Yep. Sometimes seasoned with a "A security error has occurred" message :/.

PM sent. Thanks .

Gigantic... hmmm wasn't that the proposed name of the sister ship of the Titanic ?

Thanks mate. That did the trick .

As you can see above I removed everything, but no effect.

Are there any solution for the "fixed;">" issue?

Removed everything from my signature but still no joy with updating.

Are there any solution for the "fixed;">" issue?

Removed everything from my signature but still no joy with updating.


Edit: Posted into wrong topic :/

Any tengrists here?

Buying script ASICs would be the best solution.

This is exactly what most fiat believers used to say about bitcoin .

Sent PM.

Backing a coin with other assets is a great idea!

That could be true as the older PoW/PoS hybrids never switched to fully PoS mode. Actually Cloudcoin and ADT did but not intentionally

A bit inaccurate .

First random block reward coin was Junkcoin.
First PoW/PoS hybrid was Novacoin


Edit:

First PoW/PoS hybrid was Peercoin for SHA and Novacoin for script.

I think you need a strong background infrastructure at first, such as payment gateways for let's say BTC and USD, a regulatory apparatus (RA for short. This apparatus can be a part of the distributed client), a target value for BTC/yourcoin and USD/yourcoin rates, some premine plus some BTC and fiat as reserve. Then the RA can keep an eye on the payment gateways (exchanges) and it can intervene if the exchange rates shifted too much for a predefined time period. If the prices are rising too high then the mining rewards can be increased and/or the RA can automatically sell some coins from the reserve. If the price drops then the opposite will happen.

Maybe you should take a look at eMunie as it trying to achieve the same goals. (Currently in beta.)

Trading does nothing about decentralized anything. If your hypothetical currency is issued by a central "authority" and pegged to a fiat then it's just yet another fiat.

COMM is traded on Bter, so you can buy as much you want. Maybe not for ".3 a satoshi" .

Market data could be misleading. For a while AuroraCoin seemed to be the best coin after BTC. Just take a look at it now...

Lot's of people here know that who is Kanye West but have no idea who was Colbert and what he did .

In addition a lot of historical persons are a bit controversial. E.g. Julius Caesar was a great military leader, a reformist and a notable author, a hero for Rome. But his troops killed about 1 million and enslaved an other million ppl in Gaul, (around 50 BC the world population was something like 200 million, so two million was a really huge lot of people). He also ruthlessly suppressed his opposition at home, and had an extensive cult of personality. For such "exploits" nowadays he would be labelled as one of the worst villains in human history, something like Hitler or Stalin.

An independent "coin rating agency" would be a good concept.

Issues:
- As we seen in 2007 these agencies are quite easy to manipulate.
- It would be difficult to set up a rally independent one as most people here are involved with coins (at least treading them) and have personal feelings towards the devs.
- An independent ratings agency should be paid by the community and not by the devs/fanboys/investors.
- An independent ratings agency should not trade or invest into these alts.
- These guys should be anonymous to ensure their security. But in this case how can we know if lets say a bunch of devs infiltrated into their ranks?

If they can't trade and the community will pay them, then these blokes will starve to death very soon .

Hypocrisy or cognitive dissonance regarding sex I guess .