A Bitcoin Tip bot for these forums would be cool. Like the one they have on reddit. This would encourage better discussions 

I don't know, why don't you try and see?

I beg your pardon?

Neither does yours.

The most secure ciphers are those that nobody knows how to decrypt. This is the reason SmallWallet is so secure. SmallWallet uses PRESENT, one of the most compact encryption methods ever designed (being 2.5 times smaller than AES). PRESENT is not very well known. However, this is it's strong point. A potential hacker might try AES, DES, Blowfish, IDEA, RC4, and TEA before they try PRESENT. Needless to say, this will take a long time. The only weak point, however, is SmallWallet itself. If a potential hacker finds out you use SmallWallet, they'll use PRESENT right away.

However, SmallWallet also provides protection against that with false password entropy. False password entropy is a system I developed in which the application asks you to put junk letters in certain parts of your password. The location and letters of these junk letters are somewhat remembered, so a key logger wont be distinguish from your password and a junk password (%50 of your password would be junk). All you have to do is remember your last SessionKey, and this will make your password entropy secure. However, forgetting your last Session Key is no problem, however false password entropy will chose different locations for those junk letters, which might be an advantage to key loggers.*

SmallWallet also provides offline support, so you never have to type or receive sensitive information while you are connected to the internet (which might protect against malicious SSH or something similar). Just turn off your internet connection, log in, sign the transaction, log out, and as soon as you are back online, SmallWallet will send your transaction for you.*

If you don't like the PRESENT encryption algorithm, and or prefer to use something even smaller, we will provide a Tiny Encryption Algorithm version of SmallWallet. And if you are even more concerned with space, we will provide a method of compressing code and tjat wallet.dat, and decompressing on the fly (performance in exchange for space)*

• Is very lightweight†^{Will be whence ECDSA is compacted which will be done soon.}
• Uses PRESENT super light weight function for encryption
• Uses non-standard methods of storage but still provides export to standard methods (and thus looks like nonsense to hackers)†
• Protects against key loggers and other viruses using false password entropy (don't bother looking it up)*
• Offline support.*

* NOT YET SUPPORTED (PLANNED FOR VERY NEAR UPDATES)
† IS ARBITRARY AND IS CURRENTLY BEING IMPROVED

• [  ] Using false password entropy to protect against keyloggers
  
• [✓] Uses online resources to get data including balances and recent transactions
  
• [  ] Showing recent your transactions without downloading blockchain
  
• [✓] Live promt that features shell-like argument passing
  
• [✓] Uses PRESENT super light weight encryption function
  
• [  ] Non-standard mneumonic system in case of loss of file
  
• [  ] Maintains password entropy position similarities (to confuse keylogger further)
  
• [  ] Gets all data from Junction.co or any other website that uses Junction Co API
  
• [  ] Junction Co wallet API
  
• [  ] Use compressed code for SUPER SUPER lightweight feature
  
• [  ] Transaction signing and submitting to network
  
• [✓] Generating addresses using standard ECDSA, Ripemd160, and Sha256
  
• [  ] Lightweight Ripemd160 and Sha256 Python implementations
  
• [  ] Uses Junction Co as a lightweight method to check for internet connection
  
• [  ] Has configurability as to white sites are used
  
• [  ] Offline transaction signing
  
• [✓] Balance cache updated every 15 minutes
• [  ] Compact ECDSA Python implementation
  
  
  PLEASE LEAVE SUGGESTIONS
  I'm trying to create this client for everyone. If you have ANYTHING that would improve this client, PLEASE post it.
  
