You have made several good points (and I'm sure others are paying attention to that) so I am only wanting to clarify their relevance.

My hope is that the result should be the creation of a useful technology (hopefully a win-win for all of us)!

Interesting and rational point I guess but what exactly has that to do with the OP?

Aha - I replied before you updated - okay then but what about the idea of "rational fitness"?

(have you read the book Shantaram?)

I think that constantly bringing up the personality types thing adds nothing to the actual point.

Is it possible to just leave that part out and focus on the idea itself (i.e. I don't really care about each person's personality type I care more about whether the system will work or not) ?

I created CIYAM Open (https://ciyam.org/open) to solve this silly bounty problem.

Instead of people racing to hack out the *first* solution (typically badly written) you instead ask for people to bid (going to be renamed *dib* soon) as to when they will come up with a quality solution - if their bid/dib is accepted then they are not competing against anyone apart from themselves (to complete the task by the deadline they provided themselves).

The first 10 projects to be listed on CIYAM Open can be fee free for life so if you are serious in getting a project done *properly* I would be happy to help out.

CIYAM Open also allows people to donate at either the Project, Project Area or specific Project Task level.

Why not just use 1TF repeatedly and filter out all non-32 byte addresses?

Again - where exactly did I say people in Africa should not have a computer (or anywhere else for that matter)?

You are basically trolling now so I am unwatching the topic as it is pointless to continue.

You will help the environment *more* by producing *less* (although producing more environmentally friendly products is of course a better idea).


Firstly I never mentioned that we should *stop* producing and secondly keeping things in good repair is *exactly* what people that are good at saving already do (you should come and visit China - you'd be surprised how people are proud of having years old devices that still work well because they are constantly being repaired).


Please re-read my posts to see how silly that remark is.

If your major intent here is just to try and win an argument with misquoting, exaggeration and other tactics then I will just stop watching - if you really have an interest to discuss something then I will continue to post.

Certainly overpopulation is responsible for a huge proportion of the world's current problems and understand that in the most populated countries (China and India) the main reason for wanting more than two children is that the parents typically depend upon their children for *money* to look after them when they are old.

When you have *money* that gets worth more then there is less incentive to want more than 1 or 2 children (as any money spent on them would just be wasted if they died or decided not to support you later).

Economists are quite famous for a) never agreeing with each other and b) being unscientific.

You'd be better off ignoring anything an economist has to say.

I am not interested in living in a cavern and of course being a software engineer I will still be making the occasional purchase of computer hardware and using the internet.

Slowing down our production and consumption != going back to the stone age (but it could help to save many species on our planet including our own).

Really - think about it - we have global warming, over population and are polluting the planet to death with our manufacturing (and all at an ever increasing rate since the industrial revolution).

I think if people only spent on what they really needed (such as food, clothing and housing) then we'd all be better off.

Funny that computers and smart phones get cheaper and cheaper every year - but somehow the companies making them are not already out of business (i.e. if your purchasing decision was purely based upon getting the cheapest price you'd never by a computer or a smart phone as they will always be cheaper next year).

Another important aspect is that the vast majority of people are poor savers at best - they are more interested in showing off their latest iThingy than "hoarding" their earnings.

Shit - I thought I had the record for paying the most fees ever (due to creating a raw tx when way too tired).

I hope they can get that back (in my case I got most of it back).

I think the OS is not really a problem if you completely disable networking and use QR codes for comms (stuff I already do for cold storage).

If you go with a deterministic wallet and offline tx signing then you could install the software into an Android smartphone then disable its WiFi and 3G you'd have a do it yourself cold storage (that won't be conspicuous like a Trezor as it just looks like a normal smart phone).

In regards to *offline* safe storage (not normal day to day stuff).

As well as generating keys securely offline and using only air-gapped comms (via QR codes) I also use GPG to be able to safely keep copies of the private keys.

I put a set of tools for doing this into a Live Distro using Open SUSE here: http://susestudio.com/a/kp8B3G/ciyam-safe

(it isn't the most pretty system but it is about as secure as you can get)

I think the domain squatting problem is an interesting one - few (apart from Aussies) would know about the whole Burger King vs. Hungry Jacks issue (someone incorporated a company called Burger King in Australia before the USA chain tried to do so).

Strangely enough even after "Hungry Jacks" finally got back its name ("Burger King") in Australia - it failed as the name "Hungry Jacks" had become more popular (so they closed down the one and only "Burger King" in Melbourne only about a year after opening it and just continued under the name "Hungry Jacks").

This was some years back though so am not sure if they have managed to change the public perception since then but it does show that a name is really only as important as the publicity that surrounds it (as an Aussie I hadn't even *heard* of the name Burger King until I learned about the legal case and didn't even initially know that "Hungry Jacks" == "Burger King" as I am pretty sure many other Aussies would also not have known).

Well you have piqued my interest in finding out about Scala but I think that after more than 15 years of C++ programming I am probably not the right person to become a convert.



(maybe we can end the OT language stuff now and get back to what I think could be a very interesting project)

I think I'd have to agree with bytemaster that this had crossed into "Language Wars" which is not productive for anyone (so will not further it with more fuel).

If you have found your nirvana with Scala then I am not against that at all - so please don't argue that my nirvana with C++ is somehow *inferior*.

Enjoy your programming and *change the world* - that is what we are really striving to do here (rather than win a silly argument about which compiler/interpreter/parser is the best).

We are really only going to have the greatest influence by working together rather being at each others throats about our choices of computer languages.

So this is just getting pointless - now your argument has conveniently changed into one that I can write *shit* in C++ - so I can't possibly write *shit* in Java?

(again - the only BTC lost though shitty programming seems to be via Android and Java - nothing from C++ but of course I *must* be wrong so please correct me)


I made the point in regards to *financial software* (traditional banking and insurance apps) and as stated I am a C++ guy first and foremost.

Once again I would just like to ask - if Satoshi posted here again would you criticize him for his (according to you) *stupid* use of such a *crappy* language?

In regards to Scala I know nothing about it so am not qualified to comment about it (apart from to say that languages are languages - there is no *perfect* one).

Perhaps you've never heard of std::string and std::auto_ptr (i.e. these problems were fixed back before the Java vs. C++ language wars had even really started and a big reason why I really don't buy the whole Java is safer argument).

You can't *overrun* a std::string (unless you're trying to) and std::auto_ptr's look after the memory and validate the pointers themselves - did you miss something?


COBOL and DB/2 SQL (with pre-compiled queries) is used because it does *not allow anything dynamic* period (i.e. it is more secure than *anything* else available today).

Understand that it is simply *not possible* to do a SQL Injection attack when you use DB/2 pre-compiled queries (which is what COBOL apps normally do).

Also understand that I am a C++ programmer (and advocate) but I understand and respect what is used in banking and insurance industries because I spent years *working* with them (and no it's not just because of the legacy code being there - they can afford to get it re-written anytime they like just as they spent billions sorting out the Y2K issues with the COBOL programs they are still running today).