There was no entry in my log for Variation margin for BUH3 today (Jan 11, 2012).

I see the previous day's entry showed "last = 15.5750" and the current level is at about the same level so it is likely the clearing price today was the exact same as yesterday and thus, I'm presuming, that there was no need to add a log entry as there was no adjustment.

But there's no historic log of daily clearing prices that will show me today's clearing price to confirm that this is what happened.

Might it be better to simply add an entry in the log for Variation margin each day regardless of whether or not the amount was above zero?  At least then nobody would be left wondering if clearing didn't happen on those days like today.

As Bitcoin permeates through more and more of the conversations by the news media, journalists and bloggers the number of posts here is increasing dramatically.  Some of these have very little to do with Bitcoin itself.  

For instance, here's an article that didn't specifically mention Bitcoin by name but the reference to "crypto currency" followed shortly with a SR reference means this certainly was a Bitcoin mention:

Insights into Cultural Shifts from a Visit to a Hardware Store
 - http://www.caseyresearch.com/articles/insights-cultural-shifts-visit-hardware-store

Even though it is a great article, I don't think it is worthy of inclusion in the Press board here on the BitcoinTalk forum.  Bitcoin was simply just a mention in the article.

But yet a catalog of all the different mentions of bitcoin might be useful.  Perhaps a thread titled something like "Minor Mentions" would be more appropriate for posting links to articles and posts where Bitcoin (or a Bitcoin-related item) was mentioned but where Bitcoin was not necessarily a significant part of the article.

Here's another example:

2013-01-11 WorldCrunch.com - SILK ROAD: DEEP INSIDE THE INTERNET HIDES A BOOMING
 - http://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=135976.0

That article was about SR only.  It did mention Bitcoin but it too was a small part of the story.

Or am I trying to fix something that isn't broke and including them in this "big net" Press board is something that works fine currently and should continue to be fine for the foreseeable future?

2013-01-09 forbes.com - PayPal Assault On File-Sharing Sites Makes Business Case

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=135623.0

I don't see any way that I can choose the language from blockchain.info (web) when the browser isn't wide enough for the drop-down select to show.  There is no scroll.   This will happen with nearly every mobile user attempting to use the blockchain.info web page.

I'ld use the Blockchain mobile app but it doesn't have the feature I was looking for ... to view the balance and transaction activity for a Bitcoin address.

I tried to install Paytunia on a Nexus 7 (Android 4.2.1) and it shows "Your device isn't compatible with this version."

Are there any plans to remedy this?

As a bookend to this thread:


and then:


[Edit: And a related thread:

[warning] bitmit.net was sold secret without telling the community.
 - http://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=135366.0 ]

I wonder if accepting bitcoin for payment would paint a bigger target on these gun and ammo sellers than they already have (or at least I wonder if that would be a fear these sellers might have.)

These sellers are more dependent on keeping their Federal Firearms License than they are in being able to accept credit card or bank transfer.  (i.e., they currently seem to have more than enough business from customers at their retail locations and gun shows where sales are cash only).

But if this were to escalate to where banks start to outright refuse provide banking service to gun and ammo sellers then bitcoin could become a necessary component for survival of these businesses.

I'm not too familiar with mobile network infrastructure.  So that is LG sending an OTA update for my Virgin Wireless branded-O/S to my mobile, and not my mobile network provider (Virgin Wireless)? 


Yup.  This isn't a problem just for mobiles either.  This same risk occurs with any updates where the user doesn't have 100% control.  Microsoft, for instance, has sent Windows Updates that install regardless of the setting that enables automatic updates.

All that is needed is one bad egg with access to slip in a few lines of code to cause widespread misery.  And there are lots of bad eggs:

- http://www.businessdailyafrica.com/Corporate-News/Safaricom-sacks-70-workers-over-theft-and-bribery-/-/539550/1500846/-/904lrp/-/index.html

That's their magic sauce.  Well, it is not just them who are employing this technique now but they were the one that first introduced this particular method.

Each payout includes funds from the wager transaction.  So if the wager transaction never confirms, then neither will the payout.  This provides the ability for SatoshiDICE to send a payout on 0/unconfirmed and not have to worry about sending a payout with the risk that later the wager will end up being a double-spend.

There is one weakness with this in that if SatoshiDICE is revealing win/loss immediately, there is then a small chance to cheat then bydouble spending only the losing wagers.   This was evidenced in this thread:

Double Spend against a satoshidice loss
 - http://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=130764.0

But SatoshiDICE made a change and now the chances of that tactic may no longer be a profitable method to cheat the service.   The change made was to treat wagers with no fee paid different, where it is not processed until the transaction gets one confirmation.


Since they are linked, the payout will only confirm in the same block when the wager transaction confirms or in a subsequent block.

This is the same type of problem seen when trying to buy bitcoins using PayPal.  Because the transaction can be reversed after the sale, no exchanges and few individual sellers are willing to sell bitcoins in exchange for either Skrill/Moneybookers or Neteller.
 - http://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Payment_methods

If you have establish a trust history on the #bitcoin-otc marketplace you might find someone willing to trade with you.
 - http://www.Bitcoin-otc.com
 - http://webchat.freenode.net/?channels=#bitcoin-otc-foyer
 - http://bitcoin-otc.com/viewratings.php

Otherwise, if you have a Skrill/Moneybookers prepaid debit card you can withdraw cash at an ATM.  If you can find a cash trade, that's one way to use your Skrill/Moneybookers funds for buying bitcoins.  There are cash deposit methods in many countries:

In the U.S., you can deposit cash at any Chase branch for credit to your BitMe exchange account:
 - http://www.BitMe.com

There are cash deposit methods available in about two dozen other countries including Canada (CA VirtEx), Australia (Spend Bitcoins), New Zealand (bitNZ), many in South Asia (ECurrencyZone), Russia (BTC-E, BitInstant), and a dozen countries that BitInstant now supports.
 - http://www.BitInstant.com

A local trade with cash might be your quickest path:
 - http://www.LocalBitcoins.com

And of course, there are numerous bank transfer methods.  E.g., in the UK, through Pingit used at Blockchain.info and BitcoinFridge.co.uk.  Blockchain.info/wallet also supports Faster Payments transfers in the UK.  Elsewhere in the EU there are numerous relatively inexpensive SEPA transfer methods.   

