@2112 - my brother has taken our family tree back a couple of centuries and we are completely UK+Irish. :-)
On your point on IMEs - from Java's point of view this is mainly in the OS and Java *should* pick up any unicode text that is put into any text field. (Java understands unicode natively)
From your post - are you saying this is NOT the case ? I.e can you not use the IME you normally use for Chinese/ Korean/ whatever ? If so, I need to look into that.
I haven't tried your software in a long while. But I do have plentitude of general experience with Java (and other languages supposed to use Unicode natively). One of the most common errors are related to incorrectly supporting the "supplementary characters", the ones beyond the "base plane" of 64kilo-characters. As to your Irish heritage: one of the best scenes in the movie "The Guard" is where Irish people cooperate with the police by speaking Gaelic. Talk about sufficient entropy... |
|
|
|
Good advice there 2112!
:-)
I am not really monolingual no. Whilst my mother tongue is English I speak reasonable Spanish and have lived in Germany and China.
Thank you very much for not getting offended. I wrote my post above with trepidation that somebody will start another deletion campaign against my posts. If anyone is worried about the entropy of your password/passphrase/passpoem: just make friends with people speaking other languages or at the minimum research the roots of your family. Who knows, you may really be 1/16 Navajo? |
|
|
|
Do people think this is an easier way to remember 128 bits?
Jim, are you, by chance, a monolingual person? Are you capable of reading any other script than Latin? Just lay off this problem. It tends to become a paranoidal obsession, similar to the one exhibited in other thread where very intelligent people assume that Internet is operational but all sources of time are compromised. As far as your software: just make sure that Unicode and various Input Method Editors are operational. Really just lay it off for a while: it isn't a technical issue and really a behavioral health issue. |
|
|
|
Bitcoin is not "user-friendly" for conventional business at the moment and it's not going to enjoy wide-spread adoption while it's cumbersome to acquire, to store, to spend or to exchange. It's not going to become user-friendly any time soon unless people are paid to develop solutions.
This has nothing to do with being "user-friendly" and 100% with the attitude of the core development group: 1) check out http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=koIq58UoNfEabout 1:25 into the clip: we don't much care if you don't approve of the software we write. 2) utter disregard for the GAAP; check out the old thread https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=93502.0It just too bad that the juiciest portions were deleted by Maged at the request of Gavin Andresen and Roman Shtylman. |
|
|
|
titling himself as Director.
Dudes, please don't read too much into the official titles. FinServ racket is notorious for the inflation of job titles. For example: many of the completely legitimate stock brockerage houses will confer the title of "vice president" to anyone had passed the very basic "series 7 exam", went through the probationary period and had shown the abitlity to retain at least one profitable client. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Series_7_ExamPlease just try to read any job title as: "account executive" or "salesperson on commission" to better understand the financial services sector. Edit: For any of the readers who are not from the USA: please go to youtube and search for the clips from the movie "Boiler room". Then search for the initial interview scene where anyone who had passed "Series 7" is asked to leave. Actually I've found the clip, but the sound isn't good: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zvICN8DNMpYEdit 2: OK, for anyone unfamiliar with the FinServ racket: the movie "Boiler Room" is a dramatization, but factually based, of the Stratton Oakmont brokerage house. Edit 3: Stratton Oakmont sales people worked over the telephones. Please understand that this doesn't translate directly to working over the bulletin board like bitcointalk.org. But the principles are the same, just the medium is different. Edit 4: Please compare the following links: http://www.securitiesarbitration.com/news/1998/09/07/could-you-fall-this-hard-for-a-stockbrokers-scam/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=99497.msg1155023#msg1155023 |
|
|
|
Paymium, I remember seeing that in my mailbox... Yep, the guys who registered a "bitcoin" trademark in France to steal the bitcoin.fr domain. Hope now they know that no, it's not "legit" to register a trademark for the purpose of taking over a domain name.
I'm just quoting the most interesting part to be able to find it faster in the future. |
|
|
|
NOTE: if someone knows how to "build-in" a GPG signature into a Windows installer (*.msi file), that would be great.
You can't build-in a GPG signature into anything since they always sign the whole object. The political disconnect between GPG and the commercial software vendors is too high. You need to spend money on a code signing certificate. Since you aren't signing a kernel-level driver you can go for the cheapest ones. Here's the link to some random blog that has a sensible discussion, links and prices in the comments: http://www.wintellect.com/cs/blogs/jrobbins/archive/2007/12/21/code-signing-it-s-cheaper-and-easier-than-you-thought.aspx |
|
|
|
One of the providers (perhaps Comupserve?) was reluctant to allow users out of their domain so I quit them and went with a shell provider. Please don't disparage the good old aunt Compuserve. She was always very liberal with the access. Too bad this was never marketed and stayed a Pulcinella's secret to the very end. May she rest in peace. http://www.yolinux.com/TUTORIALS/LinuxTutorialPPP-compuserve.html |
|
|
|
You lost me.
... what?
This is what makes good drama: you don't know what's gonna happen next. Initially story starts that a supposedly open source project dictates the technical parameters to the hardware manufacturers. In second part both friedcat and Inaba/ Nassim GNasser Gh Moeini unveil their secret algorithms and start the fight for domination, kidnap Gavin and try to force him to change the official Bitcoin hash algorithm. firedcat is backed by the Umbrella Corporation and Inaba/ Nassim GNasser Gh Moeini obviously by the Taliban. In the 3rd part Magical Tux unveils their Tekken-hash and with the help of ragtag group of karate kickers and hot asian girls they free Gavin and conquer each of the ASIC usurpers. The Tekken-hash is the key to the win: it runs well on AMD, Nvidia & DirectCompute on Intel GPUs and spreads itself as a cross platform first-person-kicker computer game (this is why hot Asian girls are important) . We also learn that Magical Tux is a secret son of Gavin Andresen(or vice-versa). |
|
|
|
There are no licenses or issued secrets. Each ASIC vendor is expected to come up with their own reasonable "secret alternative algorithm" and not tell anyone else (including developers) until such an emergency occurs. When/if that happens, Bitcoin would be made to accept any of these alternatives.
