At some point, you're going to begin seeing the balance tip, and people looking for ways to save money.

When this happens, the demand to get paid in bitcoin will increase, because as merchant adoption spreads, people will begin realizing 30%+ of their income can be tax free.

Don't use wallet software provided by someone who goes by a name like l33tHaxorKid, and you'll be fine.

It's sending change back to itself.

Look at that, both you and the CEO of that KickStarter campaign are named Michael.  Talk about a coincidence.

Not to sound like a jerk, but who cares about the Bitcoin Foundation?  Isn't the whole point of bitcoin so we don't have to deal with bureaucratic bullshit?  In my eyes, they're 100% totally irrelevant, and just created themselves a bunch of good paying jobs.

Hell with it, I'm starting Bitcoin Foundation 2.0 -- who's in?  If we play our cards right, we can all be making 7 figures within the next 12 months for not doing much except talking.  Cool deal, eh?

If you're trying to prove a case for the superiority of altcoins versus bitcoin, you're really not doing a good job.  How are any of those four factors you mentioned different in altcoins out there?  You don't think the developers of various altcoins don't have their own massive stashes they're hoarding?  If they get the traction and media attention bitcoin has, you don't think some of their business owners / foundation members aren't going to have the spotlight and cops attention attracted to them?  You don't think they're susceptible to network-wide hacking attempts, or fake bots manipulating the price?

Sorry dude, but you failed at proving why altcoins are superior.  Especially considering 99.5% of all altcoins out there run off bitcoin's code.