How are the 100% perfect regulation and transparency of money supply and transaction rules in bitcoin, as implemented since 2009, not official?

There has never been a currency as regulated as bitcoin. What exactly are you implying would be useful?   

I think the transition from everybody being continually robbed to everyone not being continually robbed will not be as painful as you think. 

In a society of slaves the free thinkers usually wind up in jail. 

We already have 13,000,000.  I guess I don't understand your question. 

The term is ninjamine.  Premines are visible on the block chain as premines.  Instamines are also visible on the block chain as massively rapid block additions.  Ninjamines are not visible on the block chain because they are hidden and made to look like normal mining when in reality it is just a few peeps on a darknet. 

No.

Agreed mostly.. 
but every time I send a bitcoin am I stealing code from Satoshi ?   

I don't think so.  XMR and the rest of the clone army uses cryptonight code for what it was intended.  BCN authors are bright people and so they are happy about their code being used to secure people's TXs.   

Wow I've never seen a more convoluted and sketchy way to fund anything. 

Requires login information and tries to catalog your network presence and identity when you try to find a way to donate:  check.

Does not list donation addresses on any project page, not even in "startcoin":   check. 

Centralized and pseudonomous central control of everything: check.

Breaks any potential benefit of direct communication between donator and recipient: check. 

Philanthropists recommended to stay well away from this stuff. 

After 6 months sadly I must report here as Nolan no longer responds to my email.  I am out 0.9 BTC and have only been given the run around. 

Thanks as usual gmaxwell.. hanging on your words here!

Well this one doesn't explain G so it's not all the parameters..  and out of all of the the generator point is the only one that looks like an obvious question "where did this come from?"

I also hadn't noticed until recently that b (=7 in secp256k1) can be replaced with anything at all with no effect on all bitcoin operations..  so definitely a waste of time investigating that choice further.      .

Yeah year of the multisig and all and here we are still using bitcoind command line with 1000+ character lines based on gavin's 18 month old instructions.  

Fortunately there's a nice javascript tool also in the wild which works on your offline computer:

https://github.com/OutCast3k/bitcoin-multisig/



Or you could go the SX route..  have you tested that recently grue?  

Thanks for your posts anonymint!

Just curious, do you believe there is any accuracy to these (or any) fiat statistics?  After using coin networks for some years we become accustomed to actually knowing the money supply, days destroyed, transactions per sec., etc..   For me there is a stark contrast between this kind of transparency and the numbers we hear thrown around in the fiat realm (80 billion per month QE, velocity decreasing, GDP, etc).  However it seems you are putting some import on this particular metric despite the lack of transparency in measurement technique or verifiability.  Could you explain why? 

Cheers -- 

"The government" is not a person.  It is not even a clear entity of any sort.  "The FBI" is also not a person but is at least a slightly more specific moniker that can refer somewhat more easily to the real people involved.  The proceeds of the SR theft and coin auction will go one way or another into the pockets of individuals just as they always do when uniformed gang members rob entrepeneurs. 

There is no such thing as "backing" tokens (digital, paper, or any other) by physical metals.  People have had luck pretending that such an idea exists, so you could go that route if you are interested in fraud. 

Another option is to set up a company / entity that promises to redeem any tokens with the precious metal.  In this case all users are trusting the central company/entity to do the redeeming so there is no need for the decentralized structure of a block chain.  If this type of operation is what you seek (a la e-gold), you can make a better service without mining and an altcoin style ledger. 

I'm not quite sure I follow. 

How would the mining software verify what the pool operator is doing with the block?  The pool operator still is free to add whatever TXs it likes.  If the pool finds a new block and an old one happens to be floating around to get orphaned, this doesn't imply "going rogue" this is normal operation..  so the mining software should allow it. 

But basically you are right that miners need to have more monitoring tools..   

I've been trying to find a way to do this too.  Please PM me if you found a way

Wait..  "most of the  time"?  You're kidding right?   

No offense but you'd have to be a total idiot to buy real estate with bitcoin.  We are still in the era of fiat mining.  Not even the richest 0.001 percent pay hard cash for real estate unless of course they are in a huge hurry and willing to take a loss.  Get some money counterfeited by the bank for you, er, I mean get a loan! 

It's one half of a "shave and a haircut".

Thanks for your reply.  I am interested in proof of stake but still missing something.  I don't understand some details of the NXT algo including the universal random number (just reading http://www.docdroid.net/cckd/forging0-4-3.pdf.html)

Yes:  total BTC miners revenue in a day is 3600 coin.  Before accepting 3600BTC and making a physical delivery from a source with zero trust I would wait about that long.  Lets look at NXT for comparison:

Total Forgers Revenue: 5500 NXT
 
So in a perfect liquid market of stake, I would want to wait about a day before accepting 350 mBTC worth of NXT. 

I understand that liquid markets in hash power and accretion of hashpower by individuals can be bad very bad.  But replacing hashpower by something that is even more liquid already seems like hardly a solution to that particular problem. 

Yes, I understand that the big stakeholders now holding the 100% premine might not want to accept my offer of a little extra doublespend revenue to borrow their stake because they are afraid the word could get out and this would affect the value of their personal holdings.  But isn't concentration of power in the hands of a few and requiring the network to trust them part of the problem we were trying to avoid?  If we want to trust a central entity, this whole blockchain system is a waste.   



Indeed.  Bitcoin hardly seems perfect.  But imagine if the 21million BTC  (that's 10 billion or so dollars) were all premined in the hands of a small team.  They could run a country on that, especially with their total control of the transaction record for all time.  Institutionalized double spending, here we come.