Blocks in a row are irrelevant. To double spend  you need to rewrite history . Which means mining ahead of the network, then spending, then releasing your mined blocks.

I am sure there is stuff about this on the wiki .                 

Either that, or they have different assumptions about the likely future income of such a device than you or I or others do. 

Although I agree with other sentiments - if a device is deemed to be worth more to asicminer as a miner rather than as a sale unit, then we should mine with it.  However that assumes we have the ability to deploy all our units - and given that that's not the case, as I understand it, selling them seems wise from a shareholder's perspective.

I take your to mean that you are joking, but neither you nor organofcorti are the first to say those words, and I just want to get this off my chest:

Why do people have such a hard time coming to terms with the fact that value is subjective?

Just because they valued a 10GH/s blade at BTC75 (or whatever) doesn't mean that if that device doesn't mine more than BTC75 that they are stupid.  Maybe they don't believe BFL will deliver, maybe they think Avalon will be late on all fronts, and maybe they are willing to gamble on that?

Or maybe they have bitcoins to burn, and want to help distribute hashing power around the network?

Or maybe they just value the bragging rights of having one of the first publicly sold blade mining asic units in the world? 

Their reasons are their own, and for you to label them as stupid is insulting to everyone.

LOL.

For me, litecoin will always be just another altcoin that was started by a group of butthurt newbies that were pissed that they didn't get in early when bitcoins were cents-per-bitcoin (assuming of course that they'd have seen it for what it was and not ignored it if they had that chance).

The fact that they chose to implement it with a different crypto algorithm (at the time advertised as "cpu-friendly, non-gpu-minable", later updated to "cpu/gpu-friendly, non-asic-minable" when that was shown to be false) just shows that they gave it more than 5 minutes of thought, unlike so many of the other altcoins that popped in to (and almost as quickly, out of) existance back in 2011ish.

Oh my, I feel such a fool!  It's like a shroud has been lifted from my eyes and I see sense for the first time in years!  You have changed my mind with the sheer force of your formidable logic and intellect.

You are my saviour lm2f!  I don't know how to thank you!

Found it a bit weird - either the author doesn't understand, or is purposely being disingenuous.

The argument about being able to mine 6 blocks in a row with good odds over a certain period of time is a red-herring, and speaks nothing about the ability to exploit your mining power for evil.

In fact, there is nothing inherently wrong with mining 6 blocks in a row.  If you were going to try to exploit the system (double-spend), just mining some blocks in a row isn't enough.  You need to mine _ahead_ of the rest of the network (keeping the blocks for yourself), then spend (on the rest of the network, which is behind you in terms of block generation), and then release your blocks, effectively rewriting history.  That's why it's called a 51% attack - because the only realistic way to get ahead of the rest of the network is to be more than 51% of the network.  (Actually thinking about it the name seems to be a bit of a misnomer - it should be a 101% attack, because the attacker has to have at least as much hashing power as the rest of the network to have a chance of pulling off a double spend).

One of the "arguments" for litecoin is the faster blocks.  So comparing, say, an hour's worth of bitcoin blocks to an hour's worth of litecoin blocks and saying "litecoin is 10x more secure" seems to me to be discounting one of the supposed selling features of litecoin.

2012-04-25 11:27 UTC

25 @ 1.05, burnside PT as escrow

I should have bought more in your previous auction.  cest la vie.

I ended up finding my tx on blockchain.info and working backwards to save one of the sending addresses in the address book.   

It could be dangerous as the change addresses from one install won't be on the other.       

This x 1000.  As much as it would be more convenient to have my 50 chips in one unit, if the added complexity leads to delays then I would rather delivery sooner than later .

And i can only imagine the headache keeping track of everyone's different orders would be for burnin .              

PT shares and dividend received .

You should have taken the chance to buy in. 

"plummeting".... I don't think that word means what you think it means.

current bid/ask on btct.co is 11.2/1.18, current bid/ask on bitfunder 1.0/1.14

Sure the price has fallen from the 1.25+ spike a week or so ago, sure, but I'd hardly call it plummeting.

LOL @ being insulted at a poor scam attempt. 

Q. What sort of scammers are these Bitcoiners?
A. Nothing but the best!

Be wary - inject printer ink has a finite and relatively short life (can be as short as a few years).  Don't use inkjet unless you know the ink is long lasting, or only for temporary wallets.

That's cool, I truly wasn't sure.

Transaction fees are still quite small compared to the block reward - single digit percentages I believe.  Also, some mining pools pay out tx fees, others keep them and only pay out the block reward.

There is another aspect to transfer fees beyond tx size - and that is coin age.  Older coins are cheaper to spend.  It doesn't help you right now, and with such dust the time required would probably be significant, but I believe _eventually_ your dust transactions would get cheaper.

In the meantime, if you plan on spending bitcoins, but some "real" amounts.  And make sure you set your mining pool payout threshold to a decent size amount to avoid collecting more dust.

I believe that a significant proportion of future hashing power hardware has already been paid for out of retained earnings.

There is no "chicken and egg" problem here.  We're not asking for proof that you know how to trade bitcoin markets.  We're asking for proof that you know how to trade _any_ markets, for a starter.  If you truly have a day-trading/HFT background then you would already have proof, maybe in the form of an already profitable ETF trading on a _real_ stock exchange, for example.

As I said in a previous post - it's simple.  Imagine it's me asking you to invest a significant proportion of your free cashflow in me and my trading enterprise.  What proof would you want me to show you, to convince you that a) I won't just run away with your money, and b) that I actually know how to turn a profit trading.

There will always be doubters and haters, so stop engaging.  Instead, answer the reasonable questions.

Are you trying to pick an argument, or are  you truly asking a question here?

The fee goes to the miner who puts your transaction into the block chain.