There is no regulation that prohibits smaller tick size (or at least none I know).  For lower priced equities (<$5? <$1? something like that) NYSE uses a  tick of $0.001.  

Personally I think 1 cent is a little too restrictive when the asset is trading around $5.00 and really bad if BTC declines to say $2.00.  If they (Camp BX, BitFloor) are continually bumping up on that limit they should look at a smaller tick size.  Maybe to 1/10th of a cent? or 1/100th of a cent? Beyond that there isn't much value.  I mean does anyone really care if they can get a 1 BTC for $5.11000001 vs $5.11000002. You save 1 cent every 1 million BTC traded.

Still it is all relative.  If someday BTC was in the ballpark of $100 ea then tick size smaller than 1 cent is really just noise.  If someday BTC was >$10,000 you probably wouldn't even need ticks smaller than a dollar (well more likely all trading would be done in mBTC.  1 mBTC = $10.00). 

A good exchange tries to balance divisibility with ease of use.  "Does having a smaller tick size provide any benefit to traders?"

Well no none of that is true.

I don't think deflation will be a problem but your reasons don't make sense.  Adding decimal places isn't increasing the money supply.  Deflation WILL occur I just don't think the deflationary death spiral idea has ever been proven.

Also I don't think there will ever be a time when 1 satoshi will be equal to 1 BTC now.

That would put 1 satoshi = $5 and the Bitcoin money supply at ~ 10 quadrillion dollars (or ~100x the size of entire global money supply).

I don't think GLBSE is in violation of the law or at least not yet.

The determination if a security exists (and thus is subject to regulations of selling and promoting a security) is the Howey Test:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Securities_and_Exchange_Commission_v._W._J._Howey_Co.


Is Bitcoin money?  Has any US court given an opinion that Bitcoin IS money?

If the SEC was to try and indict the operators of GLBSE they would need to show that Bitcoin is money.  If it isn't money then it isn't a security.  For example in the game "Eve Online" corporations exist and they control assets sometimes massive amounts of assets who's market value is in the tens of thousands of dollars.  I doubt that SEC would find that those corporations would need to issue shares.  Any profits intended or realized aren't money.

On crowdfunding & the Jobs Act yes the law will loosen regulations.  The SEC hasn't written those regulations yet and almost certainly the regulations while "loose" compared to current regulations will still be "significant".  There will requirements related to KYC, AML, limits on funding, limits on number of investors, due diligence requirements on the exchange, surety bond requirements, licensing requirements, etc.

In other words driving down the cost of an IPO from tens of millions to tens of thousands.  I don't see that helping GLBSE or at least not until Bitcoin is significantly bigger.

I'll get you started with 2 BTC.
http://blockchain.info/tx-index/5161830/47ccf90112665550b4930c68dde8578f6bfe9ff703d19f635044abdc4aca43ed

MoonShadow is correct.

The method used for determining the reward is to do a right shift on 50,000,000 satoshis every 210K blocks.  That truncates any fractional satoshis.
There are some truncation along the way.  For example starting in block 6,090,000 the reward is 9 satoshis.  In block 6,300,000 it becomes 4 satoshis so the block reward declines by more than 50%. Block 6,930,000 will drop the reward to 0 satoshis however only  2,099,999,997,690,000 so it looks like we will be eternally  2,310,000 satoshis (0.0231 BTC) short of the magical 21M.

If Satoshi had wanted it to be an even number the starting block reward should have been a multiple of 2.  For example is the first block reward had been 2^32 satoshis (~42.94 BTC) then we would have had 32 perfect halvings of the reward.  2^32 down to 2^0.  A bit of trivia, the "21M" appears nowhere in the code.  The entire subsidy calculation is just a handful of lines.



Even IF decimal places are added (a move of dubious value) we will hit 0 block reward again before hitting 21M total minted.  I doubt decimal places will be added.  If the entire global money supply was in Bitcoins and no fiat anywhere on the planet existed 1 satoshi would be worth about 5 cents which isn't a limit on commerce. In any scenario short of single global currency 1 satoshi ends up being worth various fractions of a single cent.

Lastly adding decimial places wouldn't change the rate of price deflation by any material amount.  Even if you added decimal 4 places that would allow you to pay out ~ 2.1 million satoshis over the next 3 decades.    99.9999999% will still be issued by the time the block reward originally would have hits 0.  Spreading the remaining 0.00000001% over a couple decades means the money supply growth rate is something like 1 billionth of 1% per year.

0% vs 0.00000000037% = totally meaningless a token change at best.


 Essentially 0% (which is what it will be when block reward is 0).

Weird they seem to be processing tx "out of order".

I just want a complete copy.  I don't care how it gets done.  If you guys want to compete that is fine.  If you want to work together split the work and the reward.  I don't really need two complete copies from independent sources though. 

I would however STRONGLY suggestion someone start a seperate thread, put up a donation address, a goal for releasing, and show progress.  If you do all the work, release it, and THEN try to get some compensation I guarantee you it will end being less than flipping burgers.

Simple it is called a copy. 

