And that should up to the user to do with what he/she wants to do with his/her privacy. Why would other people care what I do?
Not only that, but by doing that you damage the privacy of everyone that interacts with you. That's why I called it pollution. People who practise poor address hygiene make the ecosystem worse for everybody. |
|
|
|
|
The setting to automatically make links to threads go the page with the last unread comment is great.
It would be even better if you could make them automatically open in a new tab.
|
|
|
|
Imagine if bitcoin was all in one sub-forum.
That is entirely the point of having a single altcoin section. If it's sufficiently inconvienient to discuss altcoins here maybe they'll move to their own forum. |
|
|
|
Re-using addresses to me is a good feature of bitcoin. Why are programs trying to stop that? When you have a donation address, a payment address, an address just associated with your company you would want people to know that address. Let the user make up their mind and do what they want instead of the program, right? Almot %90 of the users here paste their personal bitcoin address in their signature. It is more of a common practice to re-use addresses then anything and when a program or someone tries to just change that, questions will be asked....hence an entire thread. Address reuse is privacy pollution. |
|
|
|
And the topic will keep being discussed until a solution is presented and implemented.
People are discussing and implementing solutions instead of trolling here. http://utxo.tumblr.com |
|
|
|
what happens to open transaction
Open-Transactions is the project that's actually going to work. It's actually going to incorporate colored coins as a way of adding certain features that the libraries to not currently support. |
|
|
|
|
I'd like to recover my original account, but I've lost the password and closed the email account it was tied to.
The account I'm using now was one I created for a business I worked for in 2011 that sold refurbished classic arcade games for btc. That business folded, but I kept using this account because it had more activity than my personal account. Eventually I changed this account's name and let the old one retire.
I'd kind of like to recover the original account though since it has a July 2010 join date.
|
|
|
|
|
Is there any plan to move this patch into the main repository any time soon?
Maybe start incrementally by moving the peers.dat format changes first?
|
|
|
|
The pull back after #2 however was very violent and it took 16 months for the next growth spurt. That could happen as well.
I think #2 is an outlier due to what was going on during those 16 months. It was a nearly-constant stream of high profile Bitcoin sites getting hacked (or sometimes "hacked") and losing customer funds. Mt Gox and Bitcoinica being the largest examples. |
|
|
|
Rephrased: (edited to remove people I'm hesitant about having know I dislike them)  Yeah... That's the only reason I haven't posted mine. Actually I read most of the posts of people on my Ignore list in the threads that I'm interested in, but having to perform that extra click to show their post is a form of protection, like putting on a mental condom first. |
|
|
|
|
Maybe we should have a "Post your Ignore list" thread.
|
|
|
|
Interesting article, appreciate it. On the topic of voting pools, it links back to what we discussed in the pybitcointools thread - you're going to need big multisigs, don't know if you saw my latest reply there but Vitalik has included pushing txs to eligius, presumably specifically for this reason. I've always assumed that by the time we're ready to deploy voting pools (Fellowtraveler and co. are still coding them) it won't be a problem. Worst case scenario is that the pools needs to privately negotiate with miners to get their transactions included into blocks but that's not the end of the world or anything. |
|
|
|
|
What if we could invent a calculator that could, under certain circumstances, conclude that 2+2=5? If that a feature that we should add to a calculator?
No, a calculator that concludes that 2+2=5 is broken.
Adding the ability to "recover" coins isn't a feature that can just be added - it's a fundamental transformation into its opposite.
Bitcoin is a distributed computer that processes scripts. Its entire design is focused on making it possible for every participant worldwide to come to a perfect bit-for-bit identical consensus regarding whether or not scripts have been processed accurately.
The only way to recover unspent outputs is to negate this fundamental reason the Bitcoin protocol exists by disregarding their scripts. Once you do that the new thing you've created isn't Bitcoin any more.
The is the most polite reply to this topic I am ever likely write again. This topic is extremely tiresome in no small part because it pops up again regularly via people who are either trolling or who don't understand how to use a search engine and it's a lot easier to just tell them to fuck off each time than rehash this over and over again.
|
|
|
|
The only response I ever get is "But the base will grow and margin orders will level off the volatility." Those arguments don't address my concern that a currency needs to have some psychological element built in like fiat does.
Your concerns provably don't matter. By every objective measurement, adoption is proceeding exponentially despite every so-called problem. Bitcoin is already a successful technology because people are choosing to use it. Actions speak louder than words, and the actions of the market tell us that whatever issues Bitcoin may have none of them are deal breakers. Some of the flaws that various concern trolls want to "fix" are actually selling points. If you're going to start out an argument with the premise that Bitcoin is fatally flawed then you're as grounded in the real world as someone who starts an paper on hydrology by assuming that water flows uphill. If you want to be taken seriously you've got to acknowledge reality first, then try to make the case that the gains could be even greater in some alternate scenario. |
|
|
|
How about the Foundation pays for more full time devs? They are spending all their money hiring lobbyists, lawyers and PR. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
