Why not derive this from first principles?

Reason for having sex: Making babies
Reason for having sex with multiple women: Making more babies. If a man impregnates 10 women, he can have 10 babies. Note that a woman cannot have 10 babies by sleeping with 10 men.
Reason for wanting more babies: Higher chance of one surviving and passing on genes.
Reason for women wanting the man to stay with her and not sleep around: The man can provide resources for the baby, increasing the chance that her baby will survive. Having children with more women means splitting resources between them. As humans get more intelligent they need even more resources before they can become independent and survive on their own.
Reason for man cheating on woman (from a biological perspective): Raise a few babies and have some more on the side that you just allow to grow and hope they survive in case your main family still doesnt make it.
Reason for women cheating on men (from a biological perspective): Hard to get a highly attractive man to stick by and not cheat or leave. Easier to get a less attractive man but cheat on him in order to get the genes from a more attractive man. Women are most likely to cheat when they are in the most fertile phase of their cycle.

There are more advantages to a relationship where partners don't cheat on eachother besides the exchange of resources:
* Higher mutual trust
* Lifelong bonding and opportunity to learn more about yourself and to know another person on a deeper level.
* Continuity along the many decades of life and its ups and downs.
* Division of labour. Each member in a family can specialise in different tasks which must be performed.

There are also advantages to society:
* Having many orphaned or single parent children is a resource burden since they must still be fed, clothed and housed
* Children without stable families are more likely to commit crime and engage in reckless and self destructive behaviours, and will generally be less productive members of society.
* Since one man can impregnate many women, but one woman can only be impregnated by one man, there is a high chance that without monogamous relationships, a few men would get all the women and most men would be left without the possibility of reproduction, meaning they would have less to live fore and less reason to care about the future, and more to gain through risky behaviours such as engaging in violence to obtain status or women.
* Ability to transmit knowledge and culture down though the generations leading to a long term improvement and multiplier effect.

So there are many reasons to cheat and many reasons to avoid it. The struggle with life is learning how to avoid temptations which feel good in the moment but which in the long term will tear families and society apart. It is each persons responsibility to try to be the best person they can be for their partner, to avoid the relationship falling apart, and to choose the right person in the first place, to make you want to keep it together.

The point is that its meant to be a cross-website way of displaying symbols next to your name or on your avatar showing your support for a cause. If its done in ethereum then the donations can also be made with custom currencies tied to the dollar, euro, gold, oil, btc or anything else really. Buying a tshirt is great but you don't see it online.

I guess as a proof of concept this can depend on running a local client and using directly the blockchain currency whether its ether or btc or whatever but the real power of this would be if the symbols could be made visible on existing social networks - but this will probably be a lot harder.

Yeah this was like my point. I guess the poppy analogy isnt the best one. It's like collegting badges or flair.

I'm trying to think of a way this can be done technologically but I don't know if there is a way that a random user of a site could see the badges without having a wallet installed on their local machine that checks the blockchain.

Hi guys!

I just had an idea for a simple but possibly powerful use of blockchain-based assets.

Every year in the UK and other commonwealth countries there is a remembrance day in memory of the troops who died in WW1/WW2 and other wars. The symbol for this is a poppy. Small paper poppies are sold during this time and the proceeds go to a foundation which is seen as a good cause (I won't discuss this here). People then wear the poppies during this time to show their support.

I noticed also that people quite often buy T-Shirts or other merchandise simply to show their support for a particular cause, and also to support artists and musicians.

My idea is simple: have a system whereby a user can "buy" a small coloured coin (or perhaps Ethereum asset) and have an API to have an icon displayed next to the users name across whichever websites implement the API. When registering to the site the user can simply sign a transaction with their public key to validate that they own a particular address, and from that point all tokens owned by that address can be shown next to the users name or in their profile.

This would allow users to show that they have donated to particular causes online and have the effects visible across multiple websites. For more commercial uses, users who have bought a certain token could also receive special offers or access to special information or forum areas.

