You guys might also be interested in reading up upon the experiment done in Russia about breeding foxes (for one trait - "friendliness" - it actually explains quite well how *wolves* became *dogs*).

This thread is becoming a mess of *opinions* with very little facts.

The fact is that various breeds were in fact bred for no other reason than to "fight" (this is why the term "pit" - they were bred for fighting in a "pit" not for digging them).

As I already stated I owned such a pet (a Staffordshire) and they are wonderful pets but they "don't respect territory" (this is why they are useful for "fighting in pits").

Generally such dogs are not so dangerous to people (they are usually most dangerous to other dogs) but to think that the breeding *has nothing to do with it* is simply wrong.

There is *nothing encrypted* in the Bitcoin blockchain - so am not sure why secret is relevant here.

I think the term "crypto" is not entirely well understood when it pertains to something like Bitcoin in particular.

I read about the "atomic cross chain transfer" stuff quite a long time ago but I have yet to ever see *one single tx* using it.

Is there a reason why not one single "atomic cross chain transfer" has ever been done?

(sorry if this is a little OT - but I think it is related)

Although I would tend to agree that pet owners tend to bring out the worst qualities in their pets it should be realised that some breeds (in particular pit bulls but also other smaller related breeds) were in particular chosen for *one quality* and that is that "they don't respect territory" (which is why they are keen to fight in an unfamiliar place which most other dog breeds would not do).

I used to own such a dog (of the smaller breed variety) and I certainly *never trained my dog to be aggressive* (and luckily he never hurt any human) but he did fight with other dogs which was problematic and costly (I think if I get another dog it will be a different breed).

Understand that if you use vanitgen to create your *fancy* address you will need to "import the private key".

As an example:

The Privkey value (for the address that you generate) would need to be imported into your wallet in order for you to *own* that address.

Also note that if the "fancy" prefix you want is large then it can take *a very long time* for vanitygen to find a match (so unless you have a very powerful computer I wouldn't advise trying to exact match much more that 5-6 characters).

My 1ciyam vanity address took 4 days to generate (on a fairly old laptop).

I am not interested in being involved with IPOs (far too many issues with doing those).

I don't know how many times it has to be pointed out to people that Bitcoin is *not ready* for such mainstream usage (without some sort of side-chain or other parallel system).

You do understand that at the moment it can only handle 7 TPS at the most (and as most miners are not filling blocks to anywhere near the capacity probably quite a bit less)?

Imagine the negative publicity that would occur when people are trying to pay for a coffee with Bitcoin but it goes cold before a single confirmation can occur (which if the network was jammed due to too many txs could easily be an hour or more) - or even worse the negative impact on retailers if they decided to do 0 confirmation coffees (to supply them while still hot) only to find out that a bunch of "smartarse nerds" had tricked them with so called "double spends".

Although 0 confirmation payments for services such as VPS/VPN can work (easy enough to cancel the service if the payment doesn't confirm) the same can't be said for actual exchange for goods.

So apart from those services that can handle 0 confirmation without any real risk the focus for now IMO should be on greatly improving things like international money transfer where Bitcoin shines (despite its poor performance when compared current PoS systems).

With regards to identity information I am indeed referring to a "mapping" so that the public registry doesn't contain any such information (just a hash) but the Issuer itself would have all the shareholder private details they legally require.

This allows two things: allows each shareholder to "verify" that their public issue is correctly recorded and allows a court to be sure that if address information for a particular shareholding are demanded that those details are indeed *correct*.

The use of a salt would of course be to prevent anyone from being able to try and "mine identities" across different issuance's.

I had considered this already - and I think the solution is perhaps to get such information (name, address, etc.) and add a "salt" then *hash* this and publish the hashes (so can't be reversed).

When it comes to to "prove" this info it can be easily done (but only by the person who provided the info).

I can't give out details here but I have been in contact with a lawyer who is working on this very thing.

Am pretty sure work on this sort of idea is already well underway (although I think that Ethereum and BitShares are more a focus for DACs than Bitcoin).

Understand that "coins" get split up and recombined all the time.

So your 100 received 0.001 BTC's can be sent out as 0.1 BTC (so the system doesn't *break down* because of everything turning into dust).

The point all along is to help keep things more "anonymous" and "coin control" can help in giving you more "control" over this process.

I would agree - the main problem the detractors have with the system is the usage of CA certs which (as I understand it) can be fairly easy swapped for some other such approach that can be added down the track.

You might want to look into BitShares, Ethereum or Nxt AT for tech that will be able to do this most likely before the end of the year (especially in the case of Nxt AT as I am managing that project and it is progressing very rapidly now).

You might be interested to know that "decentralised" versions will be appearing soon (i.e. there should be no need to sign up to any website).

I guess that depends upon what your skills are and what you have in mind for the project.

It is open source and on github (check http://ciyam.org for the link) and it is fully functional already but is not "user friendly" (as I am the kind of person that loves using a console rather than playing with GUI).

So I would guess finding a coder to improve the "user experience" would probably be the main priority.

Are you talking about the CIYAM Safe or did you just post in the wrong topic?

You might find this topic to be of some interest: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=60229.60

(I spent quite a lot of time working on a design for voting way back then)

This is what "Hello World!" looks like in C++.

(no ".h" includes and no "printf" statements)

C++ supports various different programming "paradigms" (including procedural, OO, functional and TMP) so you don't need to create a class to do anything in C++ (unlike Java) but you should get familiar with "iostreams" right from the "get go".