Can you hook me up with your dealer? Whatever you are smoking, it's totally awesome.


Given massive difference in complexities, function and markets involved, inadequate analogy is inadequate.

LOL, what a bad troll you are.

Incidentally, could someone remind me if trolling is against forum rules ? 

Um, could you kindly hook me up with any of the kingpins of said underbelly ^__~ ?

Such scenarios are not specific to bitcoins.

Such scenarios could take place with any kind of system where an agent hires the lowest bidder as subcontractor and fails to carry out due diligence.

If you hire "dude from Sandcraterstania who looks tooootaaallllyyyy leeegiiiit" to code a system intended to manage thousands upon thousands of dollars and pay him a penny, you have it coming.

Whether you deal in exotic products of arcane mathematications or more traditional subjects of trade is at that point irrelevant.

Rewriting trader prices automatically is simple.

Now, if you keep the bitcoins you receive for goods and services instead of converting them to something else instantly, a price drop would screw you over. Yes, your prices will adjust in less than a second. The bitcoins in your wallet won't.

Auto-selling the coins you receive at best possible price is also doable, but then a price rise will make you very, very sore (despite the fact that from strictly pragmatic point of view, you get exactly as much USD for your goods and services as you wanted)

Best option would be a bot that manages the salesmen's accounts adjusting their prices and trading their coins in accordance with market behavior and "risk settings" the salesmen set when creating their accounts with bot service (so that bot can play "riskier" with the account holders that are willing to allow somebody's bot to carry out more risky, but potentially more lucrative, operations with their accounts)

I wonder how hard would such rent-a-bot service be to create.

@ Gabi

Well, that is  definitely a very plausible proposal

1)
Quick google search suggests that "pogs" indeed have value, that can be trivially expressed in U.S. Dollars.

Another quick search suggests that even   weirder things, such as age-riddled postage stamps, do have value (and fairly exuberant one at that)

2)
The fact that OP later tries to make an argument regarding "deflationary" economics suggests that the OP has some pretty weird assumptions about the nature and eventual extent of "bitcoin economy" and generally does not seem to realize that something that is essentially infinitely divisible can not operate in a manner entirely similar to "usual"  deflationary currencies (which were quite limited in their division ability), which is what makes this experiment in quasi-deflationary system interesting (also, in my humble opinion, considering bitcoin to be a currency is somewhat inaccurate).

Conclusion:
OP has presented no novel arguments and has fairly bizarre assumptions both as to "target" extent of "bitcoin economy" and value in general. OP has presented a fallacious argument that extends the behavior of typical "deflationary" currencies to something that, by its nature, can be neither really "deflationary" nor really "inflationary". OP also apparently believes that Bitcoin transactions are, by their default state, anonymous, which is simply factually incorrect (OP can educate himself using Block Explorer, which can be found via powers of Google).

OP's motives for posting his "warning" on this particular forum are completely indecipherable to me (I am, of course, operating under assumption that OP is sincere in his claims)

OP is thus best ignored.

Thank you, and have a nice and very safe day.

Goodbye.

It seems to me that what matters  for a security model is not whether the "legitimate" participants ascribe value to their activities (all value being a matter of perception, in my very humble opinion), it's whether their opponents do, and given the existence of (technologically  sophisticated) agents interested disrupting filesharing networks, one would say that the analogy between torrent trackers and pools is not entirely off-base due to apparent existence of (relatively) technologically sophisticated  opponents who would find disrupting the respective services   to be a source of benefit (financial or otherwise)

Anyways, I find the fact that an apparently notable (though sadly unquantified) number of pool-ops are running on outgoing-only is verily interesting and worth keeping in mind.

you should be getting an occasional block every now and then (just don't forget to set s to 1 and Q to zero, and turn off longpolling, and everything should be fine with CGminer)

looks perfectly fine to me

That I   understand .

Still, the security paradigm of running on pure outgoing is kinda weird. I mean, I am aware of existence of TCP denial of service shenanigans, but for the love of everything good, are we seriously more paranoid an environment than torrenter / KAD crowd ?

johnj how many mhashes you have, again, per guiminer ?

Well, looks like poclbm still is no 1 geist miner.

I wonder why, tho.

Yes, I tend to agree with your gut feel, will have to tweak that bit later on.

manrus, which options do you pass when launching cgminer ?

I think there has been some discussion as to good cgminer options in the main GG thread.

Basically, cgminer.exe -s 1 -Q 0 --no-longpoll

 cgminer.exe -s 2 -Q 0 --no-longpoll might work slightly better or slightly worse depending on connection, diff and whatnot. Try both.

Also, it's normal for cgminer to report lotta rejects. It is just like that.

Ow, dude, it will take you a long time to find a block.

How many kilohashes per second does guiminer report ?


What cgminer options did you pass ?

Type getinfo in the control tab

Post output here.

What it's saying right now is that it has not found any devices it could configure with UPnP. That can mean either that 1) there's nothing to configure and you are connected or 2) that you will have to open port 7769 manually on your system, which depends heavily on what your setup is like and whether your ISP is among assholes who provide "free firewall service"

Actually, I intend to use the coins that I have "properly" mined over the period of time

I strongly doubt there will be so many solidcoiners coming forward that I will have to consider using Superfund to introduce them to Geist ^__^

You mean me or the whole "announcement" ?

My offer is absolutely serious.

Hot potato principle - the last man to own Ye Olde Solicoinsiz looses.

Having said that, I  do not know if anyone would by old solidcoinsiz for bitcoins, but as a gesture of good will, I will buy them for Geist Geld, at a fixed rate of 1 solidcoin for 1 Geist

MEss is like that.

It hates everything with mining code  that isn't explicitly whitelisted, it seems.

Given that you're on 'doze, I suggest you download the portable bundle, run it, then set up guiminer to target port 8777 (given that you mine locally, you can just leave default username and password, which are, well, username and password respectively)