There appears to be the ability for "Brand New" forum members to be able to post in the Local -> Other board, without any of the Newbie restrictions like the other boards have.  Is this intentional?

 - http://bitcointalk.org/index.php?board=11.0

Forum user mndrix ran for office recently.  He operated CoinPal (selling bitcoins, with payment through PayPal ... before PayPal froze his accounts):

 - http://www.bitcoinmoney.com/post/508616700
 - http://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=93770.0

He also ran CoinCard cash-out service (to PayPal and to gift cards).

His profile:
 - http://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2538

Is the registration e-mail being sent out automatically?  I registered but haven't seen the message.   I checked my spam folder as well.

[Edit: And I clicked the re-send activation and didn't get anything after that as well.]

Liberty Forum 2013 starts today [Edit: Friday] through the weekend.

The list of speakers includes:

Charlie Shrem (Bitcoin Foundation board member, BitInstant, BitcoinWireless.com)
Roger Ver (BitcoinStore.com, investor in various Bitcoin ventures)
Erik Voorhees (SatoshiDICE, BitInstant, Coinapult, BitcoinWireless.com)

 - http://freestateproject.org/libertyforum

Well, BitconWireless only ran their limited access trial for a short while so currently there aren't any methods to convert bitcoins to mobile airtime through them -- and the only competition (BTCBuy.info) serves U.S. mobile carriers only.

Seeing that M-Pesa has 60,000 agents in Kenya who load E-Float (airtime money) onto customer phones a network of potential trader/entrepreneurs already exists and could easily begin to add exchange service (to and from bitcoins) as an additional service (... though without Safaricom's blessing and/or knowledge).

I've seen that each customer account at Coinbase gets its own Bitcoin addresses.  That would make them not a hosted (shared) EWallet but some form of hybrid hosted EWallet.   That would also then allow Coinbase on the list of clients that can be used to send BitLotto wagers. 

I'm not 100% sure Coinbase works this way but wanted to put it out there that there is yet another type of EWallet.  An inquiry to Coinbase to confirm should probably be made before adding them to the list.

I wish there were no threats.  I wish the only news of the day were what you read at Good News:
 - http://www.goodmood-news.com

But this is the real world.  There are real threats to be aware of.  They do exist to some degree.  They are the reason Bitcoin isn't already at $29,870 per BTC rather than just $29.87.  This thread asked what could stop bitcoin and I was just putting out some possibilities.

- http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/18g02v

That appears to have occurred at about the same time as a 15% selloff was underway, ... in which if there had been a green light and selling occurred Wednesday evening (West) / Thursday morning (East) then timing of the weekend dip strategy would have been perfect!
 - http://bitcoincharts.com/charts/mtgoxUSD#rg60zczsg2013-2-14zeg2013-02-16ztgSzm1g10zm2g25zv

At least I'm assuming that's what cbeast was referring to.

Increasing production costs might actually cause greater supply to be sent to market as miners need to sell more coins to pay for those higher costs.

The price charts for GDJ3 and CLJ3 are borked, ... no updates in many days.

Bitcoin is a distributed p2p network exactly to prevent such a thing.

Blockchain.info is a third party service.   Because there isn't a requirement that users set up their wallet account to have an alias or to associate an e-mail address with the account, many are using it without getting possession of their private keys (e.g., backups sent via e-mail).  So if that service sees "friction", those who don't have their keys then don't have their coins.   Blockchain.info is now likely the most widely used wallet, after the Bitcoin.org client.  I suspect that if such an action were to occur, that action would be seriously harmful to Bitcoin.  I didn't say it would stop Bitcoin, but I did say it would probably knock Bitcoin down a few notches.  This is just like how the exchange hacks have nothing to do with Bitcoin network, but there was a loss in Bitcoin's credibility that came with each one.

Yankee probably meant to encourage you to send a PM to his forum user account directly.  Listing order ID and/or account numbers publicly is not necessary (or necessarily a good idea).

