Thanks.

I thought the idea of using SVN for "release candidate" code was good. Stability and security are very important for Bitcoin, so there needs to be a long testing period before stable releases are made.

Deleted. There are probably thousands of these. I wonder how dangerous it would be to delete all users with 0 posts that haven't logged in for a month. That'd be easier than checking every 0-post user for spam.

Generations won't show up on your MtGox/MyBitcoin/etc. balance, so make sure you use the address of a standalone client for payouts.

Are you going to put the source on SourceForge SVN?

Really old coins might be collected.

It should eventually gain connections from the seednodes. If not, try connecting directly to one of the fallback nodes:
https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Fallback_nodes

It would be cool to set up a bitcoin.org newsgroup server for serious discussion. Possibly this could also be attached to a mailing list system.

Hardly anyone reads FAQ posts, and even fewer people read giant walls of text not organized into sections. Just post a link to a "canonical topic" in response to repeated questions.

No. They fail IsFinal(), which causes them not to be included. If they are included, the block will be invalid.

They're stored in the memory pool like normal unconfirmed transactions. The sender and recipient can resend them to keep them fresh.

26 characters:
11111111111111111111BZbvjr

I did wrongly remember the upper limit, though. It is 34 characters. I must have flipped the digits in my head.

If someone makes Bitcoin unusable for a long time by controlling >50% of the network, people might start weighting the "work" value of a chain by looking at its behavior in handling transactions. A chain of 20 blocks with no transactions is very likely to be malicious, for example. As long as it's done by weighting instead of outright rejection, legitimate clients shouldn't ever stay on separate chains for long.

The sender could leave the transaction open until confirming that the recipient is OK, and then replace it with a closed transaction. Or the recipient could send BTC to some trusted person and then cancel it with a transaction to self (a dead man's switch).

It can't protect against double-spending.

I've successfully used Centregold before.

You sign some other stuff, too, which prevents that attack.

Trimming invalid characters is a good idea. The chance that you make a valid address from nothing is nearly 0 -- if you get a valid address, the user pasted one.

I've seen many sites assume that Bitcoin addresses must be 33 or 34 characters long, but they can actually be 25-43 characters in length.

All sites should verify address checksums. I don't like the idea of asking Bitcoin over RPC for every address, though: there's code for checking yourself in several languages.

A block with more transactions isn't "more valid". Miners can generate blocks with no transactions if they want. Transaction fees encourage them not to create empty blocks.

I thought it was pretty cool how I was able to generate so much BTC when I first started using Bitcoin. It was fun and unique. A few times I generated two blocks in a row with my 3000 khash/s. My CPU was pretty fast compared to others on the network.

I sold 15,000 BTC on Bitcoin Market for ~0.003 USD: the all-time low on any market, AFAIK. I had measured my power consumption and determined that it only cost me ~0.001 BTC to make one BTC, so I thought 0.003 was a good profit margin. I knew the price would rise over time due to the deflationary nature of Bitcoin, but I didn't think it would happen so suddenly.

You guys are nuts! BTC hasn't even quite reached $2. I predict a drop to $1 or less.

Anyone want to bet me that it won't go above $20?

Illegal goods are not allowed on the official forum. bitcoin.it is not official.