The account will be put on hold from listing items, but not buying? The site thinks I owe 1000+, but I can still bid. Freezing immediately after wining a big auction seems like a bad way to do it because even if I pay instantly after winning the seller might not confirm for days or weeks. Maybe you could let the seller flag a slow/no payment?

I suppose this is fixed by paying through biddingpond.

The no multiple account rule is pretty weak. Scammers/trolls will just ignore anyway. And some people might have legitimate reasons for keeping their histories separate. There is no way at all for you to tell if I just made a second account or if it was my brother so any enforcement whatsoever is going to piss people off.

I think it would be reasonable to forget the -500 rule and wait and see if nonpayment becomes an issue. If it does you could require partial or full deposit in order to place bids. Since there is low incentive for people to win and not pay (since they won't get anything) a very small token amount that is forfeit if payment is not received should be plenty deterrent.

Just trying to help, keep up the great development!

I like a slightly different version. Payment is required, but there is a "legitimate" button that returns the micro payment. If you really want to block an address you can, but you can also simply ignore spam and make money.

The same thing could work for phone calls. You could use it to drop hints too. If my mother calls too much I just don't press the "legit" button and maybe she figures it out.

Which is the important part? That you remain ignorant of a conversion rate or that no single person in the world utters it? And what if 14 people say 13 different rates?

The first mover advantage is not like getting an 18 month head start, it's way more than that. If someone is interested in doing something similar they're very likely to join than to restart the project. And even if a few do start over unless theirs is way different newcomers will prefer to join our established infrastructure.

If someone comes up with something totally better, that a different story.

Companies like those mentioned can get first mover advantages and lose only later once they get oversized and bogged down. I don't see how that can happen here. As more people adopt bitcoin it just gets better.

This is not meant to mean "Go slow no worries" There are lots of reasons to develop quickly, including personal gain. I think the world really needs something like this to flee to or else life is going to suck big time. Trade makes awesome shit possible. And at this point on of those awesome things is life imo.

Very nice imo.

Steph is the man.

Lol, monthly fees? really? sounds scammy if that is the case.

From a purely self interested standpoint what is the optimal rate at which to increase power to maximize coins earned? Max it and hold it there or ramp it up? Can we purchase any amount that we want or only exactly 128 GPUs?

Satoshi just said it can be changed, so technically the network is capable.

I might be in for as much as $100. Do we want to do this if we might have to stop (for lack of funds or whatever)? I don't want blocks to take an hour for the next 5 months...

Also is it even efficient to raise it a bunch and make it that much harder for ourselves at the same cost during the next period? Just thinking aloud here.

Look, it's still true without the bitcoin part.

You mean that would be evidence if it had happened?

If they didn't confirm why would he clear them to go into the account? Is he counting blocks instead of confirmations? That seems odd.

None of the coins in the account were ever mine so I don't really have standing here.

But I think you could interpret the interaction thus far as you holding your hand out offering a bag full of coins for 3 weeks and not even getting a nod. You are not stealing if you pull back the bag. They had the ability to take them for a long time and didn't do it.

I'd guess that it never trades on major exchanges vs national currencies, well not for long anyway. It's just so much better that once it has comparable adoption it will end fiat completely. Wide adoption is the only problem with bitcoin imo, and that is temporary and will eventually benefit from positive feedback.

Usually you can start the nonce at 0 because they block you are working on is made unique by the inclusion of your unique address in the generate transaction. If a group of people all send generates to the same address you need another number included to make sure that the members are not repeating work.

I have no idea how important that fact is, it doesn't seem like too big of a deal to me, but theymos can elaborate.

Why wouldn't it? I don't suspect the admins have a puritanical agenda.

Unless the trade page is an endorsement, which I do think it is. Maybe it should explicitly say no endorsement, only verification of bitcoin usage.

Armatures do do various things... it might be nice to get a heads up. You don't even have to do it yourself, just give the option for paying customers to add tags.

Even if no money was attached it is pretty lame for a company claiming to be fighting for freedom to not be interested in a money that can be used freely.

Is there some way of manipulating that does not reduce to paying more than you need to to buy bitcoins or getting less than you could for selling them? Those two sound like gifts to me.

Volume used to be lower and volatility was higher, this is what I would expect. Why do you think the opposite? Something to do with bitcoin in particular?