19.55

There's allot of pseudorandom data in the blockchain that can't be compressed, so I don't know if there will be so much difference in the file size result between different algorithms in this case, maybe we can shave off another 100 MB with a better one. It would be interesting to see a comparison you linked to with the blockchain.

Two ideas for improvement:

1) Compression: this will easy shave off 25% of the file size. My 2.6 G blockchain file uncompressed became 1.9 G compressed with zip.

2) Split it up in multiple files. If I stop using bitcoin for a couple of months and then start using it again I might still have a large chunk of the blockchain left on my computer. I really only need the new block. The current mainline has a new way of storing blockfiles (.bincoin/blocks/blk000?.dat instead of .bitcoin/blk000?.dat) each with size 128 MB (instead of the much larger .bitcoin/blk000?.dat files). These smaller, 128 MB, files would be nice to have available via a torrent, making it possible to limit the download to only the latest blocks.

I would like to test some things on the testnet. But I don't have any testnet bitcoins to experiment with. Any tips on how to get some bitcoins in the testnet? I tried the faucet, but is closed.

My testnet address is: msAUWPCaZyPhTCLLpR9sbcBSnqbMMqx7TB

Nice try, but this has nothing to do with bitcoin. Go to youtube if you want a place to ventilate your inner troll.

But they lack empathy and connectedness.

You can always download the blockchain via torrent (check out the bitcoin torrent project), and then import it via the -loadblock option.

The volatility is nothing that concerns me, I'm in it for the long haul.

I get a feeling that there's much focus on securing the wallet. This is very important, but if you have an insecure system to begin with you're still very vulnerable. For instance, if you get compromised and end up having a key-logger installed on your system your strongly encrypted wallet is in danger as soon as you type out your password. This is why having a good security perimeter is essential. So how can we get more secure systems? When should we be satisfied and what level of paranoia is reasonable? Some say that security is like being chased by a bear when you're out hiking - you don't have to outrun the bear, you just have to outrun your hiking partner. Maybe this philosophy creates sloppy tactics, but I think there's something to it.

So what do you do to secure your system and where do you draw the line of "secure" and "insecure"?

I thinks it's probably a good thing to restrict new users in this way. It keeps the troll away...

I've been lurking here for a while, never posted though. I will participate more in the future.