Hey guys. I have two different approaches for new security-features to sell.
I am not a coder only average geek-user that's why i would sell the idea to someone who can make coins.

Both ideas concern securing the wallet-file.

The first idea would be a one-button-solution as big as 300kb in the software
The second idea is also easy to implement and can be assembled from existing code in most parts (probably 1 mb big)

Both ideas can be combined but are entirely different and can also stand alone each.

Each of them makes every exisitng wallet-stealer obsolete.
The first idea will make malware-programmers life hard and put out of service probably 100% of wallet-stealers today,
the second idea is 100% total security and malware-programmers can suck it probably for eternity.

The idea is worth many, many bitcoins but i'll sell it for around 1 to 2 bitcoin both in one package to someone who wants to have it. Currently i am the only person on the planet who knows that shit because i figured it out myself so you would be buying virgin ideas that are not spoiled to someone else.
That implemented into an altcoin (or alternative bitcoin-client) is a feature that will certainly ad to that coins (wallet-software's) value.

If interested you'll pay 50% up front, get the first idea delivered and pay the next 50% for the even better second idea. The intelectual property is yours then and you can claim ownership of the ideas.
If nobody is interested, i'll keep it and sell it later.
Shoot me a message if interested. Will be a supreme feature for new coins and easy enough to create. If you plan on releasing a coin branded as 'secure' this is very likely a 'must have'.

They keep money of a lot of people on hold with no prior warning demanding selfies from them. Support is unresponsive. Money is locked up for days and weeks. No word fro them on the situation.

Stop using Kraken!

Your account at exchange is a far more easy target for hackers than a coldstorage-wallet at your own house. Exchanges are attacked all the time. They are the primary target of hackers. To steal a password from your browser is much more easy than stealing coins from an offline-storage at your own home. Never leave more coins at exchange than what you are trading at that day.

For people who feel they don't know enough about how to keep their coins safe at their local computer here is a short tutorial how to do that:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=527500.msg8178658#msg8178658

friendly sponsored by Unobtanium-community


Keep your coins safe. Withdraw them to your desktopwallet. Don't be lazy. Better be safe than sorry.

Currently there are far too many coins at different exchanges. This applies not only to Reddcoin, Unobtanium and Vericoin - too many coins of all sorts at the exchanges! Withdraw whenever possible.

I was reading the disclaimer and they said the network could be instable and businesses could be forced to stop operating if eth becomes too expensive. My question is: how can it go to the moon then? Isn't that like btc would stop working once it's more expensive than 2k$ or something? Isn't it kind of guaranteed then to fail? I mean, don't we know the rampant speculation around here?
Guys, you can't speculate on eth because if you do it fails!

I know nobody will listen, then isn't it already nailed it will fail?


edit:
copy of TOS:

"19.15 Risk of Rapid Adoption and Insufficiency of Computational Application Processing Power on the Ethereum Network

If the Ethereum Platform is rapidly adopted, the demand for transaction processing and distributed application computations could rise dramatically and at a pace that exceeds the rate with which ETH miners can bring online additional mining power. Under such a scenario, the entire Ethereum Platform could become destabilized, due to the increased cost of running distributed applications. In turn, this could dampen interest in the Ethereum Project and ETH.

Insufficiency of computational resources and an associated rise in the price of ETH could result in businesses being unable to acquire scarce computational resources to run their distributed applications. This would represent revenue losses to businesses or worst case, cause businesses to cease operations because such operations have become uneconomical due to distortions in the crypto-economy."

