"Bearpocalypse Now"  Good one!

While I'm here, I'll call the bottom as in the $40's within a month (absent an external calamity.)

I claim no insight, knowledge, interest, or skill in such things as price picking though.  And I'm certain not putting my money where my mouth is!

Maybe he's one of those "have money, will send to strangers" type folks?  He seems a veritable gold-mine for a certain class of participants in the ecosystem.

I glanced through the ZH thing and didn't see any evidence that 'Satoshi' did any particular thing for any particular reason.

You would not, by chance, be projecting your beliefs onto the actions of someone you don't know would you?  If so, it's probably not as helpful to your cause as you might think it is.  Lotsa people would probably think it makes you look like a jackass.

You mean with Mark and Peter yuck-yuck'ing about engineering an earthquake which shook a lot of BTC out of the weak hands in yokel-land?

I'm in the US also.  Using chromium everything about the cert looks in order.

It would be interesting to know if anyone from outside the US (and our territorial possessions like Canada) is having the same issue.

Interestingly I just tried to log in to my Mt. Gox account and nothing happens.

I don't often log in since I don't do any trading, but I've used this same machine before without problems.  I guess it's off to the 'service' board to see if others are having similar difficulties.

Certainly not if they are indigent.  "Can't get blood from a turnip" so they say.

Yet another lawsuit involving Mr. Ver.  There go some more of my tax dollars to support Bitcoin participants.  I'm not complaining per-se...but sheesh.  Can't these guys just shoot eachother or something?

<chuckle> ya...um...you guys go ahead and feed money into that thing first.  I'll stand by and enjoy the show.

I think whoever was manipulating bitcoin.org fucked up and dropped the ball on this one.  Now it's time to pay the piper.  That means to me either:

 1) drop the entire page (and move toward a tech-only posture.)

 2) re-instate name from those of 'all stripes' with some reasonable construct which would mitigate against foot-in-mouth semi-accidents.

I happen to end up being somewhere between repulsed and horrified when many of the Libertarian stripe pull stuff from deep within their minds, but I

 - always felt that Ver and Matonis have exercised a reasonable degree of restraint in public and have served 'the cause' well, and

 - plenty of those who are more naturally on 'my side' have equally horrific thought patterns bottled up inside and waiting to get out.  Myself included.

I'd hope that option #1 is chosen and worked towards.

The trouble(*) is that at this time, and possibly for some time to come, for every '1' in the real world who is turned off by such things, there will be '10' who will think they sound great(**).  Their response will be 'Count me in.'

(*) Of course "One man's trash is another man's treasure." so 'trouble' may not be the right word exactly.

(**) I'm not standing by and exact 1/10 ratio.  Just making a point as I see it.

Maybe with the following modification:

  "Work (for me) together, not against each other.

I anticipate that it is almost inevitable that alternate crypto-currencies will be issued by different organizations to further different goals.  This unless free communications are clamped down on to an extent that I don't believe is probably possible.  This process will take some time however, and it will likely be possible to milk the shit out of Bitcoin in the interim.  That's why "I agree with this message."

I only spout off on this forums (and usually do so with a high degree of honesty) because I believe that it ultimately has little influence on anything.

My rough translation would be:

  "STFU and be happy.  There are things you don't need to know right now."

I'll go ahead an '+1' but neglect to explain my rational.

Hmmm....or would it?

If the 'proof of work' is truly plug-able, most of the system would not care a whit about what miners do.

I liked the 'simplicity' of just having solid equivalence in all ways between PCN and BTC.  But there may be a role for a coin which consisted of a 'basket' of crypto-currencies!  Hmmm...

It also occurred to me that it might be possible to derive nourishment from multiple sources simultaneously.  'poly-paracoin'? 

Probably not worth the extra complexity.  The end-goal would be something valuable enough to stand on it's own (and potentially support other worthwhile efforts in fact.)

I thought of that when I was showering this morning.  It would just (potentially) add some other niceties that were important to some people.  So, that would be great!

Edit: bolded a highly important observation in the quoted text.  In short, it is probably doable!

Paracoin would view Bitcoin mostly as a natural resource existing in the environment which might be exploited.  The fattest and juiciest one at this point.

This is kind of like a tic on the back of a wild cow.  If the cow gets domesticated and subsidized by a farmer (like Bitcoin to corp/gov) the tic does not care...the cow's blood is that much richer for it.  Nor does the cow particularly notice or care much about the tic either since he is so tiny.  Of course the farmer could fear bubonic plague and fumigate at great cost and risk.  The tic can pack up and leave in that case.

The goal of 'paracoin' in my conception is just to explore a different block-chain path.  By happenstance it would layer on all kinds of niceties which any Bitcoin users who wish to are welcome to use (anonymity being one.)

If the cow died or the farmer injected her with so many hormones that the user's didn't like the taste of her milk, Paracoin could split and probably take a reasonable amount of hashing power with it.  Of course at that time hashing power will likely be highly monopolized by corporations.  I would be always looking for ways to either use hashing power asymmetrically, or use a different 'proof of work' altogether.  That part of the system would be designed to be 'plug-able' as much as possible.

As long as Paracoin is 'riding on the back of' Bitcoin, the whole world of economic balances and incentives is out of whack.  This is regrettable, but if one is interested in that for the academic aspects of that, there are plenty of places to study it.  The real-world impacts of various decisions regarding management of the solution would have to be dealt with using intuition and considered low precision...just as is/was the case with Bitcoin.

I am now even more interested in BitEN for this reason

  http://www.paracoin.org/home/depth_l1/network_mesh

Looking forward to updates, but will also be taking these from the repo pretty soon I hope.

I added the following near the top of the front page to help put people in the 'frame of mind' to understand the concept.

One more slightly more targeted response.  Sorry for the duplicate.


Who knows?  I wish to put it back though.  Back into Bitcoin itself (as it vanishes.)

I did a slight mention of the 'dense mesh' idea recently which is actually at the heart of things.  I value 'anonymity' personally, but it is not actually the thing that really 'gets me off' as it were.  None-the-less, the 'dense mesh' architecture helps with a lot of things, and could increase anonymity within the Bitcoin network at any time.  Or at least at any time after the system is functional and has some certain number of users.

As the diagrams are drawn, the type of client illustrated does not have a Bitcoin blockchain so it must either perform an SPV (or similar) transaction, or it needs to proxy.  With a 'dense mesh', it would be straightforward to do a pretty secure multi-hop proxy and thus significantly ad to the complexity of de-anonomizing traffic.  Particularly if the analysis were using listening stations and via backbone network taps.

Anyway, it's things like the proxy foundational work which would be much easier to implement on a system which was 'semi-live'.  My chief interest is actually in exploring multiple data transmission channel options.  But countless things along these would be much easier to develop in 'parasitic' mode when the Bitcoin network is standing by to catch any dropped balls and even potentially allow full system 're-boots' if you will.

It's worth pointing out again that a lot of users would have nothing to lose and very little risk to 'use' paracoin.  The main danger would be that for some reason Bitcoin would actively attack the solution in code, but it would be disruptive and there would be almost no reason to do it.  It would be much smarter to actively embrace it.