Another permabull, checking in. Still entirely in bitcoin, still living almost exclusively on it since June of 2013, still using it to buy all my groceries and stuff, and still converting all the cash I get into bitcoin.

Bitcoin fundamentals haven't changed. It's still better, faster, and more convenient than dollars or credit cards. Dollar, Euro, and Yuan fundamentals, on the other hand, are continuing to change, for the worse. So 

Just have enough hamsters that they can breed quickly enough to grow replacement hamsters. Have the live ones eat the dead ones, work on the wheel, reproduce, and die, and the cycle repeating for ever. There. Free energy.

So, Russia seems to be collapsing: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-12-08/russia-pain-spreads-to-stock-and-bond-markets-as-ruble-plunges.html


And OPEC is helping along, by deciding on Nov. 27 to maintain oil output levels, worsening the outlook in the already bear market in oil. Add to this more idiocy coming out of Russia itself, such as more planned currency controls, plans to ban and heavily fine anything Bitcoin related, and the ridiculously stupid law forcing all online services to store information on Russians only on servers located in Russia by January 1st, which practically none of the international online businesses can comply with, and that place is pretty much going to hell.


By the way, regarding that last part, since bitcointalk.org servers are NOT stored in Russia, does this mean that all you Russians will have to be banned and blocked from this forum to avoid any legal trouble for the forum owners?

I used to be a fan of Zerohedge too, until they went "full retard" on the whole Russia/Ukraine thing  



One thing that immediately jumped out at me is the relatively short time period of the tests versus the large period of time between each wave. How do we know that this is an actual wave that has existed and will continue to exist for centuries, and not just random few points within a short period of time that happened to fit into a graph? After all, if I give you just 3 points on a line, you can fit a perfect sine wave to them, regardless that the points before and after those three could be completely off.

*raises hand* At the least this bit was an interesting read http://nihoncassandra.blogspot.com/2006/08/enigma-of-martin-armstrong.html

Yes, it was posted, and I answered here https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5373.msg9341977#msg9341977

Mycelium has multisig in their "we really want to do this, some time when we actually have time for it" list, but will probably first focus on hardware based security using Rivetz's API instead. (http://www.rivetz.com/)

There is no point to having multisig when you are signing and verifying transactions from within a secure separated hardware, since that hardware will be the point of failure anyway.

Oh, hey, crap, the year is up. Is anything going to happen with this? I'm tired of having to subtract that 0.1715415 BTC amount from my holdings total whenever I'm trying to reconcile my wallet. Where should I send it?

Yes, that's how you would test it. Plug a USB stick with a jpeg on it into the port, and see if there's some way to print it.

I read through the printer manual, and although it supports printing photos without a computer, it doesn't say if it can do that from the USB port, or if that is limited to just the memory card slots. I asked on Amazon, but if you can just do the USB stick with a jpeg photo test on it, that would be quicker. Let me know if that works, and if yes, I'll add it to our list of compatible printers.

Reply from Daniel, one of our devs:


So yeah, the reason you didn't get change back to the paper was because it would have gotten stuck on there permanently, due to being below the dust threshold. Sorry you had to lose $0.00000347 in that experiment.

You ONLY get penalized if you Accept the offer by pressing the Accept button, and then cancel the offer after. If you just cancel the offer, it won't affect you. So don't hit Accept Offer until you are very sure you are going to trade, and are probably on your way to do it. As for the guy sending you requests and not replying, I don't know why, but some people just do that. I get those too. It's not that the messages don't get through, it's that they just don't say anything. Yes, we need to add many more features and much more functionality to this thing. We're working on it.

Coincontrol is not on our todo list. Our wallet is meant for personal daily usage, and automatically picks which addresses to spend from to minimize fees. Once we implement CoinJoin, coin control may even be a security issue that could expose the privacy of your addresses.

Here's the roadmap so far:

Allow lower transaction fees (currently in beta)
Support for Shamir's Secret Sharing keys, which are private keys that are split into m-of-n parts, as supported by Mycelium Entropy (currently in beta)
BitID support (currently in testnet)
Support for tor through nodes accessible over tor hidden services (implemented and being tested on the nodes)
Added functionality to LocalTrader, such as more control over trading logs, and improved reputation options, including reputation for buyers so they can be trusted to buy from sellers using more risky means.
More selling options on LocalTrader besides just bitcoin for fiat, such as bitcoin for other stuff you want to sell, similar to Craigslist
Support for CoinJoin (possibly later this Spring)
Support for Rivetz (when their API comes out in 2015)
Implement BIP70 (it's a constant medium-to-high priority that we just can't set aside the time to do)
Possibly support for other digital currencies
Long term, we hope to make Mycelium into a full fledged financial app, with support for transaction categories, exporting transaction history, monitoring spending, being able to use is as a merchant POS, etc.

Mycelium already supports this. The idea was to be able to use your phone to pay with bitcoin, using the merchant's connection to the bitcoin network, without the user even needing a data connection (for example if you don't have a data plan, have bad reception, or are traveling outside of your coverage area). This would need NFC for the merchant to send the request, and NFC or bluetooth (though bluetooth isn't typically available in payment terminals) to receive the signed transaction back.

On the list, but way at the end of the queue.



Being able to sign while not connected to the web is already implemented, and sending a signed transaction through some other channel (NFC or Bluetooth) is being considered. If you mean something like Armory style completely offline signing, that's not on the list. We hope that a new tech we are looking for will make that unnecessary.



Not possible. At least not with one tap. You need 1 tap to request the address and amount to send to, then the wallet signs, and then one more tap to send the signed transaction. The reason 1 Tap = 1 Pay works with credit cards is because it's the equivalent of tapping to give the merchant your private key, and then having them only pull out what they need.