I'm not sure if anyone has tried to do something like this before? If not I'd certainly like to give it a go myself. Does anyone have any feedback or ideas for implementation or perhaps criticisms? What would be the best way to go about this? Ethereum, counterparty, coinprism?

This can be done in 5 minutes. You can create a fed coin with no cap but instead a fixed block discovery reward or perhaps one which even increases over time. Let it out into the wild and watch it fail.

The first version of the bitcoin code probably looked like this:

#include <stdio.h>

int main(int argc, char **argv)
{

    printf("Hello Satoshi!\n");

}

The code was most likely developed incrementally and never had a "first version" as such. It would make sense to get the latest version since it would contain many bug fixes, improvements and so on.

I played runescape around the same time as OP. I have seen posts on the runescape forum a few times about this and it seems most players don't understand. Often, they end up with the misunderstanding that they want to remove all payment options and replace it with bitcoin. Many people seem to say that bitcoin could make Jagex bankrupt or that it's used for drugs or illegal. There doesn't seem to be a big demand for it.

Personally I haven't played  this in years, partly because of the way they were changing it and partly because it was taking up too much time. I still have around 30M gold though while I could potentially sell for BTC (although RWT gold isn't work that much these days).

You can take a look at this map: http://www.cato.org/pubs/efw/map/index.php

It shows economic freedom by country. As you can see no country has a perfect score though here.

Hmm. Maybe it would be possible for chunks to valued differently, creating an incentive for people to try to find the missing chunks and seed them? This does add a layer of complexity though.

I'll check out bitblinder later.

It would be interesting to try to write a bot that puts 'ascii art'-like transactions out on the network.

Hey.

This is an idea I had while in a discussion on #bitcoin-otc. I mentioned it there not entirely seriously but some people seemed to think it could be worth something.

So the idea is this:

With bittorrent, as I understand it, all the files are divided into 'chunks' which represent a small portion of data in a file. These chunks are sent from people who have them to people who don't, eventually meaning that everyone in the swarm should get the entire file. The problem is that there is not usually an incentive to seed chunks after you've got everything you want. You may also want to limit the speed at which you seed, although usually if you refuse to seed at all while downloading you will be boycotted.

Now imagine if for every chunk you receive from someone, you were required to send a fixed sum of BTC, say 0.001. This would mean for a download of 1000 chunks, you would end up paying the various seeders a total of 1 BTC. However, as you are seeding to others, you will also receive BTC in return. This would give you and others an incentive to seed as much as possible before and after the download, which could very will give a performance boost.

This might seem like a pyramid scheme, and to some extent it is. No matter what, some people will not be able/will not want to seed to 100% and end up paying something for the torrent. However, in return they should get a faster download.

There are some technological issues also. Each time a chunk is sent, a trade will have to occur, chunks for bitcoins. With any trade on the web it is possible that one party will not honour the trade. Also, it would require many successive micropayments, so it would have to be done without using normal bitcoin transactions, and without increasing bandwidth overhead too much.

Anyway I just thought I'd put the idea out there to see what people thought of it. I'll know in a month or so whether I'll have time to work on it myself, so if by that time I do, and still think it's worth it I'll probably start some more serious research. Also, apologies if I've completely misunderstood how bittorrent works...

Maybe we could get the Mises institute to accept bitcoins at their store. That would be a win for sure.

I was wondering when this was going to happen. I have about 40M GP that I might sell but the price has plummeted since the trade limit was removed.

Only $325k??? You can barely buy a flat for that here...

How about including a simple game to play for the coins? One that would be difficult for a computer, but easy and mildly entertaining for a human.

I was under the impression that 'rent-seeking' in the pejorative essentially meant businesses using various means (usually the state) to try to subvert the market's tendency to drive profits to 0, essentially allowing them to use their market position to receive a continuous stream of profit rather than receiving profit based on innovation.

update added. Auction will be ending at 3AM GMT, unless another bid is made.

If a program like this doesn't already exist then I might create one. It depends if I can even think of a way to do it that wouldn't be completely futile.

Yeah I just think it might be useful to have a program which tests the concept

Is this pattern definitely due to the faucet then? I was thinking it could also be caused by mining pools sending out rewards.