The part you quoted (I haven't bothered to read the entire article) sounds reasonable enough to me.

M-Disc is specifically designed to avoid data rot.

I would imagine OP isn't all that interested in sharing his wallets.

I hope the wallets are created and burned on an air gapped machine.

In which case you should just use the burning software that comes with the OS.

I'm not...

...but everyone else is.

Sup.

Yes, I'd like to see someone start mining a fork with > 1 MB blocks. If everyone who wants big blocks now invested some money into mining hardware and just went ahead and did it, I'm sure some existing miners would join and we'd have ourselves a fork and an end to these seemingly endless discussions.

In fact, to make it easier for miners to decide (or remove them from the decision entirely), Bitcoin unlimited should be capable of being merge mined.

How much of Coinbase's liquid assets are actually in bitcoins? If I had to guess, I'd imagine them to be a company which functions fully on fiat besides their operational requirements.

I suppose Gemini, with the information I have (twins own a lot of coin), is actually part of the economic majority, but I'm not so sure about other "Bitcoin" companies. It would be interesting to know how many of them are actually part of the economic majority.

I currently control funded Bitcoin private keys. If XT ever happens, I will then have XT coins. You posit that these XT coins will have value, no? I will offer them (post XTainting) in exchange for non-XT coins. Since XTcoins have value, my offer will be accepted by someone. It's that simple. If I'm not the only one willing to make this exchange (and I am guessing that I am not), we will have a market and an exchange rate. Miners will find a way (possibly even through merged mining) to mine both coins to their profit.

If there is a client coded which creates blocks that other clients do not accept as valid and there is mining being done using both clients, there will be a fork. If mining continues on both sides of the fork, both sides will continue to exist. If you create a transaction with an input which is only valid on one chain, and the rest of your coins, you will have separate coins on both chains. If someone is willing to trade other things of value for coins on both sides of the fork, there will be an exchange rate between the two.

I don't care which side of the fork gets the name Bitcoin and which side of the fork gets the name "random altcoin", I only care about the rules of the protocol.

I'm hoping that someone creates this client (which has happened) and starts mining on it without getting any percentage of consensus from other mines/users (which has not happened). If they are so sure of themselves, I don't understand why this hasn't happened yet. If you build it, they will come. Then we don't need to argue about the merits of small or large blocks anymore, we can simply vote with our wallet.

There will be no peace. There are two sides with irreconcilable differences. The only solution that will please everyone is a fork.

Both sides can get exactly what they want with a fork (unless what they really want is to drag the other side with them kicking and screaming).

I say this with all sincerity to those who want bigger blocks now. Please fork already instead of this constant posturing! Fork the code. Mine your fork. Trade your forked coins. I wish you all the best, and would prefer the community split along these irreconcilable lines.

Do it! Let the chips fall where they may.

Stop talking. Do.

Time is money and you've invested plenty. I hope you are getting good returns on the time you've invested here.

If you create your private keys on a compromised networked computer, it doesn't matter how many of them you create.

What the world needs is a functional global wireless mesh network.

Every day I use Bitcoin to keep a portion of my savings secure.

Yes (as long as you do all of the appropriate reporting and pay your taxes).

IANAL.

Privacy issues aside, I assume the main reason for wanting to ship a package anonymously is because there is something inside which could get either the shipper, the receiver, or both, in trouble with the authorities.

So, now you've created an entire chain of people taking that risk! I don't see any reason for a peer to participate in such a network, but I do see a huge reason to avoid participating. Maybe I'm missing something?

Also, I don't know what this has to do with Bitcoin Development and Technical Discussion.

Video games are just a form of entertainment. Everyone needs a way to blow off steam.

Perhaps you should consider your audience if you don't want to come off as "mean". This is a forum filled with computer geeks (in fact Bitcoin mining used to be done with hardware specifically designed for computer gaming). Telling them that computer games are "so pointless" is probably not going to earn you any friends. I'd imagine that most of the users here think that jewelry is pointless, but they probably don't go to jewelry forums to share their opinion. That would be a perfect example of trollish behavior.