You're missing that accounts have nothing whatsoever to do with addresses. The only thing that setaccount does is causes coins sent to a particular address to be credited to a particular account instead of the default account. Coins sent from an account merely sends whatever coins are available, and deducts the amount from the account, which is what you would normally expect. After all, when you deposit cash in a bank account, you don't expect that the notes you later withdraw will be the exact same ones that you deposited, or get upset that somebody else withdraws "your" notes. If you expect anything else, you don't understand how accounts work and shouldn't be using them (you probably shouldn't be using them anyway, but for different reasons).

This block was, by chance, found only 39 seconds after the previous one. It is likely that no new transactions were made during that time. These blocks are still useful, as they made it more difficult to double-spend previous transactions.

Bumping for orange numbers.

It's a rhetorical question, so it's still a statement.

That's actually Finagle's Law. Murphy's law is "If there is a right way and a wrong way of doing something, someone will do it the wrong way." Murphy was an optimist.

Not quite. The rules don't specify what happens when there's a tie, probably because a tie is damned unlikely after all 36 predictions. But just in case, I propose tied contestants receive the average of what they would have got if there wasn't a tie (ie, bluemoon and I would each receive 170 mBTC).

We are actually tied for second place and that's not just a rounding error, right?

Who do you think you're fooling? You're not new here and you know exactly how this site works. But, hypothetically, if you were new here, your trust would fall because nobody knows who you are and within a day of your first post you're asking for a loan with no collateral and without explaining how you intend to repay it. Since you're "basically an accountant", you should be able to understand why some people might think this behaviour is "untrustworthy".

You heard wrong. It goes to $10 by the end of June.

There's also the equipment they left behind on the moon, such as the Lunar Ranging Retroreflectors. Anyone with a powerful laser can zap it at the landing site and verify the presence of these devices.

And the moon rocks they brought back, which have been analysed by many independent geologists around the world and found to be not Earth rocks.

And the fact that the moon landings were conducted in the middle of the Space Race, with the Russians watching America's every move. The Russians were tracking American space launches on radar, and they'd be the first to call bullshit if they never happened.

No, you can see the Earth from the Moon just fine during the day (and vice versa), as long as you're on the side of the Moon facing the Earth, obviously. The Earth isn't visible in those photos for the simple reason that the camera wasn't pointed in Earth's direction.

You're not. I once got IP-banned for opening so many threads simultaneously that I was mistaken for a DOS attacker. That's why I'm not surprised to be the #1 non-mod thread-reader.

Killing someone is an awful lot of effort to go to just to stop them from typing. Breaking bones is much easier.

Yes, but the police are probably less likely to do anything about it.

You're exaggerating again. He's not threatening to kill you. He's only threatening to break your arms and/or fingers.

You mean when the price approached $630, we were panicking over nothing? That's disappointing. So when do we get to see the leaderboard? I don't care about my absolute score, only my score relative to the other contestants'. That's the only thing that matters!

Ten minutes left to stay under $630.95 and net me 0.5472 points. I'm bristling with anticipation!

It's all over! Price for the end of May: $627.80. 0.5472 points for me!

$515. And I did buy more than BTC10 (no, I'm not saying how much more).

It has insufficient fees. Given its size, it's a wonder it confirmed at all.

Those transactions have dust outputs, and are therefore non-standard.

True. These transactions also have the benefit of not being non-standard.

There's nothing unusual about this double-spend attempt. Note that a double-spend is only said to "succeed" if the party receiving it is defrauded by believing it to be valid (which isn't the case here, as the payout transactions are invalidated by the double-spends).

The transaction is confirmed in block 303349.

I'm about halfway through making the next round of predictions. I don't think I'll change my strategy too much.

EDIT: Done. Prediction sent.

What terminal program are you using?