It would be trivial for any entity B through Y to make a copy.  Hell it beomes trivial for Z to steal the funds and then blame it on A.  Even "IF" (and that is a big if) everyone is honest it becomes impossible to prove that B through Y only passed it along without making a copy.  Even if when Z gets it the funds are still there it is now unprovable if the funds are secure.  They could "disappear" in the next second or the next year.  When they do nobody can prove who took it.  

Also if I am "A" I really don't want to be doing business with an entity so stupid as to essentially leave 7 figures lying around in big piles without any protection or accountability.  When it goes missing I don't want them coming to look for me ... especially if I didn't even have anything to do with it.

Also maybe "A" gets jammmed up and is going to be dead if he doesn't come up with some money.  Better to steal from Z that risk guaranteed death from this new threat.  So Z needs to trust that not only is A honest right NOW but he will continue to be honest forever.  If "Z" needs to send funds to someone else that simply extends this chain of trust and unaccountability.

There is a reason we hash tx into blocks.

+1 and start a separate thread to handle crowd source funding and progress.  Having a digital searchable, quotable version would be an asset for whole community.

Sure.  You understand stand that at any point in the future anyone who had access to the wallet.dat could spend it and that spend would be untraceable.

So I buy $1M in drugs from you and give you a $1M wallet.dat.  You don't spend/transfer it to a secure address.  You pass that wallet.dat up to your boss, up to his boss up to his boss.

Suddenly one day the wallet is empty.  Who stole it?  You, me, your boss, your boss to frame me, your boss to frame you, you to frame your boss and take his job?

That would create a spread of 1 satoshi which is nirvana for a market.  Why would that be a bad thing?
Everyone wins under such a situation.

If GBLSE needs the revenue even cutting the fee when adding liquidity is better than a flat fee on both sides.

Something like:
0.4% taking liquidity
0.2% adding liquidity

Why is reduced/no fees for those who create liquidity "broken"?  I guess some people are unaware that every major exchange in the world operates under similar model (including the NYSE).

http://individuals.interactivebrokers.com/en/accounts/fees/NYSEstkfee.php?ib_entity=llc

You will notice for share price >1 the "fee" is negative.  Thats right.  The exchange PAYS you for placing the order which adds liquidity.

Ever notice the spread on most highly traded stocks is 1 cent.
http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=BAC

Wonder why?  Yup.  reduced/no/negative fee for adding liquidity drives the spreads closer.  The reason it isn't closer than 1 cent is simply because NYSE has min tick rules and for stocks valued > $5 the min tick is 1 cent.

That is non-viable method beyond immediate and well trusted peers and only for tiny amounts of money.

mufa23 - Sent Friday - Shows Tuesday
tgmarks - Sent Wed/Thur - Shows Monday
D&T - Sent Thursday - No Show

How that hell did that happen?

In the other thread someone said they are willing to retype it (or OCR and correct it).  Maybe we can crowdfund this.  Get 10 people who want a readable copy to pledge 2? BTC. 

Caution I am not a lawyer but I have seen one on TV.

My semi-informed but totally layman's understanding of cross state licensing:

1) Most states require a license if your company has a presence in that state.

2) Some states (NY, CA, VA about a dozen more) require a license even if you are out of state (foreign entity) if you process any tx for residents in that state.

3) We have learned that many surety bond issuers can issue a multi-state bond.  So if you need to be licensed in 8 states and the largest requires a 200K bond you can find an issuer who can issue a bond covering your obligation in all 8 states.  It will be more than the cost of a single state bond but it won't be 8x the cost of a single state bond.  Cost is still pretty significant though.  Oh to just have an extra $200K in cash (to post a security deposit in lieu of a bond).

4) If you aren't registered in all states some mechanism of verifying the user's address will be required.  You can then dynamically limit your offerings to the states where you either have a license or no license is required.

We are looking into licensing in Virginia.  Due to the cost and complexity we likely will not initially obtain licensing in states which require licensing for out of state entities (IMHO I feel they are overstepping their bounds).   As a result if we offer any money transmitter services it will not include all 50 states.

Not exactly optimal but the govt has really turned this into a mess.

It will be available in 5-6 months but only if 1000 people pre-order it now.  It's gonna be awesome.  20,000 pages, full color, so glossy it will fall right out of your hands, and in 1080P 3D.  Contact Matt is you want to purchase some ad space.

Yeah that is what I figured.  It is going to take a lot of work to get it into a usable format. 

You can't get p2pool to point towards a different pool.

You may want to try p2mining.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=66202.0

It will reduce the VARAINCE but your avg reward won't increase.

You do understand the gross value of 2.2 MH/s is <$0.01 per day (including both full profit from BTC & NMC) and that is before pool fees, tx fees, exchange fees, electrical cost, and wear and tear on your computer.

If you are an experienced miner with a BFL Single why would you want to use this.  It is essentially a mining pool with a 50% fee.  The main draw would be the ease of user for non-Bitcoin users.  No need to figure out miner software, no need to create pool accounts, wallets, exchange accounts, figure out how to cashout, etc.