I used Britcoin ages ago and found it an agreeable experience. But on looking at the Terms and Conditions at the new Intersango, I notice at term 12:

You agree to indemnify, defend, and hold harmless Intersango Ltd, and its parent, affiliates, directors, officers and employees from and against any claim, liability, cost, damage or loss we may incur (including, without limitation, legal fees) as a result of the use of this website as well as but not limited to any violation by you of your obligations under these terms and conditions.

(https://britcoin.co.uk/terms.php)

That seems a bit scary! So much so, I just didn't go any further with the new registration. I hope some intersango punter isn't going to get screwed over by the lawyers there.

I'm mining with p2pool, running forrestv-p2pool-27ab63b / forrestv-poclbm-5590e7c on radeon 5850 on ubuntu 11.04 64bit. Box is a dedicated miner. Seems there may be some stability problems. Indicated hash rate changes dramatically. With a straight forward:

./poclbm.py -d1 http://etc etc

... sometimes I get:



... other times i get:



... and other times I get anything in between. 70 MH/s showing right now.

like maged said:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=25091.0

do it now! I did, and got my btc back.

awaiting an invite here too...

I will stop mining with mtred to move to p2pool just as soon as poclbm works at p2pool. I check for any progress on this daily! I've nothing against mtred, they have been fine. I would just prefer p2p mining for the usual predictable reasons.

wow, thanks for your post kjj, that was very informative.

Thanks for the input Theymos, i didn't think it would be a crashing big a deal :-O

JoelKatz, i didn't quite follow who was claiming and who was sending in your last post. So just for sh*ts and giggles--and notwithstanding Theymos's decisive contribution--here's an example:

Bob has 10btc held at a one-address-only, read-only wallet.dat. With this address, Bob wants to send 1btc to Alice. Surely Bob's client gets RAM to load Alice's pubkey, uses Alice's key to encrypt the string for the 1btc (and whatever else for the btc to be "sent back"), and then sends this to Alice, right? If Bob tries this (and has hacked his client so it won't crash), then surely his old balance of 10btc will after a confirmation show up on the blockchain as now being 9btc (assuming there are indeed no problems with the btc "sent back"). If all Bob wants is for a full account of the change of balance on his address to show up in the blockchain, then no writing needs to be done at his actual wallet.dat.

Even if (as Theymos said) Bob's client crashes, nevertheless, the blockchain might still record things faithfully once the string is encrypted and sent to Alice. Of course, in the real world, it would be a little impolite to go around crashing one's client, so one wouldn't do it. I'm just hypothesising really.

Crap. I have a feeling i'm waaaay out of my league here. If there is *so much* wrong with that example above, then i hope it at least gets your week off to a lol start ;-) Anyhow, i definitely won't be doing any chmodding now.

Maged and JoelKatz,

So sorry about the late edit of my question. I suppose you both answered before the "$ chmod 400" bit reared its ugly head.

As to *why* i would only one addy at this particular wallet, i just wanted to be able to reliably use the http://blockexplorer.com/address/<address_goes_here> page to keep tabs on this wallet, without having to decrypt and mv a wallet.dat, and then start up a client just to find out how much btc i have got. Having a read only wallet.dat containing just one keypair should do for this, or so i reckon. If i have several addresses in the one wallet, then the web page method of btc balance checking is torpedoed. But if i were to go this one-address only route, i have the worry about the btc "sent back". (In addition to whatever other horrors may await me!)

Again, sorry about the late edit to the original post.

when i check the balance of any address at the following url:
http://blockexplorer.com/address/<address_goes_here>

... i see the following text appearing in the web page:
"Every time a transaction is sent, some bitcoins are usually sent back to yourself at a new address (not included in the Bitcoin UI), which makes the balance of a single address misleading."

Q1) Does this mean the btc "sent back" are sent back to one or more of the other addresses contained in the sender's wallet.dat file?

If the answer to Q1 is "yes", then please suppose for a moment that the wallet.dat was generated with this entry in bash:
./bitcoin -keypool=0
... and then:
chmod 400 /path/to/wallet.dat

... which generates a rather skinny ~16kb wallet.dat containing only one address, as far as i can tell. (A standard issue wallet.dat is around 90kb at generation.)

Q2) If i send from this one-only-addy-wallet.dat, will the btc "sent back" be sent back to the one and only address without a hitch?

I can't see why they wouldn't, but maybe someone else can see something i can't. I hope this is not too arcane a question! Thanks for considering this.

/** edited to include chmod

debian squeeze amd64 users will need this:
aptitude install ia32-libs

i got my btc back, thanks again for speeding the process along makomk :-)

aww, sweet!

edit; lost a btc wallet, then recovered it using awesome recovery software from makomk:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=25091.msg344382#msg344382

Great work Amir (and other coders). Now it's back up and running, i just had a nice experience there.

Genjix, you are--or might be feeling--under a fuckload of pressure here. I hope you are coping OK. Don't let this all get you down! You have done some great work. What's the addy to send you a btc contribution?

thanks saqwe, i got it :-)

i got an invite :-)

Thank You theymos, i had concluded there was a problem with that set up, as the time appeared to me to be a 24hr clock that was 12 hours wrong. Of course, now you propmted me, i looked again and made sense of it! Maybe conventions are slightly different between US/UK, generating confusion at first sight. Imagine that ;-)

Thanks Again :-)

I can not seem to find a way of setting the timezone to UTC ? All i can do is set my location at profile > forum profile information > location, but i can't do more than that. A tick for UTC would be really nice :-)

Hi saqwe, i'm vladi1821 at ebay, did i get everything right eventually?

Here is a related worry i have: if big retailers and similarly large corporations and institutions start accepting BTC transactions, many of the BTC will likely be funneled straight to the banks. The banks wouldn't have to *buy* any BTC at all. Then, having acquired all this BTC, the banks could just sit on it, and take the losses on the chin. It wouldn't take long before that would become a very big pile of bitcoin for them to sit on.