Are we even talking about that same thing? The gold standard is not currently used by any country on the planet, as every country that ever tried found it too inconvenient as it prevented them from printing their way out of trouble. Not quite what I would call "wildly successful".

Yes, you're missing the fact that this has been tried before (with gold instead of bitcoins) with absolutely no success.

Show me where I was repeating myself, cause I only repeated myself since people were asking the same questions over and over. So that isn't me repeating myself.

How was my concern addressed completely?

How is setting the default policy to block these transactions exactly making it easier?

This is the saddest thread of the forums, cause this right here, shows that if aren't on the side of the core developers then you must be the idiot. And that is what hurts me the most, and makes me sad. Freedom of speech... none is being shown in this thread. If you actually read my point of view before attacking me you would understand. I have discussed this with many bitcoiners offline and online, and this is the only thread that completely doesn't get it. That is the most upsetting thing ever. I don't know if your scared to say Gavin is a dictator or you actually believe this is the right move, but if understood my point of view you would agree with it. Or maybe not since you seem like a bitcoin foundation front runner, so yeah.

PLEASE READ BEFORE POSTING IN THIS THREAD dumb people ...snip... just say the same thing over and over

I sent a total of 4.0624 BTC to the genesis block that was mined by Satoshi Nakamoto & which can't be spent due to a quirk in the way that the genesis block is expressed in the code (this may have been intentional).

1G5apmPvo2iTtmkNWAHTCET7Y842Ufijs8 ~ I sent 0.0624 BTC on 2012 07 15

1ASTRv7aBipHxXH2iF5XfchNBdWWYbjbSo ~ I sent 4 BTC on 2013 01 27

http://blockexplorer.com/address/1A1zP1eP5QGefi2DMPTfTL5SLmv7DivfNa

The total all together that's been sent there (including the 50 BTC mined coins reward) & hence it's balance is 63.02319969 BTC atm (last TX was for 1 BTC on 2013 05 26)

I'll let someone who's been following this thread work out what's best to add to the running total, I didn't see the genesis block mentioned before here but expect that I may have missed it in my quick look through the posts.

Don't take my word for it (I'm neither expert with the code nor with crypto), but I presume for signing a message you first hash it and then sign the hash.  Thus it is completely irrelevant how large the message is because you always end up doing your crypto on a fixed-size hash.

    vector<unsigned char> vchSig;
    if (!key.SignCompact(Hash(ss.begin(), ss.end()), vchSig))
        throw JSONRPCError(RPC_INVALID_ADDRESS_OR_KEY, "Sign failed");

Hopefully, if Bitcoin really takes off there will be a million more people with the same question.  I really did look around, read the Newbie section, etc and found nothing--so perhaps senior members might want to organize something to underscore that it is important to always be positive and informative.

It's just one opinion but for what is may be worth, I don't think you should expect new people to do tons of research in a forum with which they are unfamiliar...it's good that these things come into people's minds--and I think the expectation that most should or will self educate is erroneous.  As an outsider--with a fresh point of view--as a consultant, if you will--I think for the good of the movement--senior members should either ignore dumb questions--provide links--but certainly *never* use a negative tone.

You should be glad this is happening and develop a positive strategy to deal with it.

For example I would encourage senior members to type up a canned reply (each different for each member) which can quickly be pasted into a response and modified a bit to suit the particular inquiry--the important thing is that the tone be positive, polite and informative--such as

"As a senior member of the community, I would like to welcome you.  There are no dumb questions and we very much appreciate your interest.  As you become more familiar with the forum, you will find that issues such as the one you just addressed has been discussed--and there are many good comments to ponder on the subject.  Here is where you might want to go to research this issue:....."

You guys shouldn't be getting frustrated but rather see it as an opportunity--and develop a strategy to capitalize on the interest.  If a junior member had made that comment I would not have taken much notice--but I think it is important for senior members to develop a policy for dealing with Newbies in a manner which will grow the movement and encourage participation.

Now where exactly can I go to get a full discussion of my particular question, please?  If it is so easy to find, it should be easy to pass on.  But when you look--try looking from the perspective of someone who doesn't know what he is doing and is completely unfamiliar with the subject and the structure of the forum.

How are my rantings insane, they are very rational and voice my opinion. I am actually glad you didn't cause then you wouldn't have done it for the right reasons if someone as you say "insane rantings" pushed you away LMAO. So why you even here then?

LMAO well since most miners are greedy and looking for money, and this would allow them to net more money, it is kinda hard right? So how would the problem be me?

I do think that screaming at a new person and boarder line verbally abusing him just because you don't like something he posts is not only very rude--it is also counterproductive to the goal of getting people to join the Bit coin movement.

It isn't that simple, cause with at least one miner on board, we can't do anything. Also why would we fork our own coin, there is enough wasted alt coins that just change one thing, that would just push people away from the cause.

The meaning of a confirmation is that a miner has checked your transaction and agrees it's valid.

My understanding is that the genesis block coinbase tx is unspendable because it is not indexed, as twobitcoins says.  (I could be wrong on this.)  So, you will never get a confirmation because no miners have modified their client like you have.  When they see your attempt to spend it, they won't even know what transaction you're talking about because it's not in their index, so they'll never confirm it.

Also, unless you have cracked the key Satoshi sent his genesis block reward to, you will never be able to produce a valid signature to spend it, any more than you can steal anybody else's coins by hacking your client.  So even if the miners knew what transaction you were talking about, they won't agree that you've made a valid signature for it.

Yeah, at least proof-of-stake voting can give us a neutral and objective way of deciding if overwhelming approval actually exists in the community rather than just guessing.

That's what's so clever about this proposal: they can't.

Miners can already make the max blocksize smaller by just mining smaller blocks, so the default vote is "the status quo". What they can't do is raise the limit without consent, because they have to prove that the community wants an increased limit by including their votes.

edit: The assumption in Bitcoin isn't that half the hashing power is honest, it's that no more than half of the hashing power is controlled by one entity, and that at least half the hashing power is economically rational. That's a much weaker assumption than the hashing power being "honest"