Make sure you don't have any extra spaces or other invisible whitespaces (tabs, carriage returns, etc).  A good site will strip that from the webform before validating but some don't and return false positives (i.e. mark "1AxkyqHW98DMH1mZiXZ247BYdDvwN4dV9U" as valid but mark "1AxkyqHW98DMH1mZiXZ247BYdDvwN4dV9U " as invalid.   You can always try another address.  Your wallet can produce an infinite number of addresses.  If you try more than one, are sure you don't have any extra whitespace, and it still says invalid then their site is broken (possibly flawed address validation).

The min mandatory fee has been reduced once already.  It was 0.01 BTC at one time.  As he said it can be reduced.  The last time it was reduced is when BTC spiked to $32 in 2011.  So the fee isn't much higher then it was then.  If BTC continues to increase in price the min mandatory fee will be reduced.


Obviously you haven't thought about this much.

Then your mem clock wasn't lowered.  Not all cards support lower memclocks, and some have limits on how much it can be lowered.  Most cards don't report an error when they get a REQUEST to change memclock to a value they won't accept.  They just silently stay at stock clock.   "You: Set memclock to 1 Mhz.  Card: Ok.  (Memclock doesn't change)".

Ok it is double that, or quadruple that.  Doesn't really matter when there are 60GH/s ASICs being sold right.  The answer is probably correct on an order of magnitude.  A faster version isn't going to change much, it would need to be many magnitudes faster which simply isn't going to happen.

If you feel it has promise, buy one and find out.   IIRC those processors run like $1K each.  That is the raw chip so at best you are looking at a price point comparable to BFL Single SC.  You aren't going to magic 60GH/s out of 64 general purpose cores running at 800Mhz.

That it intentional.  Most people will never be able to (or need to) understand the currency at the "nuts and bolts" level.  Just like someone can use facebook without needing to understand the OSI model or the Internet Protocol.  Even a good web developer doesn't really need more than a high level understanding of those concepts (mainly so they can understand the limits and capabilities of the world wide web).


The source that started it all ...
http://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf

A tip.  Read it from start to finish.  Even if there are parts you don't quite get or have questions about read it from start to finish.  Then wait a few days and read it again.  Later as you are looking at code, asking informed questions, and piecing together the mechanics refer back to it.   Also if you read through it and believe you understand Bitcoin on the first try ... you don't.  

Then there is the source code ...
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin

Without a good understanding of the paper above though it will just be technical magic.

When you can ask informed technical questions this site is a good resource:
http://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/

There is real fear among the PM diehards.  The premise of those going ultra long PM (as opposed to those who allocate a portion of their portfolio to act as a hedge) has been that fiat will collapse it is just a matter of time and when it does those trillions upon trillions will pour back into PM.  

What if the PM diehardards are half right and fiat collapses but the trillions pour into something else ....?   Until 2009 there really was no compelling "something else".

The alternative cynical view is that the author knows making the loose association increases the number of pageviews (and thus ads).  Same article just about silver up 1% (which is news in itself) isn't as sensational.

His point was blockchain technology is expensive (in terms of never ending storage requirements, massive computing power, and eternal risk of 51% attack).  This isn't to say Bitcoin is "bad" but there is a cost.  The price for decentralization is the cost of the blockchain.  Remember the cost isn't just in the miners (proof of work).  All full nodes must not only store the blockchain, they must validate each transaction, each block.  No node accepts the "work" of another node ("trust me this block is legit") all the work is replicated all over again by every node.  All that cost is the price of decentralization.  Without a trusted central authority each node must operate on a trustless model (which is EXPENSIVE). 

Having a decentralized, centralized currency makes absolutely no sense.  You combine all the costs and limitations of a decentralized currency with all the costs and limitations of centralized one.  Don't feel bad it is a common noob mistake/assumption.

The blockchain isn't good because it is the end-all perfect method of processing transactions.  Hardly.  The blockchain is good because it is the best (only one proven so far) to process transactions without a trusted third party.

