What you are describing are fpga to asic conversions like Hardcopy.  These chips consist of the same logic layout as the fpgas you use to protoype them and they have metal layers instead of the routing fabric making them faster and cheaper to produce.

You can check out Chuck's site yourself there are some examples about what his software does.

Creating a full custom asic involves modelling the transistors, simulating the behavior of the p-n junctions and the currents through the metal layers. Next is constructing logic elements out of the transistors and configuring the layout of the chip and transferring the logic into it. There are ways to start with pre-made logic elements if you buy the software which models them for you, or rent it. There are also processes which are some in-between where you have some areas already layed out for you. There is lots of snake oil in this area... it boils down to pre-configured layers which cost you performance.

It's trusting each other that counts

Then I suggest you grab it and run with it....

I won't be able to educate you on hardware design because I know almost nothing about this subject.

I followed Chuck Moore for a few years about creating a new multiprocessor-soc design which he actually did. (I have one of the chips at home but still haven't gotten around on using). Somewhere he mentioned that he is going to mainly pay the initial development out of his own pocket, he is trying to do it the most economical way possible and that it will be like 10mil dollars. He actually has written a entire software package including a new programming language and operating system to do it, so I'm really confident he took the cheapest route.
I don't know where exactly to find that information anymore but I will try to find and quote it. (He has blanked out some parts of his blog though)

Terrible idea.


I'd give you a free idea which might actually work:
Make a free2play mmorpg or social networking site in which you can earn and spend bitcoin, themed for your particular audience.
Bonus points if you find a clever way of combining the two.

Then of course that would be a lot more work, but you aren't afraid of work are you?

@molecular I'd create a thread on the subject sometime, once I have the motivation to write it down. (I think a blockchain based wot is possible without sacrificing privacy there have been threads on that already but lets see.)

Otherwise:
The way I see it what you describe as the elimination of counterparty risk is not worth anything as long it doesn't apply to the whole system. In detail bitcoin isn't a closed system.
If it your statement were correct, all bitcoins would be some tokens we can send to each other for no reason. Then there would be indeed no counterparty risk.

But since we want something in return it's not that easy.
What bitcoin actually does is shifting the counterparty risk entirely to one party, which is worse for a open system perspective because there is zero trust required for receiving bitcoins but complete trust required for sending them (or actually buying something with them).

That's also why shoes are way overrated. 

psst don't do that, somebody who has invested all his wealth into a highly speculative asset is in denial about this fact.
And to circle-jerk about it was the whole point of this thread.

Oh don't mind ulta-bulls...... I'm just teasing you

It seems we have different opinions on what centralization and bloat means. Or you could just be in denial about the issue seeking the easy way out of the argument...

Either way was nice talking to you

From a technical perspective yes. But that would depend on the severity of the flaw.
I am speaking more of the social aspect such news would have, all the hype and stuff. You know all the people announcing critical mass after a few major news outlets picked it up would be equally eager to spread any FUD once it its us. I might be wrong, but just lets hope that doesn't happen in the next decade or so in the first place

Somehow I get the feeling that you ought to pay either way...  

Quite serious, was switching the encryption algorithm on bitcoin itself ever really an option? Confidence would be lost regardless and "the death of bitcoin" would be announced instantly.
Alright we've almost been there during last years selloff, but this would be something entire different not impatient early adopters eager to cash out...



I wouldn't even say that "alt-chains" are the future, but more like the technology behind bitcoin. It has to evolve in order to be noteworthy but if that would be another cryptocurrency or bitcoin itself is to early to say. That depends if crucial improvements can be made ontop of the existing blockchain or not. A better cryptocurrency might use some different concept which facilitates the same thing as bitcoin/current alt chains do for non-forgeable transactions.

That is a fallacy, you can use the same technology used in bitcoin to facilitate the virtual transfer of gold atoms but you still can get scammed when buying something with bitcoins by the other party. I would even consider the trustless structure of bitcoin one of it's greatest weaknesses.
In detail in order to use bitcoin you have to use it in an environment which can provide you with some trust structure, be it the forums, btc-otc, silkroad, etc..
I still consider it somewhat likely that some day some web-of-trust structure will be available from within the blockchain, that's why I am still longterm bullish on it, but until that issue is solved I merely think of price increases as an investment bubble. And besides some daytrading I don't have any personal use for it. I am considering doing something about this issue but I am not that of a programmer... (No I won't hire you either )

reading down the /. comments....

https://github.com/pcpratts/rootbeer1/tree/master/src/edu/syr/pcpratts/rootbeer/generate/opencl

That would be about as appealing as idk, wearing bank account number around your neck. But if you really think you gonna set a trend with that - go ahead and do it. You could be the biggest supplier for bitcoin bling.... And I even think if there is another, much larger bitcoin bubble some people ought to do it...  

Of course the irony would be if the thing then contains any gold in the physical form in the first place, like at least the gold contacts if not the casing 

I haven't said anything about physically transferring them at least not now.  And a physical transfer doesn't apply to bitcoins.

Of course you can but it will most likely be never economical to do it.

For those who wonder what this is about: http://www.rfreitas.com/Nano/TangibleNanomoney.htm

@TraderTimm I just like to use my thinkmeats to play devils advocate, that is offering people a different opinion when they think something is written in stone

do it faggot

Sooner or later you will be able to trade single gold atoms.

(if you don't know who that is, don't bother - the people in here sure do... don't you??)