No.
Still in critical condition as of now.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/10/06/us-health-ebola-usa-idUSKCN0HT0MZ20141006


I picked up the remaining P100 breathing filters at my local stores here in Los Angeles.  There weren't a lot left.
After I put together a the kits for my household, I may have some left over.

It might be wise to check your local stores for these before things get weird, and if they never do, save them for the next time you paint or whatever.
As for eye coverings, those simple cheap pool masks because they are easy to get and are water tight.  Most of the goggles you see for protective wear aren't water tight, aren't air tight and are for splash protection.


I'd not be giving those up for dirty fiat money.  That cotton cloth is going to soak up the deadly disease like nothing else.

110 Votes supporting proposal #1

Why change to something else unless the something else is better?
Proposal #2 is that we make something new. 
If proposal #2 were changed to move to something else that is better, I'd support #2.
Some examples of forums I would think of as better include CryptoCrypt.org and Prolific.com.

This brings me some enjoyment as well, doing security engineering.  I've a wicked mind, the whole world looks broken to me.  There are cracks in everything, and all these candy colored pots of gold everywhere are just free for the taking with no barrier other than these darned ethical handcuffs that keep me from grabbing them all.

It is so easy to design something that simply works, and so rare to design something that can't be broken simply, but those things are simply beautiful things.


Yes, the TW will fail against Monero's code in that context.
The next context was "Will it fail fast?"  Essentially, if a TW were launched, even though it is doomed to not be the longest chain, would the time it takes to make that determination by the honest nodes (and thus not doing so much hashing) allow dishonest nodes to continue building on the TW chain, or even to just build on the good chain but win more blocks by essentially denying hashes to nodes busy with making this determination?

The distributed checkpointing allows for the ability to get all the honest nodes back to work even if there is a novel form of attack based on any type of chain forking attack, not just the TW, and further allows for self service of the solution.

The same can be said for BTC at the moment.

I'm more horrified of not considering everything.

So you 1) wish a vote to be taken, 2) have a vote preference you advocate here for contract breaking, others may reasonably disagree with either 1 or 2, but even more important for me are...  
3) Change it to what, and why?
4) How to do this.
Does anyone know what the "right" emission rate is?  With a sufficiently good answer to (3), then your (1) and (2) become easier.  Without a sufficiently good answer to (3), we will be right back here in this discussion again later.

It may be fine and well to keep revisiting this topic, over and over again into the future, and keep working on fixing and perfecting the emission rate.  

Further, this ought be everyone's expectation if we do (1) and (2) without a definitive (3) (which I'd argue doesn't exist today)  The mechanism (4) for making these changes, and the reasons for making them will be important.  It would essentially create a somewhat de-centralized banking function to the coin that is forever changing the inflation rate in attempts to optimize the economy.

This would present an important innovation in alt coin development that will be impossible for the crypto currency world to ignore, for good or ill.  Get it right, and XMR may continue its rise to leadership.  Bungle (4) at it's great peril.

And realize also the gravity of this proposal you are making.  If XMR lives up to its promises, the actions we take here and now in this effort, will reverberate across decades into the future and impact the lives of billions of people.  It is probably worth getting it right.

It is a great start.  I suspect most of the things I'd look for are already in your plans.  (settings for bar width other than 6 hours, start-end date for historical views, order book depth, etc)

Slightly more accurately, one "buys in" to world dollars by creating a video of oneself advocating world dollars.
Essentially, it outsources the advertising content creation in exchange for the world currency.  This is a form of legitimate trade, more than a gift.
The first big thing I would expect is a compilation video, of anyone world dollar thinks is interesting to have in its video.
I see nothing much wrong with this, though you may want to get releases from the video submitter permitting your reuse.
I wish you good fortune with this enterprise.

Its not the only argument.
Saving holders from dumps wouldn't be a persuasive argument in its own right anyway.

Will you add the numbers to show how much volume it is that the volume bars represent?

It will be great for crypto generally when you do.
XMR and BBR have a very friendly rivalry, though highly vocal and bitter foes spout off from each camp at the periphery. 
The ring signature's prospects are new and developing.  There is far more future than history in this, and thus, opportunity.
Especially for someone that values their privacy as you do.

XMR is sort of running away with the competition now, so it would be great to have a closer battle.  More evolution from both.
You would likely be welcomed among XMR's noble opposition.

The endgame is possibly for these to ultimately join, or create a new joint effort coin, or something else, who knows?
As an admitted XMR fan, I put my support (and a bit of money) on that horse in this race, but I'd be foolish if I were not also owning BBR and saving up for what may yet come.

Yeah, if only we had something like
BitMark
Thanks for joining, and pitching in.   

I take BCX very seriously, and also with a grain silo of salt.
There are valid reasons for FUD.  There are also invalid reasons for FUD.
Some of the invalid reasons are almost comically funny, some are wry.
So there is misdirection, humor, ambiguity, and vicious predation in action, all part of the fog of war.

When I see invalid FUD, based on what I see as obviously wrong interpretations, it may be a market opportunity for those that see through the fog, but also begs to have that fog burned away by the light of truth.  In this way perception matters.  But, my efforts are less anti-FUD, than anti-falsity.  Knowledge assuages fear, and doubt.

TFM, You have given me reasonable fears and unreasonable ones too.  You also worry about my confirmation biases, as do I.  In the end I don't care so much whether I started out as right or wrong, so much as that together, we get to the right answer.  I "win" an argument, when it leads to the truth, especially when it is not where I started.

Right.  That is the expectation of users, not developers.

That most us users don't even donate what might be a reasonable cost for software development is also shameful.

That ring signatures make blacklisting more useless or difficult, may be negative or positive depending on one's views on fungibility and blacklisting.

No edge is a fair bet.

The Gordian knot problem remains interesting to me because it suggests an avenue of protocol improvement making CN more robust.
It presents a special case of managing a transaction where some ring signer (such as may result from a coinbase spend) is not valid due it being on a fork-to-be-orphaned, but the transaction ought be valid.

There is already some buttressing for this (in that fresh block rewards are unspendable for a good number of blocks).  Which in practicality, amounts to a race between miners fixing checkpoints, and block rewards becoming spendable (this is the case for all coins not just CN, XMR however has a leg up in these races because no recompile is needed for the checkpoints).

And pick up these before going to the airport.  Prices are always higher at airports. 

Before too long they may be handy to keep around when going to gas stations, and grocery shopping too.

That was pretty fast, good for them.

At least we know the real reason why now, Smoothie. 
BCX is concerned that XMR may become 'better than bitcoin' or 'better than litecoin' and is trying to protect existing holdings from that.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=789978.msg9068159#msg9068159

So much for 'forced evolution', though we got that too.