It's the upper limit. If you remove coins that have been obviously destroyed in that way, the number would be 200.01000001 less than the upper limit (at the moment).
Okay, thanks. How did you obtain that number: ran a script over the blockchain? ABE? |
|
|
|
I live a couple light-minutes away, so it will after this post is completed.
Cool, I can't wait to see it...  Quantum entanglement has interfered and shifted it 15 nanoradians. So we now need to wait a couple hours for it to get a gravity assist from the sun. |
|
|
|
Yeah, I just sent a cosmic ray over to close this thread.
Did it work? I live a couple light-minutes away, so it will after this post is completed. |
|
|
|
The reason I ask is that it is a nice round number, but there are at least 20 nanobitcoin which have been literally "destroyed", or removed from existance forever. http://blockexplorer.com/block/0000000000004c78956f8643262f3622acf22486b120421f893c0553702ba7b5 gives an example of this. So unless an entire 0.99999998 have also been destroyed (which is unlikely), am I correct in assuming that this number is an upper limit to the amount of bitcoins in existance and not an exact amount? |
|
|
|
OK, closed.
Yeah, I just sent a cosmic ray over to close this thread. |
|
|
|
Previous versions of bitcoin are unable to read encrypted wallets,
and will crash on startup if the wallet is encrypted.
Is it a notification or a real crash? A real crash. In a perfect world, Bitcoin version 0.1 would have included code that looked for a "Bitcoin version X or later required to read this wallet.dat file" setting, and notify the user and exit cleanly if X is greater than the version you're running. We don't live in a perfect world. So the second-best solution was to have version 0.4 and later do the "Bitcoin version X or later required to read this wallet.dat file" thing. And write a value into the wallet that causes previous versions of bitcoin to crash on startup. If previous versions didn't crash when given an encrypted wallet, they'd just ignore the encrypted keys, generate a bunch of new, unencrypted keys, and give people heart attacks when they ran the old version of bitcoin and told them they had a 0 bitcoin balance. Hmm, how many files does bitcoin read? I might be able to help sanitize the input - display "invalid file: dsdsd, bitcoin will now exit" etc, like how "can't read blkindex.dat" works for the rest of the files that crash bitcoin. I would get a heart attack if any financial software crashed due to a cosmic ray. |
|
|
|
... SC version 2.0 SlowCoin for the masses
Every cryptographic currency should be made for the masses or in the current conditions it has no chance to succeed. CPU or GPU mining is much more important than people might think. Verifying the proof of work is just like voting/accepting its validity. What kind of voting system do we want to have in place? Vote = decision maker/CPU or vote = worker(slave)/GPU? Do we want to live in a society where 1 person = 1 vote or do we want our voting power to depend on how many workers/slaves do we have? Irrelevant : if a chain prefers CPUs, people with faster/more CPU cores will have more voting power. In fact I would probably be one of the most favored people as I own or rent several servers with beefy CPUs (currently they total ~80-100MH/s as electrical costs are fixed for those so it doesn't cost me anything more when they mine). Tying voting power to any computation can't be fair : it's more or less a "vote with your wallet" system (not democracy by far, but maybe better than chaos). Are conjoined twins one or two people? Tying votes to brains or bodies isn't fair either, but we still do it. People under 18 are even forbidden to vote where I live, so it isn't even fair representation. |
|
|
|
I'm in, if I also get your share and everyone else's.
:| Anyways, CosicMiner: 0.25, NeonLict: 0.25, MelMan: 0.25, me: 0.25, okay? Just delete all your posts so I can win. |
|
|
|
I'll stop posting if you give me 0.5 btc  I'll give you 0.5 BTC if you stop posting and I get the 1 BTC.  I think everyone in the last 6 hours should delete their posts, so I win the 1 BTC and give all you a share. Deal? |
|
|
|
(If there was nothing CPUs do best, why would be using them?)
Well, CPUs are easy-to-program general purpose hardware that can do lots of things (and several things at the same time, in these days of multicore CPUs) pretty darn fast. GPUs are hard-to-program more-specialized hardware. These days they can do pretty much any raw calculation a CPU can do, faster-- it just takes a lot more effort on the programmer's part to figure out how. That extra effort is only worthwhile for the most performance-critical code. When I worked at Silicon Graphics I saw several interesting algorithms implemented using OpenGL operations reading and writing to texture memory and/or the accumulation buffer and/or the framebuffer. That was before OpenCL and GPU programming languages, but the experience gave me a lot of respect for the ability of good programmers to look at problems sideways and come up with ... interesting ... solutions. No. GPUs are faster at parallelizing things, but if I told you to do a long, state-dependent task (modelling weather, for example) CPUs would excel. |
|
|
|
I predict someone will use FPGA's to mine solidcoin 2.0 and get faster than CPU hashing.
Doubt it, no one would waste that much money on a short term chain. If they had an FPGA already it wouldn't be a waste of money and 100 megahash would be god-like in the land of the CPUs. My 2 core CPUs ran at 17kHps at peak. |
|
|
|
Confirmation on my end. Thanks!  |
|
|
|
We're in a great time now where BTC's about to have "inflation" halved within a few months at a time where productive use of BTC (that is, for commercial and industrial use) is probably at an all-time high.
Mining incentive will halve to 25 BTC at the beginning of 2013, not in a few months. If it would halve in the beginning of 2012, I speculate we'd already see a lot less supply on the currency markets. Commercial and industrial use being at an all time high? That is wild speculation. En contraire, I think "productive use", as you put it, is very low now compared to what we might see next year or 2013. Your point about the best thing to do for a miner being to sell his rig for BTC is true in my mind. It will halve by December 6, 2012 based on a block every ten minutes. Based on the mean speed of churning out blocks, it will halve by November 25, 2012. So not the beginning of 2013, but still there isn't too much reason to worry about the halving. |
|
|
|
nice try though!
LAST POST IN 6 HOURS WILL BE THE WINNER!
it is now past 6 hours from the time of this post. We cleared up the rules before already... |
|
|
|
|
Deal still on? I PM'd you.
|
|
|
|
Maybe I should run that bot after all. |
|
|
|
no one, he didn't even keep halving the time like he said he would
LOCK THIS THREAD NOW! |
|
|
|
Seems this thread is starting to slow down...
I might just win  . |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
