Thank you guys! Been using the core client forever and didn't know about multisig.

The situation is as follows: I want to give the two godparents of my child some BTCs. You know, just in case something happens to me and to allow them to buy things for my child in the future.

Now, my plan is to give several denominations to them but 'divided', so half of each key or wallet to each. In other words, they both need to agree to spend BTCs on something. However, halving a wallet file is no problem to me, but they are not computer literate. Also, I may be computer literate but have very limited knowledge of keys and wallet files and do not know if that is actually doing the job, or may be open to single-sided spending (when helped by a geek).

So I have a challenge, namely how to get done what I want, but safely and in such way that they can figure out how to spend the BTCs.

1) What is a safe way to split a key or wallet file? (or maybe on paper?)

2) How to provide simple but adequate instructions on how they can combine those keys or wallet files?

3) How to explain in lamers terms where and how to spend BTCs?

Thank you for your answer. As I understood it, this is the reason why Bter halted deposits:


So a fix in this area would help Pennies tremendously.

Can someone confirm that the new version also fixes the upper limit of possible pennies in one wallet?

Love this coin, so I just bought a few million. :-)

For PoS, just leave the client running right?
Even if not mining PoW? Even if my wallet is encrypted?
("piggybank walletpassphrase pwd 9999999 true" doesn't work)

Regards,
jacQues

There is, if you take into account the block rate and -reward.

100 coins every minute vs. 1 coin every 10 minutes will yield a difference of 1,000 : 1 using the same difficulty.

Thanks guys, that helped!

Got my first PoS block today, using the same technique as with PPCoin (batch file, which is easier than using the console). They could add some more info on the SavingCoin web site though, because with a locked wallet I don't think it will ever generate PoS blocks. In any case, one more hobby coin working for me.

Any manual about on how to do PoS with SAV? Or is it the exact same as for PPC?

The web site www.savingcoin.net doesn't work for me.

Facts:
- Currently, there is no law in Thailand prohibiting the use of Bitcoin.
- Currently, the statement that Bitcoin is illegal hasn't been in the news in Thailand itself.
- Other Bitcoin sites, like www.bahtcoin.com, are still in operation.

Source:
- People I know personally who have lived in Thailand for over a decade now.

The legality issue of Bitcoin is merely a point of view by one organization.

This does not mean that Thailand won't pass a law to ban Bitcoin.
Lust like with any other country, a new law can change everything.
Also, if the royal family were to mention Bitcoin in a good or bad way,
then that would automatically have an direct impact on the matter.


jacQues

I sent you an e-mail on July 3. No reply and no Litecoins yet. My e-mail:


Can you at least respond please? E-mail, reply right here or pm are all good. Thanks a million!

N00b here trying out your pool with my 7970.

With BTC I've always used Phoenix.
But I cannot seem to make it work?

backend = http://jacQues.(name):(pass)@ppc.fixx.ru:8437

Am I doing something silly?


Regards,
jacQues

Congrats to tomman for winning!

Many thanks to robbert5 for holding this lottery!


People who complain about it; though titty.
It is Robbert's money so he decides. Simple.
If you feel you can do better; by all means,
start a thread and give away 1 BTC your way.

bump

Thanks a million for the explanation! I just checked and am still below 100 transactions. Phew...

As I don't fully know what I'm doing I'll stick with one wallet.dat copy for now.

So if you have 2 copies of the same wallet.dat (at least; the same when originally copied), it is possible to lose Bitcoins this way. Wow, that's news to me. I've been using 2 copies of my wallet.dat for a long time now and never noticed any issues.

In that scenario would an older backup of wallet.dat regain those lost Bitcoins by simply letting it synchronize? Or does the other copy receive the same transaction and lose the Bitcoins as well?

Is it always perfectly safe to use 2 copies if you wait for complete synchronization before sending any Bitcoins to anyone? (This is what I've done till now)

Each chip credit represents a discount of $25 for buying chips, but you need to buy at least 100 of them. So unless you sold them on day one the credits seem kinda worthless now. I'm buying them for BTC 0.01 each. Yes this is cheap, don't bother noting the obvious. If you are interested, reply in this thread or PM me. Escrow is fine by me, as long as you pay for any charges.

_jacQues_
18tZnHPXEhcjZRvbrDHKmpasPL53bJxBw1

If the userbase for Bitcoin doesn't increase, then logically the price would go down, as the total number of Bitcoins increases.

Thus, for $1,000/BTC to become reality, the userbase needs to grow at least ten-fold in a week. Or more realistically, about twelve-fold in a year. This would need an exponential increase, which is unlikely and could create a bubble like happened a few months ago.

The most likely path is a steady increase, higher than the effect of newly generated Bitcoins. This would mean $1,000 will take about 24 years.

However, fiat notes are printed all the time. This is not the worst part. Your savings can be lend out by banks eleven-fold. The same cannot be done with Bitcoins. Looking at all this from outside the box, you'd think that fiat currencies are more likely to crash to worthless than Bitcoins. In fact, several have! And Bitcoin never became worthless! So when reasoning that money is worth "people's trust x ( people using 2 )" and trust in fiat should stay the same (but fiat suffers inflation) and trust in Bitcoins should rise, then things speed up. $1,000 would 'only' take 4 years (just after the block decrease to 12.5).

This also means that the rise in value won't be a steady incline. Rather, every few months it will 'correct' itself as the increased trust in Bitcoins doesn't show up in the day-to-day exchange rate.

Please note: This is just theorizing / speculation in order to understand the underlying concept better.

As I understand it, the longest chain is accepted by all nodes and all others are rejected. This is done to prevent double-spending.


Thought experiment (1):

Some region / country sets up a huge Internet firewall, isolating their bitcoin community. Now you get a fork situation, where that region and the rest of the world are separated. Their miners should still keep working. Say, after a month, the firewall is switched off and the bitcoin communities are reunited again.

Now, as the bitcoin protocol averages one block per 10 minutes, auto-adjusting the difficulty and such. In theory, there could be as exactly as many blocks on either side. When I run my bitcoin client I never see more than 8 connections. If an entire region / country forks off, there could easily be hundreds of hosts in that fork. So...how does the protocol 'decide' what fork to use? Or is it just luck?


Thought experiment (2):

Currently, bitcoins are still being generated. But in a few decades this will stop and we'll only mine transaction costs. Is it technically possible to switch to not-mining at some point, whereby the chain is still protected? Is that even feasible? Now, currently probably not, but if bitcoin were to become mainstream? Surely some form of protocol can exist that prevents double-spending without proof-of-work and still being fully decentralized...

Simple; never ever!

If Bitcoins ever crash that severely, they will become worthless. But with tens of millions of dollars being invested in ASICs, which only work for Bitcoins(*), it is hard to imagine such a drop in value.


* Sure, some alt-coins as well, but they are no better than Bitcoin.