Eew, really?  We can do so much better than democracy in its present guise.  The leader of a nation should in theory agree to do what the public want, but that's rarely the case.  Democracy at the moment is where a bunch of wealthy individuals and companies fund the election campaigns to effectively buy the policies they like best.  Everyone else gets to choose the bought puppet they detest the least.  It's just corruption by another name.  I'd personally hate to see Bitcoin work more like that.

What you're describing is that you don't like individuals being able to release their own clients with modified code because apparently that's "enforcing their will".  That makes it sound like you want a single team of developers to be in total control and those developers have to agree all the time.  That's the definition of a closed source project.  You can't have it both ways.  Either anyone can release a client with whatever features they like and the users can then choose whether they run it or not, which is open source.  Or, the developers are in total control and everyone runs the same client whether they like it or not, which is closed source.  If you want open source, then you can't complain(*) about Gavin and Mike releasing their own client because they are perfectly entitled to do that, as is anyone else .  If you want closed source, go use Ripple or some other centralised crapcoin.  Again, those are your two choices.

(* well, you can complain, but it just sounds like you don't want people to be able to make their own choices)

There are probably some advertising for Cloudthink, which is allegedly a ponzi.


Well it obviously doesn't need to be show in Politics, but feedback can influence your perception of a person in numerous ways. If someone says something they don't like they can easily just try to attack or discredit that user by calling him a scammer or bringing his feedback up. There are times when I've not been sure if someone was trolling or not, then seen their negative feedback and then thought it was more likely they were, so it can influence your opinion of someone (sometimes for the better or worse).

The reality is technical 'signals' don't work. Professional forex traders use them as a minor input, but they are largely event trading, with macro analysis, combine with the human (trader) element. Successful trading is not programmable, unless you find some arbitrage opportunity. Anyone who finds an arbitrage opportunity doesn't sell it. They trade in until it ceases to exist.

If you want to trade forex, just trade it. Do a lot of research, run your own charts, and trade. Buying someone elses losing system puts you so far behind, your effort becomes completely worthless.

If Bitcoin XT gets a majority, rest assured that there will be more than 2 developers contributing and reviewing code. Even if it's solely Hearn or Gavin that get commit access, every submission will get reviewed. If something controversial is committed, rest assured there will be a migration away from Bitcoin XT.

It doesn't matter if it's Bitcoin Core or XT or some other version - you're getting the same level of review unless developers leave the project and go work on Doge or something.

Hey, glad it worked out.
If you have something worrying like this, its probably better to send a mail to info@mycelium.com, I only check in here every once in a while.
Mycelium does not create new addresses just when sharing, but as you mentioned test transactions: When receiving coins, the current receiving address changes. So if he shared an address, then sent a test transaction, then went to share receiving address again, he got a new, unused receiving address on the second attempt.

That's really bad. If there's a drawdown, I'd be more exposed that I wanted to. And if there's an upswing, I'd be less exposed than I wanted to.

At least with 0.5% bankroll we can get a decent return without using offsite investment. But if that changes to 0.1%, the expected return without offsite investment gets too low. So changing the maximum bet to 0.1% seems to be a really bad idea to me, unless there's some solution to be able to still have at least a 0.5% exposure all the time (not just when we manually adjust the offsite investment).

The issue is (as Dooglus put it) the bankroll is always fluctuating, so continually altering each person's offsite after each roll just isn't viable. I think we'd be better without it at all, TBH. Like 70% of the people are maxed out anyways, negating the whole purpose of it.

if you rise the payment, you are not doing anything, because they will still spam and even faster then before, for the more easy money, i think a fixed ratewith a minimum of a small amount of post would be better

Why do you want to test it with WhatsApp if the user claims it sends fine?  It just sounds like a coincidence.

Mycelium is an HD wallet so it can generate different addresses for the same HD account, the aim being to use each address only once for privacy reasons.  It may be hard to tell which addresses belong to which account.

If there are several accounts/wallets, they can be shown together or separately.  If the setting in the app is to show them separately (it's an advanced feature), and the selected account is not the one where the address was generated, the app will not show any incoming bitcoins on the Balance or Transactions tabs.  However, regardless of this setting, all accounts and their balances are listed on the Accounts tab.

Has your transaction been confirmed?

There may be various explanations why your party doesn't see your bitcoins, the least likely of which is a malfunction in the Mycelium wallet.  More information is needed to investigate this; at least, the address you sent the money to, to begin with.  If you don't feel comfortable sharing it here, perhaps consider writing to Mycelium support.

Supporters of a political party usually support that political party and that's it.  Doesn't mean we shouldn't have elections.  

Either use Bitcoin and trust the majority to do what they think is best, or use a closed-source coin and trust the developers to do what they think is best.  Bitcoin is not closed source, but it sounds as though that's what you want, so those are your choices.  

You have a certain amount of wealth that you are willing to risk investing in dice sites. Suppose you decide that Just-Dice is the best place to invest, and you agree that risking up to 0.5% of your wealth per roll fits your risk profile.

If Just-Dice doesn't offer 'offsite investing', then you will need to convert all of that value to CLAMs, deposit it all into Just-Dice and invest it all.

That's risky. Just-Dice might shut down, might get robbed, the price of CLAMs might crash, etc.

But Just-Dice does offer 'offsite investing'. So you can convert just 1% of that value into CLAM, invest it in JD, and type "/offsite 100x". Now you are only exposed to 1% of the currency risk, and only risk losing 1% of your wealth if JD is robbed while still having the same exposure to the bankroll.

I don't need to check whether you also converted the remaining 99% of your value to CLAM - in fact you probably didn't. The other 99% is offsite, and it makes no difference to me in what form you hold it (or even whether you really hold it at all).

That's your opinion and you're welcome to it, but that doesn't mean you can stop people from proposing a fork.  How about calling off the next general election because I disagree with a policy of one of the candidates?  How about closing a restaurant because I don't like one of the dishes on their menu?  How about we shut down the internet because I don't like a particular website?  Your opinion doesn't trump everyone else's.  It just doesn't work that way.  At the end of the day, you have to allow people to make their own choices and that's what's going to happen whether you like it or not.  



Anyone can modify Bitcoin's code without needing permission from the core devs.  It's called Open Source and it's one of the fundamental principles behind Bitcoin.  Consent comes from the users securing the network, not the developers.  If you want a closed source coin where a small number of developers make all the decisions and everyone is forced to use that code and only that code, what the hell are you even doing here?

The reason I don't ask you to prove that you have the offsite CLAMs is because I don't expect you to keep your whole bankroll in CLAMs. You could have it split between 100 different asset classes, and invest them all at 100x offsite.

You could invest all your CLAMs at 100x safely because you have 100 times more value in other coins (or houses, fancy cars, etc.) than you have in CLAMs. You have no offsite CLAMs, but you do have offsite wealth that could easily become CLAMs on demand...

Do you have any trading experience Sebastian?!?

These types of scams have been marketed to stock 'day traders' for aeons. Now the scam artists think they've found a whole new pool of unwitting dupes.

Winning systems are not for sale. Only losing ones are.

I get it. But it doesn't make any sense to require that I have a carrier set up. I use wi-fi only on my tablet and can Skype using it just fine.

Ok here are the last 2 trades taken by the Auto Trader:



This is a 5 minute EUR USD chart and trades taken are pointed by the arrows.



   EUR/USD▲   25/6/2015 12:29:31   25/6/2015 12:34:31

and



        EUR/USD▲   25/6/2015 09:39:30   25/6/2015 09:44:30