Also, the BitInstant support thread is here:
 - http://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=128314.0

If you are going to extend trust to the issuer, then you might as well use media that is more durable and harder to counterfeit (e.g., Casascius physical bitcoins).  Paper wallets work great because they are cheap enough to produce that you don't lose much when destroying them after one use.    If I scan the QR code upon receipt (or when I get back home, etc,) then there is much less risk than circulating a piece of paper that potentially could be counterfeit without anyone really knowing whether it is or not.

ZIGGAP, but you are asked for name, phone number and date of birth.  Moneygram or Western Union transactions don't necessarily require identity verification when the cash payment occurs (it may vary based on agent location) so I'm curious why ZIGGAP makes that a requirement.  Either way, here's the URL:
 - https://ziggap.com

BitMe allows cash deposit at Chase bank to be credited to your BitMe exchange account:
 - http://www.BitMe.com

In the U.S., be aware of the "suspicionless, electronics search rules":

- http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2013/02/electronics-border-seizures

Heh, did more than just follow.  Great idea!

Re: A Bitcoin Fountain (Burbank, CA) - -> BTC for the taking!

This weekend is SCALE 11X (So CAlifornia Linux Expo).  I'm not able to attend this year's conference but last year I attended and in addition to having some great conversations with sysadmins, developers and others in the open source community I gained a healthy fear of relying on the cloud for services in which complete control over security is necessary (something which played out months later with the hacks at Linode (where funds were stolen from Bitcoinica, Slush and Bitcoin Faucet wallets) and Rackspace (where even more funds were stolen from a Bitcoinica wallet).

But if others from this list are attending it might make for a good impromptu Bitcoin meetup.

Your transfer transaction consolidated a bunch of "dust" transactions


BitcoinCharts shows it as:
"This is a low priority transaction. This transaction includes 0.00600000 BTC as fee. size: 10881 bytes priority: 12,044,794 input: 9.79264834 BTC"

i.e., you submitted a large sized transaction that isn't even getting relayed it appears.

Over time it will eventually get processed (if it does not involve any double spends).  It may take a day, or so -- maybe longer since it appears some peers aren't even relaying it (evidenced by blockchain.info not even knowing about the transaction.)

If you are using Bitcoin-Qt, you can use "-connect=173.242.112.53" to have your client connect to a node that will re-broadcast your transaction regardless of the amount of fee paid.

The Bitcoin-Qt client generally won't let you make a transaction using unconfirmed funds but if you were using a different client that is something that could have happened.    What client were you using when you made the transfer?

You are overlooking how exchange rate volatility is not a favorable attribute for a currency.  If those hoarding continued to hold their coins regardless of current sentiment, you would have a point.

Instead what historically ends up happening, more often than not, is that a rise that is unwarranted gets "corrected".  The aggressive buying ends and just normal selling volume can cause the price direction to turn.  Then the hoarders [Edit: speculators] "lock in their gains" by selling, and the downward pace accelerates.

Is this rise unwarranted?   That's the question that nobody knows the answer to.   It could be.  Or, perhaps Bitcoin should already have been a digital currency worth somewhere around $300 million at the end of 2012 but it wasn't and now has been brought to an appropriate level.  Or not.   We'll see.

But merchants who sell goods and services at $29.87 today and don't convert those to some other more stable form of value may rue the day they decided to accept bitcoins (and hold those proceeds as bitcoins) should a price correction occur swiftly.

Or the occcu. 


New Epic Fail Currency? 'Occcu'
 - http://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=62983.0

These won't stop bitcoin, but any one could definitely reverse Bitcoin's current direction:

 - FinCEN going after exchanges for not filing as money transmitters (and/or for not registering as money service businesses) for selling "prepaid access".  (This includes those exchanges serving customers in the U.S. regardless of where the exchange is located).
 - Coinbase, BitMe, BitFloor, and CampBX being served subpoenas to cough up the USD and BTC transaction history for each of its customer accounts.
 - Blockchain.info being raided for mixing service, logs sized
 - Update to Adobe Flash released in January includes previously undetected wallet-stealer code that executed on all systems at 8am UTC February 19, 2013. [this is a hypothetical threat.]
 - etc.
 - etc.
 - etc.