Well, if you want to throw away another $500, and on an international lawsuit that will likely get nowhere, go for it.

OK
Back to the question, can P2Pool and Bitcoin handle that?

Sounds like she's the one who is depending on her own need to feel selfless. I believe Rand said quite a bit about people who are selfless for selflessness' sake. None of it was good.
Love is doing things for someone else, not because they can't, or because you feel obligated to, but because you want to. She feels obligated to, and it sounds like it's out of some messed up sense of "I'm holier that though because I am so selfless" (forgot the term).
Another major problem with a relationship like this is that it's uneven. You would basically owe her, A LOT, for continuing to stick with you, and it's only a matter of time until she calls in the favors and uses that against you. In a love relationship, I would expect everything to be shared equally, with no one having an unfair advantage or debt.

I really love the “Bitcoin will die because it will be valued too much” theories! I mean, look at gold. It’s very deflationary, so it’s doomed too!

Regarding his $100 example. That is true if all he did was sit on the money paid back to him. If, instead, his borrowers paid him back $1 at a time, and he went out and spent that money for something else, that $1 would get recirculated back into the economy, he would own that something else, AND that $1 would eventually make it back to him as a loan repayment, again. In the end, he would have received a total of $110, though not all of that money would have been in his bank at the same time. Also, the value of everything he owns and bought would be worth $110 using pre-loan exchange rates.
Is that about right?

20-some of the rigs. They said they will release all there product lines at the same time. And they did say that all the orders that were placed before the end of August should be shipped before Christmas. But yeah, it will be a few months.

Go back a few pages. There was plenty of that, until Rarity completely derailed the whole thread with pages upon pages of his crusade against drugs.

So, I'm in the process of ordering one of those $30k ASIC rigs. Once i get it, how bad would it be to drop that amount of power (1,000GH/s) on P2Pool? Would I have to massively increase my own difficulty? (Would need help with that). Would the combination of the arrival of ASICs and the block reward dropping to 25BTC make mining with GPUs pointless anyway? Will P2Pool and bitcoind even be able to keep up with the hashing onslaught?

Understood. My apologies, and you are right.

You really need to get off the "it's not real money, so no one will care" bandwagon. Pirate allegedly did something illegal because he claimed a legitimate business, and claimed legitimate investments, while possibly doing something that wasn't legal or legitimate. It really doesn't matter if the investment was made using USD, BTC, or manure. Bottom line is that something of value was taken from others by illegitimate means. That's all the law cares about.

This has been pointed out many many times before, but you must have missed it:
Are bricks considered money? Does government regulate bricks? If someone happened to steal $5,000,000 worth of bricks, do you think the government would just laugh it off, because it's not money and is not regulated, and will ignore the theft?
Do you think that for anything to be considered legal theft, the item stolen must have government regulations?

I believe, and I could be wrong, that using multi-sig it's possible to deposit all coins into an address that would require two signatories to spend any part of it. I.e. money deposited into a business "vault" requires two signatures to spend it afterwards. Now, I could be wrong, and it may be that any coins stored this way must be fully spent when signed, instead of being able to be spent in parts (vault has to be emptied entirely, portion is sent to the recepient, remainder goes back into the vault maybe?)
Multi-sig has a lot of weird combinations of how things can be signed,, and I'm still trying to wrap my head around it.

^^^ That's this "multi-signature transactions" thing that the developers have been working on and talking about for I think almost a year now. It's already implemented in the protocol, and should be a usable feature probably before the end of this year.

Be specific as to what you are replying to please.

I know financially that's not the case, but it just "feels" as if that's taking other people's interest to cover current people's withdrawals. Money is fungible, of course, so yeah, that's not the case.

criminal charges =/= cops. There are other entities, like FBI, SEC, etc. Organizations specifically designed to deal with internet and financial crimes. As for what they do, once they quietly collect enough information on you, they bust down your door and haul you away.

The purpose of doing this? I'm missing it too

Still not quite. Remember the terms I used earlier, which someone else complained sounded too religious: good and evil? Matthew just does NOT strike me as being evil like that. $50,000 IS tempting, but, don't forget, we're all hoping to be multi-billionaire Captains of Industry™ here  

Not to my knowledge. All his companies have either got off the ground (Bitcoin Magazine) or flopped around and went nowhere (the Ellet), but I don't recall him ever actually taking people's money and not delivering the product (there WERE delays though).


I have nothing in this race, either (the 20BTC bet wasn't something I was planning on keeping). If this is something that Matt would consider doing, it would surprise me. Matt struck me as someone who wanted to become big in the Bitcoin community, and was focusing on growing some sort of a reputation around it, with all his attempts at and involvement in businesses (though it WAS a really weird reputation). I think he would have considered the gain of $10,000 to be WAY less than what he thought he could earn from all his other business involvements.
But then, Matt has surprised me already with this stunt...

Let me see if I can explain what I mean (example):

There are two investors, each invested 10BTC. Total of accounts is 20BTC
One investor notifies the bank that he wants to withdraw his money. The bank only has 5BTC on hand, so can't pay out in full.
Interest payment comes in. Interest earned on all accounts is 2BTC, so now each account should have 11BTC.
What the bank actually has on-hand is now 5BTC + 2BTC interest = 7BTC
The investor asking for a withdrawal comes up to get his money, and receives 7BTC. He is still owed 4BTC.
The second guy has 11BTC in the bank, but since there's no actual money there, it's all on paper.

Is that what's happening?
Or does the guy who asked for a withdrawal only gets 5 + 1 = 6BTC, with the other 1BTC going into the account of the guy who's not withdrawing?

EDIT: Though, now that I think about it, I guess it doesn't matter.

Do you have Credit Card Annual Fees where you live? Same thing. Usually banks can afford to print out the cards for "free" because they make a lot of money from servicer fees and such, from having A LOT of transaction volume. My guess is these guys don't expect to have a lot of volume per customer, and so need to recoup their costs. If this thing takes off, I wouldn't be surprised if they did become free eventually.

TL;DR For now, just think of this as a one-time $10 account fee