It depends on whether hashing strength is increasing or decreasing.

This chart shows how many days it takes for 2,016 blocks:



 - https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/oimg?key=0AmcTCtjBoRWUdHVRMHpqWUJValI1RlZiaEtCT1RrQmc&oid=8&zx=hc9djb2l3hlo

The last few data points number between 12.5 days and 13.2 days each.

So let's say currently this is at the level of 13 days per 2,016 blocks.  That mean about 155 blocks are generated per-day.   There are 1,440 minutes per day so that a new block arrives about every nine and a half minutes during the day.  

Now as soon as difficulty adjusts as the end of a 2,016 adjustment period, if the hashing capacity doesn't continue increasing, then blocks will be solved, on average, at the targeted rate of one per ten minutes (and the duration of 2,016 blocks at fourteen days).

Options listed here:
 - http://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=108716.0

2012-10-08 TheNextWeb.com - Mail-order drugs, hitmen & child porn: A journey ...

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=117377.0

By Joel Falconer






 - http://thenextweb.com/insider/2012/10/08/mail-order-drugs-hitmen-child-porn-a-journey-into-the-dark-corners-of-the-deep-web/

If I remember correctly, the one from Mt. Gox only works with BlockChain.info for static password.  i.e., it is vulnerable to a replay attack.   The one from YubiKey is supported for true OTP against Blockchain.info's site.

Currently at $12 per BTC, the 7,200 BTC bitcoin miners earn each day are worth $86,400.  That amount is distributed among all the miners proportionally based on the amount of hashing work performed.  

Litecoin blocks are targeted at 2.5 minutes, and with 50 BTC per block that means 28,800 BTC are mined each day.  At $0.06 per LTC means all litecoin mining together produces $1,728 USD.  

I have no idea of the profitability of mining litecoin today but I'ld bet that $1,728 a day mined is stretched fairly thin already. Come block 210,000 an influx of GPU refugees from bitcoin will be making their way over to Litecoin hoping to find another revenue stream, but it is just a tiny fraction of Bitcoin's.    The cost of running a GPU is the same, whether mining bitcoin or litecoin.   The most likely result will be to simply power it all down and liquidate the hardware.

The work miners do is necessary service that the bitcoin network requires due to its unique decentralized architecture.  But Bicoin only needs a certain level of this to be performed -- a sufficient amount to serve as a disincentive to any party or cartel wishing to mess with Bitcoin's blockchain.

If those miners find it difficult to make profit, that means there are too many of them and some (those who are mining using the least efficient methods) will drop out.  That doesn't harm bitcoin though. 

This was addressed here:

How can one download the initial Blockchain data files securely?
 - http://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/3551

The problem is that the client doesn't validate each block on startup, so unless the client downloads the blockchain from the P2P network blockchain, you are exposing yourself to the risk where you have invalid data in your data files.  If a manual download was offered with the intention to defraud, this could make you vulnerable to a double spend attack against you that could be successful.

With the version 0.7 client, -loadblock=  is now available and with that you can manually download the blockchain data files, but instead of using them directly you can load the blocks from the manually downloaded data files.  Thus the blockchain is loaded securely and as fast as your system can go.  There is no security risks as long as after the load is done you let the client finish the last bit of catching up to protect against the chance that the longest chain in the manual download had something other than the current longest bitcoin blockchain.

[Edited for readability]

FWIW, there were no other payments, so if that 3.5 BTC was yours, you were the only one.

 - http://blockchain.info/address/1Fhoq69gYN5a61Yhv3Rc3ufCkDiryqybVK

After reading your post though, I did raise the issue on another thread:

Here's an example of someone new who didn't understand what a scammer tag meant and sent coins to a now-outed scam service where the operator has run:

HungerCoins SCAM
 - http://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=117309.0

The solution there might be to have posts by a scammer stand out differently, perhaps with a scammer background image in the posts's div, for instance.

Or perhaps a separate board (thread cemetary) where threads from which the scammer operated can be moved.

Well, they aren't necessarily a "rig" as much as a "device".

Here's a thread that might have some more info for you:

Complete Newbie to mining with questions about the BFL Jalapeno coming out
 - http://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=104602.0

The Jalapeno still requires a host, connected via USB.

A number of people who have pre-ordered multiple Jalapenos are revising their orders to buy BFL SC small singles instead.

So the Jalapeno is like the entry-level / starter version.

[Edit: as far as the insides, nobody knows until they ship.  Here's the circuit board rendering for the SC single:
 - http://codinginmysleep.com/first-look-at-bfls-asic-hardware ]

I keep scratching my head trying to figure out why people are still adding on more GPU capacity.
In about seven weeks is halving day, otherwise known as GPU retirement day.

For Dwolla, the list of exchanges that accept that payment transfer methods are:

 - http://www.MtGox.com  (1:1)
 - http:/www.CampBX.com (1:1)
 - http://www.Intersango.com (1:1)
 - http://www.BitInsatnat.com (fee)

- http://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Buying_bitcoins

I can verify that the BitAddress.org website has been updated and returns the same HTML from the latest commit (31433898c7b984ff532bd8f24a286ba5e6426e1e) in github:
 - https://github.com/pointbiz/bitaddress.org


To confirm this I first check the sha1sum hash of the html returned by a request to http://bitaddress.org:

$ wget --quiet -O - http://bitaddress.org|sha1sum
97d52a44eeb261e2398e98e1eed2bd56b99c845a  -

Then from my bitaddress.org repo:

$ git pull
$ git rev-list --max-count=1 HEAD
31433898c7b984ff532bd8f24a286ba5e6426e1e

$ sha1sum bitaddress.org.html
97d52a44eeb261e2398e98e1eed2bd56b99c845a  bitaddress.org.html

Problem is resolved for me, logged in just fine now after previously not being able to.

I think that was answered here.



You'll probably get a more accurate and prompt asking in the main thread for LocalBitcoins.com though:
 - http://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=86012.0

All that is needed is for one to be the first,  It may already have happened, just not publicly.  But once that happens, others that were reluctant to be first now don't have the barrier.

This is a very interesting development.

Hate to break it to you, but CPU mining's last days were in late 2010, though had an after-death heartbeat in mid-2011.

We currently are in GPU mining's last days, though the party is in full swin until 210,000 when revenues get cut in half.  It is unlikely anyone paying for electricity will be profitably mining on GPU after block 210,000.  That is in about seven weeks.
 - http://bitcoinclock.com

There will be some who can switch over to an alternative currency, but no current altchains have an  exchange rate that would support much more added capacity without causing the same problem -- deluge of hashing capacity causing everyone to mine either for free or at a loss.

> Transaction: a8780d5bca15f75a6dbefb28e7a27de4ba4f70e292b0834467ef97c253da95fb
> Fees paid: 0 BTC

I can think of another way to "fix it".