There are a bunch of Harvard Business cases that go into this in detail, but unfortunately they are not free. The best evidence, though, is that over the last two decades, over 1 billion people in the world have been pulled out of poverty (http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21578665-nearly-1-billion-people-have-been-taken-out-extreme-poverty-20-years-world-should-aim). More than any other government program has been able to accomplish. And none of it was due to minimum wage laws.



In fact, the only differences between the two is that liberals have been fighting for workers to either get some high minimum, or zero, while others have been fighting for workers to also get everything between that high minimum and zero. Just because there is a minimum wage doesn't mean that everyone is earning that minimum wage. Some are forced to earn $0 an hour, or work in the grey market, getting pain in cash under the table, without any legal protections.

As for the "race to the bottom" idea, sure, if the current situation is wildly inaccurate and propped up by unsustainable minimums. But the bottom isn't zero. Note that white collar jobs have no minimum wage laws, yet everyone in those positions still gets WAY more than $7.50 an hour. Likewise, factory workers in India and China get way more than their minimum wages too. The race to the bottom only goes on until everyone is employed. Then it's a race to higher wages, as more workers are needed, but fewer and fewer are available.

You probably have some specific definition on observe I'm not aware of. How do you explain universe actions that are happening while we are not observing them?

I like to start with the absolutes of things like it's absolutely wrong to deprive someone of their property or life without their consent. Like NAP. And then I go from there. That absolute, which gives people the freedom to create and own things without the threat of someone else coming by and claiming a right to their stuff is what expands to things like Libertarianism and AnarchoCapitalism, and makes things like Resource Based Economy and Zeitgeist Movement seem very violent by comparison.


Not only do I think so, there is plenty of evidence for it. US and Europe have minimum wage, a whole lot of people earn that minimum wage, and there is a whole lot of unemployment, because you can't hire people for less, and thus less productive jobs are left unfilled. China has minimum wage, but workers in China and India earn more than that, and their unemployment is very low. It used to be that they had a ton of unemployed and extremely low wages, but as more and more companies outsourced to those countries, building more factories and offices and hiring more and more people, the number of available workers decreased. Used to be that every time a factory opened in China, there was a huge line of people outside the fence looking to get hired. Now when factory opens, there's no one coming, and companies have to look for people themselves. This meant that companies ended up having to raise their wages more and more, to try to entice workers from other companies to come work for them. As a result, they now have much better working conditions than the sweatshops that existed decades ago, and pay much higher wages and benefits. This actually became a problem in India, since over the last decade, workers actually got used to working for only a year, and then switching to another company for an up to 20% raise. Now wages in India are not very competitive at all (as high as in many other, even developed, parts of the world), and it's hard to retain employees for a long time, because they keep expecting there to be something better elsewhere, despite the economic expansion boom there slowing down rapidly. So, yes, China wage growth had nothing to do with government intervention, besides government deciding not to be as restrictively communist any more, and allowing a whole lot of foreign capitalism to come in.

Don't forget that this exact same scenario happened in India, South East Asia, and parts of Africa, too, so it can't just be Chinese government at work.


By the way, in regards to this


socialists are the ones who focus on employers, and think in terms of work and capitalism as those evil rich employers who must be constrained for the good of the workers.
Libertarians think of this scenario from the worker's point of view, not the "evil" employer's. Specifically, if the worker that employer currently has is earning $5 an hour, and I am desperate for a job and am willing to do it for $4.50, I should be able to, instead of that job having a minimum wage barrier that keeps me from getting that job despite me needing it more, and as a result keeping me starving on the streets.
Or, put another way, you guys think "I should have the right to get paid some minimum amount regardless of the quality of work I do," while we think "I should have the right to a job if I need it more than the other guy, without legal restrictions preventing me from getting it 'for my own good'".

Fuck you, you poser. Not only do I have my life savings in bitcoin, and I am a cool cat, but I have a cool cat avatar to prove it. You're not cool until you get one yourself 

If this were true, then why do we need to keep refueling nuclear power plants with fresh uranium, and keep having to dispose of spent fuel nuclear waste that is NOT uranium? Something is being added, and waste is being created. Meaning it's not an infinite source of energy, meaning once we run out of uranium, that's it for uranium powered nuclear reactors. This suggests that the energy is stored in the nuclear fuel itself, and is released when we use it, same as energy out of coal, oil, etc. No math required to understand this.


It takes very little energy, just a tiny spark, to extract much more energy from gasoline, too. That doesn't make gasoline some magic perpetual motion fuel. It just makes them sources of energy, where that energy came from something else, and can easily be released. For gasoline the energy came from the sun that powered the plants that dinosaurs ate, and then the sun and earth's pressure that decomposed those dinos and converted them into oil. For nuclear power, it was a star's pressure that fused lighter elements into heavier uranium. Either was, energy was already existing, was transfered into a fuel, and once we release it from that fuel, it's gone. Just like a magnet that's brought too close to another magnet, storing up energy, and once they are released, the magnets spring apart and all that energy is gone, or energy added to water to break it into hydrogen and oxygen, and once the two gases are recombined, that energy is gone.
Note that in ALL those cases, the energy put in is less than the energy we get out of it. Even for star created nuclear fuel.

AnonyMint (aka UnunoctiumTesticles and many other names) claimed $150 by the end of this year, not Armstrong. I don't even know what Armstrong's position on bitcoin is. I know Anonymint thinks it's a POS, because of some ideas he came up with on how to attack and destroy it. Ideas that bitcoin devs and many others explained would not work,  even show a lack of understanding of how bitcoin actually works, but which Anonymint stuck to as the absolute truth no matter what.