For the record, it was posting one of mine from ~4 years ago.

Retaining control of the contents of your wallet should be more important to you than a potential quick profit from getting to dump the losing chain.

If your bitcoin is on an exchange, it's not "your" bitcoin any more, regardless of what the exchange may say or promise. They may cut and run, they may Gox it up, and you've got no control since you don't have the private keys to "your" bitcoin. It's only yours if you have those keys and nobody else does. Nobody knows what's going to happen when Segwit2X goes down, and nobody can predict how the exchanges will respond. Stay safe, and stay in control.

As ixcoin continues its inexorable drop, to the point where even Vlad has to acknowledge it as a "prediction" (not exactly what you've been predicting thus far, I might add - "up to $10 each within the next 30 days" I recall, at one point), we're treated to the spectacle of Vlad calling someone else a numerology conspiracy nut. That's the absolute peak of this thread. You two are as mad as hatters and a perfect match. Keep it up!

Just so we're clear, are you pretending that the user "iXcoin Foundation" isn't you? Because all of their posts have the same overuse of italics and nutty writing style as yours.

Apologies if the intended humour wasn't obvious.

Removing sigs entirely would obviate this responsibility, no?

Most people perceive and expect a clear distinction between advertisement and content, and ad sigs blur this significantly. If advertisers want to advertise on the site, they should do it through traditional channels, that don't introduce obvious conflicts of interest.

With sincere respect to Danny's efforts, he is attempting to win a game of whack-a-mole, which history and logic warn against. I wish him well on his war against the moles, but consider it a distinctly Sisyphean task - and more to the point, it shouldn't be necessary. (He also apparently shitcans people for other, more subjective transgressions, such as profanity, which leads to the amusing possibility that, were I to adopt his list, I'd be unable to see my own posts.)

In any case, it's a heavy-handed, all-or-nothing approach to treating a complex symptom, when there's such a simple way of tackling the cause. Nobody needs ad signatures, they communicate nothing of any merit, and it's evident beyond any reasonable doubt that the quality of posting on the forum would be improved by their absence. I just don't understand why the glaringly obvious solution continues to be ignored.

The SNR is beyond fucked at this point, and the inaction on this one very basic issue makes it clear that the staff are unwilling to take even the simplest step toward remedying the situation.

Shame, really. I certainly find myself visiting less and less; I never posted much anyway, but it's just too much effort trawling through the reams of garbage to get at the interesting stuff.

Your "twin brothers" thread is so chock full of batshit loco nonsense (numerology, quotes from the book of Revelation, etc etc) that I think it's fair to say you do an excellent job of both ruining your reputation and making yourself look unstable. For instance (from the same post as above, no less):
These are really excellent examples of crazy things to say! Especially when the topic of discussion is an ostensibly decentralised currency.

Vlad, you crack me up. I can't believe anyone would take you seriously, much less give you any money, but hey, there's the old saying about one being born every minute...

What do you think undercover LE sounds like? "Good morning mr. kingpin sir, what grand criminal conspiracy are we going to undertake today?"

It's called "playing the part". The fact that no arrest has been made does make a compelling case that that entity was, at the very least, cooperating with law enforcement. They rounded up practically everyone else - even the witless compsci major who gave Ross a few coding tips back in the day. DPR's mentor not being arrested, despite his identity apparently being within reach of a determined government agency? That just doesn't make sense to me.

It wasn't a big operation, the mushrooms were the first product on the site and that's exactly why he was growing them in the first place.

Go read the journal, it's interesting. It's also interesting to compare the early verbose, idealistic diary of 2011 against his later notes on running the site in 2013, the latter of which (if genuine) are quite chilling. Routine stuff about DDoS attacks and PHP upgrades and whatnot is punctuated with statements like "arranged hit with angels" as though arranging a murder was just another entry on the day's to-do list.

Oh dear.

Given this would cost the user substantially more in electricity than they'd see in bitcoin, I doubt they'd consider it much of a "benefit".

In the past.

Scarcity is not meaningfully correlated to the units chosen to represent total coinage in cryptocurrencies. That's like someone saying "you can have 1 pint of this beer or 568ml of this other one" and you deducing that the 1 pint must be "scarcer" than the 568ml beer. The units involved don't really matter, it's what's in the glass that counts - i.e., does the cryptocurrency provide utility and value, or does it not.

Bring back newbie jail.

A few questions.

If people have to pay high fees to get their transactions confirmed, why would they use Bitcoin rather than some competing form of money transfer?

If the the hashrate of miners including blacklisted transactions shrinks to insignificance vs. those who adhere to the blacklist, surely it doesn't matter how high the fees are? Those transactions could take weeks/months/years to confirm, depending on what percentage of the overall hashrate the adhering farms represent.

Do you see a future (decade+) in which hobbyists continue to be involved in mining, continuing to represent a significant share of the hashrate?

Agreed, though really they're two different expressions of the same problem: the impetus towards centralization via economies of scale.

See above.

1/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Countries_blocking_access_to_The_Pirate_Bay
2/ You don't see "copyright" as a smaller issue than "control of money"? You're entitled to your opinion, I suppose.

1/ In many places, it isn't, thanks to government regulation.
2/ "Potentially illegal filesharing via a bittorrent site" is a somewhat smaller issue than "global money transfers".

Your solution to most things seems to be "change ip address". This is fantastically short-sighted. You also seem to be conflating or confusing the issues of anonymity and freedom of transaction.

If the rapid centralization of mining hardware that we're seeing continues, and control of mining effectively consolidates into the hands of a few, then it is not much of a stretch of the imagination to think that governments/banks/corporations will seek to compel the victors (the cex.io's of the next decade) to blacklist transactions that they consider fraudulent. Your identity may be secure behind TOR (I wouldn't bet on it, personally) but if your address is blacklisted then you're still screwed, and no amount of TOR exit node hopping is going to change that.

The centralization of pools is a problem until it is solved, apparently p2pool is not the solution, and this sort of hand-waving and saying "it'll be ok, we'll figure this out" strikes me as naive, and fundamentally unwise.

Yeah, many orders of magnitude so. There's also risk inherent in trying - people used to arbitrage Gox against other exchanges. Profit was slow in arriving, but consistent (thanks, Markus!), right up until it wasn't. I doubt there was a happy ending for most who were doing so.

Well, maybe you expect to be able to claim a refund on every donation you make to a foundation, but I'd argue that you're misconstruing the concepts of "donation" and "foundation". Irrespective of where you stand on the Bitcoin Foundation (they're due their share of criticism, it seems), it is unreasonable to expect donations to be refundable in perpetuity.

(As an aside to Beliathon, I have often enjoyed reading your posts in the past - please don't take this as a personal attack.)

This.

That article uses a lot of words to say very little of substance. All it amounts to is a hunch.