I thought of a simpler way to force divergent balances to be incompatible while still retaining transaction protocol compatibility. Treazant will first copy the wallet and synchronize to block 109,999 without transmitting transactions. For each public/private key pair address that contains bitcoins, two new public/private keys will be generated. Both Bitcoin and Treazant will get a copy of both new addresses, but the treazants and bitcoins will be sent to opposite addresses. Neither the kludgy double signing idea nor the alternative encryption idea will be used.

Yes, you will be able to double spend Bitcoins/Treazants which you had before the first Bitcoin four year reward halving occurred at block 210,000. Don't delete your transaction history from when the Bitcoin reward halving occurred and I'll let everyone know when treazants are usable and worth more than nothing.

Now that I've had some time to think about it, the solution which I mentioned should be pretty simple to implement and I will definitely have it done before I can get my hands on ASIC hardware. When the client starts up, if there is a Bitcoin wallet, it will open the wallet in read-only mode and for each of the Bitcoin addresses it will generate a new public/private key pair address first using a yet to be determined cryptographic algorithm, which may either be the same ECDSA algorithm that Bitcoin uses or a different cryptographic algorithm that will produce the same length address and then afterwards it will sign the transaction again using the original Bitcoin private key. The order is critical to guarantee that when the currency is eventually sent, the transactions will not be incompatible with Bitcoin. Afterwards the client could either continue to use twice signed addresses or just use single signed addresses. Please let me know if you have a recommendation for which cryptographic algorithm I should use or if you know or if you can think of a more elegant solution. Thanks!

209,999 blocks have already been pre-mined. If you had bitcoins before the reward split and if you haven't thrown away your wallet, then you have treazants.

Edit: Party's over. It was fun while it lasted. It just occurred to me that transactions on the bitcoin block chain could be rebroadcast on the treazant block chain not only by the sender, but by anyone. And the opposite is also true, treazants produced before the block chain split which are spent after the split, could be rebroadcast on the bitcoin block chain. This wouldn't always be true, eventually divergent confirmation paths would stop the double receiving, but only after much potential harm. If I'm wrong, please let me know. Thanks for all your support. We had a good run.

Edit 2: It could still work if the encryption method was changed or a salt was added at and after block 210,000. Doing so would be good practice in case Bitcoin were ever close to being compromised in the distant future.

Treazant is for folks who prefer for the Bitcoin reward to stay constant forever. Block chain confirmations will resume once ASIC hardware starts to arrive. The client only requires a few very trivial modifications to work. The one piece of the puzzle which would be useful, but is not required, is functionality to export wallets from Bitcoin and import them to Treazant and vice versa. If you haven't sent any outgoing transactions after the reward halving yesterday, then a simple copy and paste backup and restore should work fine. Minor modifications to accommodate the larger supply of currency will occur at block 420,000 and as needed at each subsequent 210,000 blocks.

But not necessarily the value, quite yet.

Always backup your important files before a big change!

Regular treazant transaction confirmations will resume promptly upon the arrival of ASIC mining hardware.

Liberty Reserve account holder U0617086 Valentina Izmailova (possibly fraudulent name) and IP address 67.212.80.94 (possibly proxy) steals money from friendly Internet users by stealing your email password by sending a message with the subject "Your account will be suspended". Please make this your status for a little while and if you happen to find him, give him what he deserves. Thanks!

You're thinking of troy ounces. One ounce of gold is worth about $1226.00. There are 31.1034768 grams in a troy ounce, so a gram is worth about $39.42. A dollar is worth about 0.000815661 troy ounces or 0.025369883 grams of gold.

I think the person who created the page just posted some quick terms without defining them. It's a perfectly valid term, although I would personally change it to Chain Branch. It's not a very complex term, but I'm having a hard time thinking of how to succinctly define it off the top of my head. I don't have time to work on it at the moment, but here is a sentence that I wrote while I was trying to think of how to lead in to defining it. I hadn't gotten to the chain branch part of the definition yet. This definition is somewhat descriptive of the term Proof-of-Work, which is another term that should be added. There are plenty more definitions which haven't been included yet. I'll add some more at some point when I've got some time and if I don't forget.
Edit: It just occurred to me that the Bitcoin difficulty increases at much smaller increments than x2. Bitcoin doesn't attempt to only get consecutive zeros, but tries to get the hash below a certain number when the hash is expressed as a number.

