And everyone that pops up suggesting this forgets that their proposed renormalization is just as arbitrary as the current one.  Are you suggesting that we keep changing the entire network every time the value changes by a factor of 10?

Start refusing?  Hmm.  I suggest you take a look at the source code to the default client.  There are already rules in place regarding which transactions to forward.

If I have time, I'll write a detailed refutation.  But no promises, Mondays are usually fairly busy, and I probably won't have time.

Sorry, my bad.  I was thinking extenders.  It was late. 

cablesaurus sells them.

There would be WAY too much temptation to break the strike.

Well, there goes my theory.

Maybe he just doesn't care about reddit.  I know I don't.

If you aren't using /var/lib/php5 for your session files, do "php -i | grep session.save_path" on the command line, or make a file with:


In your document tree, and load it in your browser, then look for session.save_path.

An alternative removal method is:

My guess is lots.  I'm running an ancient Athlon XP 1800, and my 5 miners with about 800 Mhash/sec total power don't even make a dent on it.

Statistics has nasty dark corners.

If an event has probability X per attempt, your chances of getting the event after Y attempts is not X * Y.  It is 1 - ((1/X)^Y).

Because this is exponentially decreasing, events that happen before the 50% time will come quicker than the events after it are late.  As in, it takes more attempts to get from 50% to 51% than it does from 49% to 50%.

Consider rolling a die.  You have a 1 in 6 chance of getting a 6.  If you want at least a 30% chance of getting a single 6, you only need to roll it twice.  If you want a 50% chance, you need 4 rolls.  If you want at least a 70% chance, you have to roll it 7 times.

Moving the odds from 50% to 30% saves you 2 rolls, but moving it from 50% to 70% requires 3 more.  If you look at the 1 in 6 and 5 in 6 odds, they are even worse, 1 roll vs. 10 (savings of 3 vs. loss of 6).

Now instead of a die with 6 sides, imagine a bitcoin hash with 2.436 * 10^15 sides...

Can you people take your own personal failings elsewhere, please?

If your ideas had any objective merit, the Japanese Yen and the Indian Rupee would rule the world, and everyone would be laughing at us with our huge, cumbersome dollars.

If you want a distro for your parents, pick Ubuntu.  If you don't understand the humor at funroll-loops.info pick Gentoo.  If you want to learn to manage servers, pick CentOS.  If you want to be godlike, pick Slackware.

http://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=5506.0

Two of the first three threads in this board are about gaining pool redundancy by dubious means.  For the love of all that is holy, use the flexible mining proxy instead.  It does that, and a whole lot more.

The thing is, and I've said this about 50 times in various threads around these boards, you can't make any claims about a single event.

You didn't look hard enough if you think there are only 10.

Ugh.  That newbitcoin paper is a trainwreck.

In section 2, for example, the author has no clue how the network works.  It is trivial for a person to change their node so that it does not include transaction fees.  Much less trivial, however, is getting the rest of the network to forward them, or miners to accept them.  (Yes, I know that at least one mining pool always accepts free transactions, and it is trivial to connect to it.  I'm speaking more broadly here.)

I gave up another couple of pages in.  I sorta wanted to do a page by page rebuttal, but it would really need to be more like line by line.

I'm pretty sure the commands I listed will do what you need.

Ugh.  Why wasn't it merged in a month ago?

Or just use persistence so you only have to click it once.

For most people, mining and buying are the easiest ways to get them.  That will change over time as the market grows.  Penetration is low so far, so it is hard to work for coins directly, because finding people that know about and have coins is still rare.  This will improve.