The ONLY advantage that Bitcoin has over a central authority is that it doesn't have a central authority.  Everything else could be done with a central authority (irreversible transactions, finite supply, psuedo anonymous transactions, contracts/multi-sig, etc).  Of course you have to trust the central authority ... implicitly.    The purpose of the blockchain is to eliminate the need for trusting a central authority implicitly.  If you don't trust the central authority the blockchain doesn't help you, and if you do trust the central authority then the cost of the blockchain is just wasted energy. Liberty Reserve for example would gain nothing by moving transaction processing to a blockchain.

You do understand there is no "Bitcoin, Inc" right? Nobody on the Bitcoin, Inc board of directors is intentionally "keeping" it unfriendly. 
It would be like saying why was the internet in 1970 unfriendly, or why is it so hard to learn how to run a commercial gold mining operation with no experience.

Bitcoin is far more user friendly than it was in say 2010 and will be even more user friendly/mainstream/"easy" in 2020.  If you can't "get it" then honestly it might be too early for you.  I don't mean that as an insult, the reality is there is a massive amount of work before the project is ready for mainstream "plug and play" users (larger higher trading volume exchanges, hardware wallets, functional multi-sig/contracts, insured deposits, polished UIs, etc).  You can get your hands dirty or you check back in a decade when everything is "facebook easy" (the fortunes will have already been made by the companies that made in super easy).

No that isn't normal.  You have something wrong.  You should get work within seconds.  Then again CPU mining is worthless.  Might be more profitable to do pen and paper mining.

Pools can't see hashrate.  They have absolutely no idea what your hashrate is.  What they can see is how many shares you submit.  Depending on how the pool ESTIMATES your hashrate by looking at shares (over what period of time, difficulty of shares, etc) there can be significant differences in estimated hashrate (even between BTC pools).

With 700KH/s you can just forget about mining.  I know you are excited but the end result will be you earning less than a cent and likely destroying your laptop.

All miners make the same amount in the long run.  Pooled mining just reduces variance.   Would you rather have $1 per day or a 1% chance at $100 each day.  The expected value is the same.   Now some pools charge fees and that reduces the expected value of mining.  It is simply a trade of a little less revenue for more consistent revenue.

On the employee/salary angle give there are a lot of options.  The simplest would be to price the salary but give them the option to take some/all of their take homepay in BTC.  Actually in the short/medium term this is really the only option.  Taxes need to be collected, payroll deductions like healthcare and life insurance need to be in fiat.  Until there is a scenario where every aspect of employment can be paid in BTC some component of wages needs to be fiat.  So the solution is easy.  Your wage is $100K.  What % of your takehome pay would you like sent to ACH (DD) in USD and what % sent as BTC transfer.  BTC fanatics could pick 100%, BTC skeptics 0%, most would pick something in the middle.

Most people are more concerned with the purchasing power of their wages not the nominal number.  You could be a trillionaire in Zimbabwae dollars but I am guessing you neither elected to receive your salary in Z or move there.  Smart employees will (either initially or over time) realize that although they get less nominal BTC the go further and their standard of living is better.  Dumb employees will happily take fiat and your company saves money (hold their salary in BTC and convert smaller and smaller amounts of it into fiat each paycheck).  Still there is a psychological aspect to it so don't force your employee (what would be the benefit).  Give them the option and if they want tired rapidly devaluing fiat ... let them.  Freedom is about choice, even the choice to do dumb things.

As for the other points which all can be simplified to "Bitcoin is too volatile".  The market will get deeper.  If there is so much profit to be easily made pushing it around with mere millions then lots of people will dump mere millions into the market and the market will get deeper.  100 or 1000 people chasing the same "easy money" will boost those walls real quick. It really comes down to a fundamental question ... do you believe in free markets?  If you don't then Bitcoin will fail and there really is nothing that could be done to fix it.

