I have a Windows Server 2008 RC2 VPS that I would like to be able to tunnel my internet traffic through, but I am not tech savvy and don't know how to set it up.  I had a friend working on it and he installed some of the Routing and Remote Access roles, but some websites I read said you need to install something else first.  I could try to do the step by step instructions myself and pray it works, but really, I'd have no clue what I'm doing.  If you can remote desktop to my VPS and just set it up for me, and tell me what to do client-side to get it working, I'd be very very happy!

If you are interested, and think you can do it in a night, please PM me your price!  I'd like to do this ASAP!

FYP

Are you serious?  You clearly have no experience with statistics and gambling.  Learn what it is you are doing and how to audit code and what constitutes an acceptable test.  "ZOMG i got 11 tails and only 1 heads, im clearly being cheated" reeks of ignorance and inexperience with gambling.  The site may or may not be a scam, but your post doesn't sway the argument one way or the other.

I'm a professional poker player by the way.

That's a pretty big accusation for providing zero evidence.

First guess:  Not real

Second guess:  Einstein Bros. Bagel

I'm still fairly new to cryptography, but I feel like there's a way to implement this.  Is it possible with cryptography for multiple people to have one portion of a private key, and then they all interact somehow to find out what the public address is, and once that's done with, they cannot individually derive it again (or get all of the private key) without that same cooperation repeating?

This way, for example, Bob could get an address to send money to, for oh let's say a p2p poker client whose blockchain contains which parties have the necessary parts of a private key with X btc on it... and then when Bob later wants to cash out, he can simply request all the private key chunks from peers and then he pieces it together on his own computer.

So is it possible to derive a public key without any of the people who own a part of the private key being able to get access to it?  That is, is it possible put the private key together from separate chunks, do the steps to get the public key, and then display the public key and also the people who own bits of that private key, but without any of those people individually being able to know the full private key?

I feel like that might be possible, but I'm not sure.  (The "who is richer" problem is what makes me think this might somehow be possible.)  If it is possible, it could pave the way for p2p bitcoin poker without a server, and without having the blockchain contain every damned hand history...  and without having to send btc over the bitcoin network after every single hand or even after every single action within a hand.

What I'm thinking is, after a hand of poker occurs and is signed by all the players, the blockchain then simply records new balances for each player without the need for storing additional information.  So the blockchain has player balances, bitcoin public addresses of addresses in the "poker" network, and then along with each address, a list of users necessary to access that private key.  This way, the blockchain doesn't become unwieldy.

(Credit where credit is due:  I was reading about Open Transactions when I thought about the blockchain simply updating balances, which then lead me to the thought about how to deposit and cash out, which lead me to the distributed private key question.)

I didn't mean to be as mean as my last few posts sound.  I'm just completely floored that some of you actually think people will self-govern and do the right thing when the whole of human history says otherwise.

It is possible to want input even if I feel there's a strong chance I will discard it, simply for the possibility of finding good advice.

Actually common sense tells me that threats of punishment do deter crime, as does life experience, research, statistics, history, and other data.

You really need to provide some kind of evidence for such an outrageous claim.  It's a fantasy to think that people will do the right thing without coercion when it benefits them to do the wrong thing.

What evidence do you base this claim on?

The idea that people self-govern is completely ludicrous.  All the evidence of human history suggests otherwise.  We are violent tribalistic territorial primates.

Words cannot describe how grateful I am, so here's a picture accurately representing it.

casascius, is there any way you could compile a Windows binary for your bitcoin address utility.  :-D  I am not a techie, and although I MIGHT be able to figure out how to compile it myself, there's a good chance I'd fuck it up.  Similarly, I have to wait until bitcoin v0.4 comes out before I can take advantage of the import/export private keys patch (assuming it's included in that build).  But when the official client does have the capability to import new keys, having your program so that I could create addresses out of my own password would be very very handy!  I'm just not enough of a computer guy to do it myself--even though I see that the ability is out there...

Until about a half a year ago, I was a liberal democrat.  Then I started to think I was a libertarian, then an anarchist.  Now, I've realized that I can't define it because what I want for myself is different than what I want for others.

(Not previously, but nowadays) I go to great lengths to preserve my individual liberty and pretty much don't think about laws or society in general.  I simply do what I'm going to do and interact with people in a manner consistent with my own morals, and I consider law only in terms of the hassle of its consequence and the chance of being caught.

However, I am very glad that laws and society and government exist, because I believe most people, if they acted freely because law and government were abolished, would act much less ethically than I would, and I think they would generally destroy civilization.  My life time experience with people has lead me to believe they will always put short-term gain and immediate self interest above all else, including long-term gains and interests.  In short, most people are stupid.

So as much as I find governments of all sorts to be grossly inefficient and I dislike many laws, I am very very happy to live in a society that has such things because most people are sheep in addition to being stupid, and I think these inefficient laws protect them and me and do more good than harm by being in place.  And it doesn't bother me at all that I pick and choose which ones I obey.

Is it weird or hypocritical that I go about my life freely without thought of governance but think it's a really good thing that others feel constrained by laws and government?

Or am I just some kind of psycho?  I really just don't trust the judgment of others.

While highly likely to be true, I am curious as to what relationship you see between the (non)existence of God and bears having lunch.

I don't understand all the discussion about "law" here.  Of what meaning or use is a law that is completely unenforceable?  Is it really even a law?  At that point it is merely a psychological weapon made to have the masses feel bad about doing something in hopes that they won't do it for that reason.  Of course, that certainly works, but I don't like referring to that as a law.  It is a psychological manipulation without physical consequence, and those who do not feel any need to conform to the "law" suffer no consequences.  (As an aside, this is one of many examples of why psychopathy is evolutionarily advantageous, which should really scare us all...)

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

I can confirm that I am indeed luv2drnkbr.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (MingW32)

iEYEARECAAYFAk5seI8ACgkQGuAUqsq/lX39+wCfYBCrsMX3mJmnthwdzIKuczZE
9eoAoMNF47AIZRE+XQJAj0lGmh3nRfyO
=3yKc
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

And you'll do what exactly if he doesn't?...  It's all well and good that you paid up when you made mistakes, but assuming others will is a recipe for being taken advantage of.


QFMFT

Where on Shackleford's site does it say he ran these kinds of tests?  I don't think 1000 trials is going to provide any evidence about -- well, anything -- remotely useful for a coin flip.  That's just too little data.

Gogulski's a reliable good guy, give him some time.  You didn't get scammed or lose your BTC.