There are a number of options:
 - http://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Buying_bitcoins

You are making a common misunderstanding of how Bitcoin works.

The Bitcoin client collect IP addresses and the Bitcoin blockchain doesn't store them.  From the data in the blockchain there is no way to associate a transaction to an IP address or to know which node is responsible for mining each block even.

This misunderstanding comes from the information collected and reported on the third-party service, Blockchain.info.  They have a backend that makes many connections (over 3K at present).  When a node that blockchain.info's backend is connected to is the first they know of to see a transaction then their service tags that transaction with that node's IP address.    But there are tens of thousands (or more) peer nodes on the Bitcoin network so very often this "first relayed by" node IP address information is inaccurate.  If your node does not accommodate incoming connections, then quite often the transactions your node makes will be reported on Blockchain.info as having been "first relayed by" with some other IP address than your own.

This same IP monitoring is part of the approach that Blockchain.info uses to try to determine which node (mining pool) is responsible for solving a block.  And that's why there is a sticky at the top of the mining forum board.  An excerpt from that sticky:

Would gold be considered a world currency?



Well Occupy was generally not liking Bitcoin.  The NYC GA was accepting Bitcoin donations for a bit but there was no push to get behind it.  And there are others in the Occupy movement quite vocal against it:
 - http://occupycorporatism.com/globalist-controlled-bitcoin-becomes-bank-supported-by-technocrats/


Exactly.  NWO power comes from a concentration of wealth and governance -- centralization.  Bitcoin is like kryptonite to them.

These aren't in any particular order:

 - http://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Weaknesses

Problem acknowledged here:



Without being able to communicate using the site itself, it would be nice if they would at least use Twitter to provide status.
 - http://twitter.com/bitmitnet

Normally when a wager transaction includes a fee and is not "spam-like", the payout -- win or lose, will occur nearly instantaneously.

Even "spam-like" transactions (e.g., no fee paid, or low amount, like below 0.01 BTC) that have a confirmation will likely get a payout once there is a confirmation.

Win or lose, you still get a payout transaction.

Your first transaction hasn't been processed nor paid out.  Numerous times in the past SatoshiDICE will have a problem and it will take a day or two to flush out these unprocessed transactions.  Your first transaction falls under that category.

SatoshiDICE has a minimum bet amount of 0.01 BTC on every wager now.  Both of your wagers were made for an amount below that.

Every SatoshiDICE transaction, since it started in April 2012 eventually gets a payout -- and that can be (and is) verified by a third party (doogius voluntarily does this and in the past has prodded SatoshiDICE if they overlook some and don't swing back and resolve every last one of them).

So, be patient I guess.  Your wager was an amount less than two pennies worth, so hopefully it being returned late won't cause you a financial hardship.

Your second wager was processed and returned (as it too was below the minimum).    The reason you might not have seen that right away is because SatoshiDICE sent the return without a fee (as it does when it returns these).  And because it was such a low amount, nodes probably didn't want to relay it because it was spam-like (low amount, no fee paid). So several hours later eventually some nodes relayed it and eventually a miner picked it up and included it in a block.

If you click on the "Advanced" page, you can enter the transaction numbers to see the details for each wager.   Your first one does not yet return anything because it has not been processed.  The second one shows the "BELOW MINIMUM".

So, to prevent this from happening in the future, keep in mind that every wager to SatoshiDICE now has a 0.01 BTC minimum, and always include a fee (which you did, but I'm just mentioning it so that it doesn't get overlooked.)

And eventually your first 0.001 BTC wager will be returned.   If it doesn't in another day or so, then maybe an inquiry to SatoshiDICE will be needed but generally these get taken care of without prodding.

I didn't realize Instawallet did that.  Thank you for protecting your users in this manner.

There are a ton of these now ... e.g., BitLotto, and several others. 

BitLotto's address changes once a month.  It would be a hassle to try to know the various services and their respective addresses which return to the address that the wager appears to have been sent from, but at least heading off attempts to send to SatoshiDICE covers the majority of those occurrences.

Yup.  If the party you are trading with isn't entirely trusted, then consider using an escrow, and other advice from here:

 - http://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Secure_Trading#Best_Practices_with_trading

Maybe push it $0.02 cents, at the moment:
 - http://mtgoxlive.com/orders

Hover over the blue line (near the bottom) to see about $20K.   It is currently less than a penny above the bottom (spot) value.

Has the bet transaction confirmed?   If not, is it a child of a transaction that also has not confirmed? 

If that is the case, those are likely being ignored until they have a confirmation, which was a change that was implemented late December following some transactions that were essentially disrupting the system.  If that is the case, place your wagers with the Bitcoin-Qt client which will not allow you to spend funds that don't have at least one confirmation.

Presuming the Ubuntu solution would be 100% open source, then I think it would have an impact. 

Right now, I don't feel comfortable that my Android device cannot be controlled to either monitor or manipulate my usage.  Does someone from my mobile provider (or Google) pushing the next Android update have the ability to inject a few lines of code to read the BitcoinSpinner key and upload it?   Maybe they already have it, how would we know?

With 100% open source, a rogue section of code like that would likely get caught somewhere.