Addresses that start with a 3 have a different version string byte than the ones that start with 1.  IIRC, the addresses with 3 prefix are the ones which are multisignature addresses.  I don't think vanitygen supports those at the moment.  You could presumably modify the program to do so, the code is available.

This might be helpful:

https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/List_of_address_prefixes
https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Technical_background_of_version_1_Bitcoin_addresses

Well, all I see on the last few pages here is griping and poking at each other.  In any case, I'm glad that the panic seems to have subsided.  If there are going to be serious changes to CLAM, they definitely need to be made in the environment of calm, rational discussion, not as reactions to someone selling on the marketplace.  I suppose that after the poking at each other subsides, rational discussion could begin again here.

I guess I'm just gonna bump this.  It's been up for a week without any reply.

Or = 2222, or equals 3333, etc, right?  Anyway, it'd be a funny address if you found such a thing.  Maybe it'd make the hall of fame, i dunno.

Very introspective of you, bill gator.  That's not exactly a quality that I've seen a terrible lot of around here.  Anyway, I kinda suppose that if you were thinking about your posts as much as you are about people's perception of you and your impact on the community, maybe things would come out differently, i dunno.

Indeed.  But (almost) all of us were in that situation at some point---possessing undug CLAMs, most likely unaware of their existence.  It's literally these folks, people who were given clams in the initial distribution who have not dug them yet, who are potentially harmed by rule changes.   And yet, as you say, they aren't really here to speak up for themselves.

I'm sorry if I suggested that early adopters were a monolithic group, that wasn't my intention.  What I was referring to, essentially, was those who dug before any potential rule change vs those who dig after.  I hope that clarifies.  Again, this isn't to suggest that everyone who has already dug their clams is of the same mind, clearly this isn't the case.  I'm just trying to contrast the group who has already dug with those who would be affected by a rule change (those who haven't yet).

It does seem like, in principle, it's possible that the checksum part of an address could be the same character repeated.  As for that character being the same as the rest of the address, I guess you've only 58 such address to check out, the 1s, the 2s, the 3s, ... the zs.

This paragraph from navaman pretty much sums up my opinion on the matter.  It seems more like an act of tyranny than an act of democracy to allow early CLAM adopters to change the rules to screw later adopters.  That seems to break the promises made in the initial distribution.  Doing this, IMO, undermines any faith people could have in the long-term stability of this project.

It was certainly allowed, and changing it was quite controversial.  One of the main issues was that mid-level mentors supposedly couldn't get any students because high-level mentors gained so much more on the diff between the levels of themself and their students that splitting that difference made a big difference.  If you were a level 3 student and had a level 11 mentor then you made half of the diff between level 3 and 11, but if you had a level 6 mentor, you only got back half of the diff between 3 and 6. 

I'm not as active on there as I used to be, in fact, I'd love to hear offers on my level 8 account.

If I'm not incorrect, the python interpreter is written in C, so yah, you're just adding a layer of abstraction when you use python.  However, for one-off scripts like this one, it's probably not worth it to worry about all the typing and memory management of C, just get yer script going so you can  have some fun.  Let us know how you're proceeding.  I, for one, appreciate your attitude.  I like doing things myself simply for the educational experience.

They've actually made a lot of changes recently regarding that "giving back half" thingy.  I think it was pretty controversial and to be honest I still don't understand all the details of what went down.  In any case, I recommend LucyLuck as a mentor, she's almost always online.

Right, I think this post gets at some of the craziness I'm seeing in this thread.  At this point, it seems like people are trying to take an informal vote on whether or not there should be some more formal kind of vote.  I think the heart of the matter is clam governance, as dooglus pointed out, there's really only a couple of "core devs".  Do they own the coin?  How much should clam look like bitcoin in which case there's some group of core devs who don't really own the coin but are looked to.  Of course we all have freedom to fork the clam client.  Anyway, I don't really know what the right answer is here, but I do think the question of how and by what mechanisms the clam community should be governed really ought to be worked out pretty concretely before we go back to the "should we make a reactionary change to the rules based on someone digging their clams" question.

I don't know of any such guide.  But if you try it and get errors, post the messages here and I can probably help you out.  (Most likely it amounts to something like "apt-get install libpng:i386" or some such).

Or just write rescan=true on the last one.  findftp, did you get this working?

DarkDays: thanks for the suggestion:

SWCPoker: hey it's been _____ months since the last update regarding porting SWC to other platforms, could we please have an update with an updates timeline?

What is a System Rescue CD?  It sounds like you've got some proprietary software there and maybe you have to read the manual.  If you just need help mounting a USB drive on a linux system, I can help you with that.

I've only ever used the linux client.  It works alright for me.  You need several i386 packages in order for it to run.  I'm on debian but I assume ubuntu is multiarch by now.

I think the solidier statues on the private islands still work.

I'm strongly on the side of not making reactionary changes to the rules based on someone actually using CLAMS as they were intended.  IMO, reactionary changes like this will make CLAM very much unserious, borderline scammy.  I'd certainly sell off any holdings I have at the moment such news was announced.

I dunno.  I quit using it about 10 years ago after the last time it raped me.  I have a proper OS now and a happy life.
Whelp, if no one complains, maybe no one notices. 

FWIW, it doesn't have to be android.  Just something that doesn't require a damn .exe interpreter.  And, apparantely, if you look upthread, you'll see how even those of us who took some time to try to see if we could get their software to work on a free exe intepreter (WINE) were told to fuck off, that it wouldn't work on WINE and they want it that way.  How does that make any sense?