one small tweak:

i would change it to "magic mobile money"

more with the times and still perfectly spot-on, since the 'computer' is rapidly playing second-fiddle to the reality of mobile.

to be honest, i almost feel like you don't have to. remember that you also need a slogan or catchphrase to be succinct and memorable.

really, "magic computer money" says enough: "magic" in this case implies ease-of-use (which encompasses convenience, safety and a kind of superiority).

it should and will evolve later, no doubt, but for now it's enough to sell it this way, and it works by itself.

evoorhees is spot on.

this is really cool.

that said, these people, like all who see the power and benefit of Bitcoin, are really about 10 years ahead of their time.

attention everyone who has not worked in marketing ever in their lives:

selling an idea or a product is NOT about explaining the technical merits or even being accurate in the descriptions of the product.

what you want to build is an emotional connection and therefore an emotional interest. everything else will fail, even if you intend only to sell it to 'technical' people -- they are not unsusceptible to the basic emotional influences, even if they say they are.

that is much less effective than "magic computer money", sorry.

'engineered' makes it sound like it's something very technical. that's not a good way to sell it to people on an emotional level.

is that kim dotcom?

seems like it, no?

you guys are missing the point.

it's whimsical and a pleasure. just like a lot of tech companies call their offering "magic" as a way of calming peoples' nerves and saying "it'll be alright".

it's a good idea. stop worrying so much about how it's technically-not-this-or-that.

(if anyone cares, i have a background in marketing and work for a marketing company).

i like this a lot.

it's common parlance to refer to cool stuff as "magic".

it works, and is even a good counter to the frequent criticism of what it is.

"well yeah it IS magic computer money."

gavin have you ever read Tim Wu's book The Master Switch? check that out and please steer us away from this kind of situation.

i don't think this was critical in the wrong ways.

he might be right about bitcoin supernodes becoming basically "Banks" once it scales (meaning, those are the points where the blockchain is stored and validated)

if I understood him correctly, he's also saying there is a problem with identity leakage when validating transactions, ie: the "connect to every node in the world and see who makes the first move" thing. It's a good point.

i'm not sure if he is correct about using Tor not working for inbound connections. i didn't know that was the case, if so and would like developer commentary on it.

ps: bitcoinfs -- whoa! that's what wikileaks should be right there.

here's a place to start maybe:

http://blog.ircmaxell.com/2012/07/secure-programmers-pledge.html

does it though?

i'm trying to imagine going to the police about something like this. can you imagine trying to explain to them what bitcoin is, how it works, how you were "hacked" and lost money, etc etc.

would introduce nightmarish bureaucratic hell to one's life and wouldn't exactly help "solve the case"

makes no sense to me whatsoever.

impressive!

roger if you don't mind my asking, was this the majority of your btc holdings?

can you talk a bit about that?

i assume there's no easy install of all dependencies listed neatly in a Gemfile?

i would like to know how the app interfaces with the local bitcoin client or client(s).

oh, great start! i see that it was started in may.

may we use this as the base, and expand it as discussed?

that's an interesting perspective. was it your view all along that the 'mainline' client was actually just a proof-of-concept, and that the client side of things would eventually be taken over by third parties?

alright, i see what you mean, and indeed i wouldn't want to get the language confused if that's where things are.

but to your point, what i am interested in seeing is movement towards this kind of organization. therefore what might be incredibly useful is a group of NOT auditors, but people who possess knowledge useful to application and (perhaps) blockchain secuirty, standing at the ready to aid new developments.

brother why on earth did you have so much on that site?