I bet they'll smile when they come to check out the project and find this thread.

Я не читал всё до этого, но когда я начинал использовать Биткойн, не был Линукс версии, так я использовал Wine и он работал хорошо. Я не пробовал в последние время.

Yeah, he was joking, but I think it's a good idea and can be done non-controversially. People have to go to a bid/ask currency exchange to buy or sell bitcoins over the Internet. General market trading terms are very related.

It's quite difficult to generate a block right now. If you've got lots of other things running, then from a practical perspective I think it would be better to get not generate bitcoins. My guess is that it's not so much the process priority that's the problem as much as just the processor thrashing between tasks because it's got so much going on. The more tasks you have running concurrently, the more important it is to leave a portion of your total CPU below the maximum in order to keep your system running smoothly.

If you've got a specialty, you could offer your services in the Marketplace section or if you've got unwanted electronics or other item, you could offer to sale it. Trading for or buying bitcoins is probably easier, faster and cheaper than generating them on your computer.

I propose that we add a number format to the forum text editor and a localization option to the profile settings so that everyone can see numbers however they want. And the formatting should be allowed in the subject field.

I posted a few quick definitions when I first saw this thread. I was thinking about adding it but I didn't get around to it. It just needs to clearly and neutrally express both definitions and perhaps mention that the primary definition has been hotly debated on the forum.

I'm not really interested, so I didn't read the much of the thread, but I did read the last comment. If you're looking for a random number, just use the hash of block x. Blocks take roughly ten minutes to generate, so you can pretty well estimate about how long it'll take to get to block x. Just be sure to specify whether you count the genesis block as block 0 or 1 since it's changing and whether you'll be looking at the hash that's available while block x is being hashed or the hash of block x. And if the payout is large, you should wait for at least about a day after the payout to ensure that the hash is pretty well confirmed.

Donations Welcome!

So a very strong node could continuously reverse the last x blocks and only allow transactions which include a transaction fee over a certain amount, right?

Bitcoin is much harder to crash than your average web server. Bitcoin is harder to manipulate than your average decentralized message board.

The checksum is just the hash at a single particular block such that new chains can be started and can grow, but once a client with the checksum included reaches that block block number, it won't accept any hash except the checksum.

Is that correct?

So if someone wanted to create an alternative chain with the same genesis block, they would need to checksum a block after the genesis with a different hash before they connected to the live network. If they ever reached the checksum in the official client, they would need to make sure that checksum was not included in their own Bitcoin client.

How is the strength of the chain calculated? Is it length and checksum only or does it measure a single block at difficulty 500 as more valid than ten blocks at difficulty one? I presume that it's probably length and checksum only which would mean that all transactions before the checksum are pretty well safe forever, but blocks after the checksum are only as strong as the current strength of the network until the next checksum comes along.

Yes. The only exception would be if an unpatched client made another fake transaction and managed to verify it. They would be able to spread that fake block to a few other nodes that haven't upgraded, but the upgraded clients seem to have more power than the unpatched clients, so the bad link would not last long and would not be spread by upgraded clients.

I show respect to whomever I don't disrespect. Anyway, it was just a silly post. I am quite certain I haven't traumatized his tender sensitive soul. If he were not able to take it, then like most people, he would have adapted his outward personality long ago in such a way so as to reduce his susceptibility to receiving such feedback. The fact that he has grown to adulthood without adapting his outward personality, demonstrates that he is at very least, reasonably comfortable receiving pissy feedback from people on the Internet and very likely AFK as well. I kindly thank all of you who continuously show dignity, respect and civility to whomever (jgarzik and/or me) you feel does not deserve it.