Think about it this way.  Your intent is to naked short BTC with someone elses coins.  Great for you horrible for lender.  So if BTC crashes you can repay easily but anyone thinking BTC will crash would likely just sell instead of lending.  There is no counterparty risk in selling.  So really the only people who would be willing to lend coins to you are those who think that BTC will hold value.  Now lets say that instead of crashing, BTC skyrockets your ability and likelihood to repay is greatly reduced.  So lenders coins are worth more but they never see them.  Throw the fact that ALL business has risk on top and it is just a lose-lose-lose for any lender.  Better to put it all on a high % SD game. 

Your history/rep doesn't mean you WILL scam but it certainly means you have absolutely nothing to lose by walking away.  Likewise someone with significant history/rep doesn't mean they WON'T scam but it does mean they have something to lose by walking away.

Lastly 20% interest?  If someone did want to lend coins to someone looking to short they could do so bitfinex.  Collect and interest and have some assurance the borrower can't walk away (although the site could).

Well no you can't.  You can exchange USD for BTC and you can exchange EUR for BTC.  MtGox (and other specifically) don't have a USD:EUR market for this exact reason.  APMex sells gold bullion in USD, CAD, EUR (and likely half dozen other currencies).  In theory you could use them to trade USD for EUR using gold purchases and sales as a middle man.  They aren't a dealer in foreign exchange.

If you want real info go to the source:
http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=1b9bbca34ea4e56340935841929ee09c&c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title31/31cfrv3_02.tpl#1000

The two sections most relevent to MSB are 1010 and 1022.  If you are real interested open 1010 and 1022 is seperate tabs/windows because both sections make lots of references to the corresponding other section.

You can't simply ask for a "generic" administrative ruling.  You need to provide a specific example.  Say you are the owner (or legal counsel for) a company called CoinFort which allows clients to buy and sell coins using ACH as a funding and disbursement method.  If you have specific question on your business model related to specific MSB regulation (most likely needing clarification on a definition or meaning) you can request an administrative ruling.

In an administrative ruling, FinCEN is obligated to respond to the specific questions asked by an MSB.  The purpose is to prevent a lawsuit (which would be the only other way to get a resolution).

There is no legal right (sadly) for them to answer general questions, hold open hearings, or hear criticisms/concerns in a public forum, etc.

Nobody has ever thought Bitcoin (and other virtual currencies) are legal tender.  Not sure what you think that means.

Users can create an infinite number of addresses.  It would be foolish for Wordpress to use a single address for all incoming payments given there is no cost to create thousands, millions, even billions (if they need that many) new addresses.  Most businesses use a new "one time use only" address for every single order/deposit/transaction/customer. The only person seeing a particular address is the person making the payment. 

As an example, please tell me how many Bitcoins FC4B has received from clients.  ( https://fastcash4bitcoins.com )  Grab your calculator I will wait.  If you get it exactly right down to the satoshi I will give you 1,000 BTC.

You keep sending low priority spam?  Good news is you are making the network more secure.

My guess is you have a huge number of tiny inputs (SD? worthless "free" BTC sites? miner which set pool to auto-payout at something ridiculous like every 0.0001 BTC?).  Your wallet is spammed to hell.

Bitcoin priority works on the concept of coin age.  It takes roughly 1 Bitcoin-day (1BTC which is 1 day old, or 10 BTC which are ~2 hours old, or 0.1 BTC which are 10 days old) to avoid low priority fees.  The tx must also have all outputs be 0.01 BTC or more and total size less than 10 KB to avoid anti-spam fees.

Oh man some good laughs in there.

"Bears are like, WTF"

For those who haven't made the connection the "Finney Attack" commonly referenced on this forum is named after the OP who first theorized this double spend attack vector.
https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Double-spending#Finney_attack

Thank you for sharing Hal.  I have sometimes wondered what would have happened if nobody had responded to Satoshi's idea.  Would it have simply died on the vine and vanished into the pages of history?