  
  GITHUB, SOURCE, DOWNLOADS
  v1.3.20 ALPHA downloads: https://github.com/Plazmotech/SmallWallet/releases/tag/v1.3.20
  v1.3.20 ALPHA source: https://github.com/Plazmotech/SmallWallet
  
  
  BETA TESTERS
  I need Beta testers! Please consider testing this wallet. Report any bugs! Suggest any ideas! Any help is appreciated
  
  
  Donate
  If you like my work, please consider donating to 1HqnYcfyY3pqqxGQZWCTjUnsSKMVPzUmAH (That address was created and is mantained through SmallWallet )

I'm going to Berlin, Prague, Vienna, Salzburg, Munich and London in September. What are the best Bitcoin places I can visit? I do intend to spend as much BTC as I can

For clarification: I don't have that much BTC only about 0.9 but y'all get the point.

Or, y'know, math.

You evil, evil genius.

…So? Bitcoins were made to be divisible in 8 units… (or 1 byte)

Quantum Computers are not replacement for Classic Computers. Quantum Bits (qubits) operate on quantum states. Classical bits are represented as 0's and 1's, where qubits are represented as probabilities on a plane.

In otherwords, classical bits are represented as 0 or 1.

Quantum bits are represented as a|0> + b|1>.

The only difference in speed this makes is quantum computers are faster at doing quantum calculations (they can take shortcuts because of the fact that gates can manipulate qubits in an algebraic manner), but will not speed the process of doing hashes (something not necessarily algebraic)

Sounds reasonable. I'm sorry for your "loss", but I must ask you one question.

Had Garr255 warned people he could manipulate the prices would you still participate in the auction? After all, Garr255 has a right to sell his products for whatever price he would like to, and might've just been using the initial "auction" as a way to gauge the demand for the chip, and then set a price he would be willing to sell at.

Yes, and I agree.

I'm saying his actions as a whole were partially incorrect (due to the fact he used an anonymous account), however the act of setting his own pricepoint wasn't. It seems people here are arguing that his setting of the pricepoint of his own items is morally incorrect, which I find ridiculous.

Hell, if you were to sell your own prized possession and the price people are willing to pay for it is below the price you're willing to sell at, wouldn't you want to manipulate the price?

I do, however, once again, agree 100% that the act of doing so using an anonymous account is very incorrect.

I would. He's selling his stuff, why shouldn't he have control over the price of the sell? Hell, if he wanted to he could sell it for a fixed price of BTC100, but he didn't, instead, used the "auction" as a tool to gauge the demand of his audience, then placed a price point.

I completely agree to that, however it's beside the point. The point is the moral validity of manipulating the prices to his desire, which I find completely valid.

Had Garr255 warned he would "shill" his "auction" beforehand, it would remove the need to use a anonymous account.

N… No I don't see what you're trying to say.

Or at least, what I extracted from your post is that you believe Garr255 calling it an auction was a mistake, he should have called it something else so people would be forced to ask how it works, and thus would be informed of the rules of the "auction" beforehand, therefore negating the moral invalidity of Garr255's actions?

If Garr255 hadn't of called it an auction, rather, a multi-person multi-account multi-person bargain that functions rather like an auction would you agree that what he did isn't morally incorrect?

It's a multiperson BARGAIN. He's allowed to change the price to whatever he wishes. The buying must make the decision to either buy or drop the at the current price Garr255 is offering.

It's ridiculous people think the mere fact that Garr255 is setting a price to something he is selling is morally wrong. Garr255 can do whatever he pleases with the price of what he is selling (As long as he commits to a buy). What's morally wrong of Garr's actions is the decision to keep this price manipulator anonymous. Had he revealed the existence and admitted to the use of the account before beginning the "auction", his actions would be completely free of any moral fault.

If Gar255 hadn't of called it an auction, rather, a multi-person bargain that functions rather like an auction would you agree that what he did isn't morally incorrect?

I'm honest, I wouldn't do an auction and use a sock puppet for it, but I'm saying I see nothing wrong with it, just the method he executed it (Using an anonymous sock puppet) was bad. If I were to do an auction, and I genuinely wasn't happy with the prices I would raise the current bid, however I wouldn't use an anonymous sock puppet, and I would warn people I might do it beforehand.