While there are facts I don't like, I can accept them and I've never suffered a heart attack as a result. Though it's irrelevant since you've never said anything that even remotely resembles a fact.

Your thread was deleted because it was utterly moronic, even more so than your usual bullshit. Everyone who had the misfortune to read it is now dumber for having done so. Go ahead and sell your coins, and don't let the door hit you on your way out.

I reckon he'll suffer some kind of terrible "accident" (of his own design) moments before he can move the coins, providing a handy excuse for his inability to do so. The possibilities are endless - perhaps his "sealed" computer will be attacked by "malware", or maybe he'll come down with a sudden case of "food poisoning" - but in any case, he will point to the suspicious timing of the "accident" as proof that "they" (bankers, Chinese spies, etc) are out to get him, and he must go into hiding indefinitely, thus preserving the mystery of Satoshi while neatly solving his tax problems.

Newbies aren't allowed to post images.

Behold, the Opposite Oracle has spoken. If kwukduck says it, it must be false. Hoax confirmed (as if it wasn't already).

I didn't. I always believed you. With regards to the goats, at least.

In the case of kwukduck, it is. He's so frequently wrong it defies probability. You'd think he'd be right sometimes, purely by chance, but he never is. It is safe to interpret his posts as though they were written by Nostradamus on Opposite Day.

Claudius: "Hey, I didn't use that much poison!"

Because Christian mythology describes the totally barbaric concept of justice that when punishing someone for a crime, it's not necessary for that someone to be the person who actually committed the crime. It's perfectly acceptable to punish an innocent person and let the guilty go free, since the punishment itself is all that matters. See this Chick Tract for more information. Leviticus 16:7-10 prescribes punishing goats for this purpose, which is the origin of the term "scapegoat".


The Seventh-Day Adventists draw a direct connection between Azazel and Jesus, which is one of their more controversial teachings. I personally don't see what's controversial about it; the connection seems plain to me. Jesus is the scapegoat of the New Testament.

EDIT: Typo.

Exactly the same can be said for the original, being made of entirely different materials than he was some years ago. In any case, a clone's memories of doing work would be a form of suffering, and isn't it wrong to bring suffering upon a sapient life-form without some form of compensation? Compensation for the suffering of doing work is why the original got paid in the first place, remember.

Again, speak for yourself. I suppose some religious person who believes in souls would be distraught at discovering there is more than one of himself in the world, but not me.

Blackmail him for what? What exactly does the clone stand to lose by revealing that the original was murdered?

Ies disagree. Both of Ies would think myselves to be the original, and both would be correct, except in the narrow sense that Ies would not made of the original material, but as the thread title points out, nobody is.

Stop equivocating. At first you used the word "clone" to mean "a copy of our neurons with all of their connections" with "all of our memories, personality and mental capacities", and in this sense, the clone would indeed be another me, regardless of all other factors, as identity is an aspect of consciousness, which is a property of the mind, which is a process of the brain. Same brain = same person. But here you're using "clone" in the traditional sense of a being with identical DNA, like a twin. Obviously these clones do not have, and have never had, the same brain, and cannot in any way be considered to be the same person, and it is absurd to suggest I said otherwise.

Huh? 50% of their fortune is less than what they started with, when there was just one of them in the world. By having to share one person's property between the two of them, both the clone and the original have been robbed by scientist, who is now faced with two people who hate him instead of one person who didn't. Not the best idea ever.

The answer is a clear yes. The clone would be an autonomous individual in its own right. It also has every right to the original's identity (and property, which opens up a whole new can of worms). There is also the problem of pronouns - the plural of "I" is supposed to be "we", though that doesn't really work when both individuals are "me". I propose instead the plurals "Ies" and "mees" to avoid confusion.

Speak for yourself. I'm doing this as soon as the technology becomes available. I know I'm not the person I once was, and won't be in the future, so why would I care whether that person is "natural" or artificial?

Actual huge problem: this completely breaks links containing the word "bitcoin" in the URL, eg bitcoin.org.

The difference is the transaction fee, the same as any other transaction. What's weird about it?

Yan Wang

I suggest buying a dictionary. You can never go wrong with a good dictionary. I recommend the Oxford English Dictionary, Second Edition. Though neither it nor bitcoins will help you escape the police.

If you have an specific need to escape the police, try hiring a lawyer instead of discussing the matter on a public forum that the police can read.

Lauda is one of the most reasonable people on this forum. You, on the other hand, are unreasonably upset because you asked a question and didn't like the answer. Motion denied.

It doesn't. In the case of Google Authenticator and similar apps, it ties it to a key (used to generate one-time codes) stored on the device. You can transfer it to other devices, or even run the app on your PC, though that kinda defeats the purpose (which is that a keylogger doesn't have access to everything needed to access your account, the key being on another device).

Sometimes the operator of the website has no need to be anonymous, but wishes the users to be. For this reason, there is currently some development on "direct onion services" which are faster but not anonymous for the operator.

It is crucial that they don't do it. Because if they do, they won't be able to spend their coins anywhere, or sell them, since nobody else is running their code. Their coins will be worthless and they'll have wasted their money mining them. It makes no difference whether they have 51% or not. Fortunately, miners are smarter than OP and won't do this.