I'm just quoting this for posterity. Here we have Luke-Jr playing the role of Hans Buehler from the old Crypto AG drama: "Honestly, dear Iranian interrogators, our cryptograhic chips have no secret backdoor algorithms implemented!". But in my opinion Erik Voorhees plays this role better in the Satoshi Dice thread: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=101902.msg1140872#msg1140872 |
|
|
|
That is not necessarily true. ASIC vendors are advised to implement an alternative algorithm they can switch to in case of emergency like this. If the community felt it necessary to block out ASICMINER (or some other hostile ASIC hoarder), the other ASIC vendors would then publish their secret alternative algorithms, and Bitcoin could be made to support those.
Oh, the drama! The licensed mining comes up again. Except this time the licenses are issued in the secret. Hollywood has nothing going on bitcointalk.org. |
|
|
|
it would be like accusing the who e Linux ecosystem of having hubris and not being able to face innovation.
I can't fault you for repeating this Linux comparison, but it is completely wrong. The visibility of the code matters relatively little to the future, the thing that matters the most is what type of changes get accepted to the mainline branch. The next thing is the mainline developers attitude to the branch/fork developers. For the experienced developers those are the two things that distinguish the Bitcoin project the most and make it unlike pretty much any other open-source project. Several of the core developers had long careers in the "large established companies that are comfortable with what they do" and transfered their experience to this project. Those problems don't have an easy answer that can be summed up with single paragraph. It is easier to sum up what's wrong, and I liked the most the cypherdoc's summary: Bitcoin is like Mona Lisa: it is already perfect. |
|
|
|
but merely saying (paraphrased), "Bitfloor cannot be trusted because they don't expose themselves to the legal risk of accepting USPS money orders," is your opinion only.
Way to miss the point. Look up the original thread: it all started with with disregard for GAAP and separation of funds in accounts. Rest is just details and circumstantial evidence, because of the avoidance of auditing and accountability. |
|
|
|
Depends upon what we are talking about. If you mean small tweeks such as the block interval or hugely disrputive changes such as last-most-difficult-hash which can be achieved with a parrallel blockchain, then yes the developers aren't keen on playing games with a system that just works. Besides, there is test-net for that kind of thing. If you mean something disruptive, but truely innovative that cannot be practically implimented without a breaking change, then maybe.
You just don't go around breaking a running system to try out your theories.
Well, I'm thinking more of a mindset that any particular technical detail. It is more of a human factors issue than a technology issue. Example: I used to wonder why Gavin was so against Genjix's (and others) idea of refactoring the Satoshi's code that lead to libbitcoin. After about a year of kibitzing on this forum I finally understood after seeing how the Bitcoinica Consultancy/Bitcoin Consultancy/Intersango fiasco had turned out. Those are really hard choices to make, especially since this isn't a for-pay project but an association of volunters. Of course it is better to err on the side of safety when working on a financial software. But where to draw a line? |
|
|
|
That still doesn't mean that if some new cryptocurrency comes out with a killer feature, and more and more people and vendors start to use it, that Bitcoin can't just implement that feature as well, and once again overtake the newcomer due to already having established hardware/software/merchant support. It could happen, but I really don't think it's likely.
You are 100% right. Bitcoin and its developers could somehow become inclusive. It isn't impossible. I just find it extremely unlikely. The not-invented-here vibe is just extremely strong. The current mindset is highly exclusionary. |
|
|
|
So he pays you $636 and he has settled, in full.
U.S. dollars must be accepted for all debts, public and private.
This is ultra cheap lawyering, I would say even below the standards exhibited by the free legal aid in the USA. Any US lawyer that isn't rock-bottom would probably at least research the unlawful conversion torts. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conversion_(law) Edit: OK, I didn't get the Stephen's sarcasm: But I tossed it out there, devil's advocate style.
|
|
|
|
Why would Bitcoin be replaced by another cryptocurrency if it can simply "evolve" to include the new features if they are good?
The "old money" interests in the core development group are hampered by need to maintain backward compatibility and the needs for security that is ratcheted up near to the paranoia level. There's also the bunker mentality: all other coins are pump&dump scams. The combination of the three makes for a very powerful handbrake. Older thread about the same: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=101686.msg1113732#msg1113732 |
|
|
|
Please explain why someone making 30% would need to borrow any money at all after the first few weeks.
Dilution. You would want to dilute both the dirty money with cleaner money as well as dilute the investigative resources of whoever is after you. Bernie Madoff unfortunately stole the spotlight from Bernie Ebbers. And studying the scams of Bernie Ebbers is way more educational. |
|
|
|
Now that the house has investors, you are suggesting that this list of secrets makes it is possible for a party to cheat the house, lowering its profits, which in turn, lowers the dividends for investors.
Now the question is "who?". Is it fireduck cheating Erik? fireduck & Erik cheating would-be-investors in Macau? Some unknown-as-yet actor in this drama? My hunch is that Erik is innocent, sort of like Hans Buehler in the Crypto AG drama. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crypto_AGIf Erik had any experience in the gaming sales he would've come up with a better racket. Or maybe he really wants to go down in history as a first loaded dice and crooked table salesman in the crypto-currency era? Kind of like Soapy Smith was for the Wild West? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soapy_SmithBut I still would like to know who's the cortex of the operation and what was the game plan. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