If exchanges stake and have most of the pos-coins with them they can fork the coin later on.
So pos-coins that have been concentrated at one large exchange and have been staking there are done. The coin is then at the whim of the employees of that exchange since they can doublespent all they want at any point in the future.
Imagine this went on in silence, the coin gets adopted by the masses and they carry out the attack years later. WHAT A MESS!

so now everybody abandones scrypt-coins to make it even more easy for them to be attacked? Did you fall for the fud again?
You think asics are a problem? I think they will be used to secure the networks. Everybody now abandoning the coins and nobody mines them anymore makes me facepalm, really. There is only one thing you can count on: sheep

Hello everybody.
I noticed a particular drop in many of the scrypt-coins and i concluded it was because of the fear of the powerful scrypt-asics that would make those smaller coins insecure and vulnerable to hostile scypt-asic-miner-forks (at least that was what i was reading repetitively).
Now i have one question: what about sha256-coins? Have they not been in that same situation long ago? Just imagine those powerful sha-miners out there. How were they doing? Forks? Not so much. Why?

I personally don't think the horrorscenarios will play out that dramatic. I think many of those new scrypt-miners will actually be used to secure those networks of scryptcoins. I don't think small scrypt-coins are doomed. Can someone explain to me again why the small scrypt-coins would be doomed? thx

Why would it be wrong to believe that the majority of miners would mine for profit and secure the networks instead of attacking them?

If i happen to live near a border can i not just cross that border to the neighboring country, get 10k$ for btc (or what ever crossborderlimit is) in the other country and then return back to homeland? Since i am not citizen of the other country and don't live or work there and on the other hand the realisation of gains did not occur inside homeland would i have to pay taxes? To whom? What taxes?

They say "jump" you say "how high?"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YtuvVjj-vR4


you, the trader and holder of it lost control. 'They' dictate prices with headlines. Are you serious?

it is 'only' the central bank being silly (of course) and wanting to close exchange bankaccounts (that was said in december already). So exchanges will not close (not a single one) - they might very well go back to vouchers. There is really nothing new in this news.
So nothing to be expected really from mid-april. All they do is fuck up your mind with headlines and keep prices depressed as good as they can.

A friend of mine lost millions of reddcoin because he sent it to a redcoinadress (to red not redd)

Now i lost an amount of bitcoin because i accidentally sent them to a btc-s adress

Guys, we can't work like that. Contributing to the problem that you can send coins to adresses with the same number or letter in the beginning is that those adresses are listet next to each other on exchange. I think this is a problem and it will happen to a lot more people if nothing is done to prevent this.

My btc don't confirm no more. Blockchain.info is down. Ltc skyrockets and btc falls to the floor. Someone has information on this?

Aurora, spain and soon others to follow?
Yes, but why are nation-coins celebrated as a progress, when they are really a step back?
Why would you introduce 235 shitty altcoins in 167 different countries when everybody could be better off with just ltc, btc or xpm?

Are you sure this is the right track?  
Isn't the international bitcoin more convenient then 200 national shit-altcoins from italy to micronesia?

[commodities]

I would argue that we need to distinguish between cryptocurrencies (inflationary, no max cap of coins thought for use in daily transactions like doge or frc)
and cryptocommodities (hard max cap with exponential diminishing blockrewards and thus deflationary and not of great use as a currency to drive economics or do a great deal of transactions like btc or uno - which are more a store of value like gold or real estate)

i would call for this distinguishment between cryptocommodities and cryptocurrencies since this way all the currency-laws wouldn't apply to deflationary crypto and would save us a lot of paperwork at least for the commodities since other laws would apply (see german approach to bitcoin). Was this brought up before? I know in most countries i can purchase small and medium amounts of precious metals anonymously (up to around 5,000-10,000$ per day in most cases). Those rules seem to have worked for a long time for those markets since they are still applied after decades. Why would that not work for btc? I think it could. In my opinion the law should treat btc like it treats gold and silver. Makes the most sense.

[with just not halting his tradingengine!]

someone needs to go to prison over this fiasco! This Karpeles and his friends destoyed capital and ruinined some people i think. He made a damage in the hundrededs of millions with just not halting his tradingengine! He also damaged capital of people who have never been at gox! This guy owes money to every single bitcoinholder!
If i see his stupid face i get aggravated
discuss