In geometry, the corrolary was: a wannabe Euclides with the dullest pencil can prove the highest number of theorems. 

Yeah, I do agree with you to a large extent. Intel has a much better control of their sales channel than the AMD. Intel is also better at publishing the utilities that allow for testing the CPU without disassembling the heatsinks.

But historically Intel also had problems with the resellers of their whitebox server line. (I'm not sure if they are still making the whole servers, for sure they do whitebox motherboards that carry no prominent "Intel" mark.)

In summary I'd say that the current version of this maxim would be: "You are much less likely to get fired for buying Intel than for buying AMD."

By the way, on our tests IOMMU in 64-bit AMDs provides generally better performance than the comparable Intel technology. However we use custom-written database engines, not the obvious market leading ones. Overall I'm pretty much agnostic in this battle, we support Intel&AMD&others 32&64-bit, Intel Itanium, IBM POWER&z/Arch,Sun/Fujitsu/Oracle SPARC. We still have happy paying customers for Digital Alpha,HP PA/RISC, only the SGI MIPS machines dropped out of support.

I think that Intel makes and markets them only for the very narrow niche where some "enterprise software" licenses are sold "per-socket".

The scientific equivalent of this is the following theorem:

You can draw a straight line through any three points provided that the line is thick enough.

Q.E.D.

For the purpose of criminal law the issuer is clear: it was Gavin Andresen until 2011-07-03, then the next two tranches were signed by "fabianhjr".

https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blame/master/src/main.cpp

and look for lines 1309 to 1318.

Edited to add: I mean Gavin is a very smart guy. He's not going to get involved in anything related to the sales and promotion of Bitcoin. He even explicitly said that something like "as an investment Bitcoin should be considered high-risk and suitable only for the few". He also closed his company before he had to sign off on anything related to the audits or tax liability and now works for a properly set-up limited liability corporation.

I'm half expecting that in the future the next tranches of Bitcoin will be signed off by some unknown Arsene Lupin who will access the github only through Tor and be essentially nontraceable.

For now the blame is too easy to pin on one person. Even the URL above says "blame". (Sorry, weak joke. The alternative revision control implementation has "praise" in place of "blame").

How about we gentlemanly split it in the middle: sometime beteween 2100 and 2104 the number of
mined coins will reach 20,999,999.000,000,00 ? The last coin will never be mined to completion.

I think that Lolcust and ArtForz provided a good counter-example by their GeistGeld alt-chain that uses SNTP for time synchronization. The objective is not "exact-same" system clock, but the system clock differences that are within currently acceptable norms: I think it is still one minute in the insurance industry and in something close to one second in the finance industry.

I'm sorry I misunderstood the difference in time-keeping between "getwork" and "getmemorypool".

The argument that I have: it appears that "getmemorypool" is a step towards allowing the miner to record a reasonably accurate time of finding the block. Which is in turn a step towards more tight and accurate timekeeping in the whole block chain.

Your patch just perpetuates the existing bad situation where the block times are untrustworthy and acausal.

Thank you for your time and understanding.
 

That would be sometime late in year 2140.

https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Controlled_Currency_Supply

So more like: My great^N-grand-children will start selling it.

In the contract law yes. Not in the criminal law. Please re-read the links provided by John Nagle pertaining to the USA. Similar distincion exists in the laws of other countries. The criminal law always focuses on the promoter and the process of selling.

With emphasis on "seems". You should be able to use the db_* utilities provided:

1) you build them with the same build process that the "core developers" use.
2) add DB_CONFIG file into the %APPDATA%\Bitcoin directory that exactly emulates the flags set in the DB_ENV calls in the bitcoin source code.

db_* utilities give fairly descriptive error message about "database environment mismatch" if you don't follow the step (1) correctly. However they are helpless about (2) because the "core developers" decided to hide the database logs in the %APPDATA%\Bitcoin\database subdirectory. Without correct DB_CONFIG file you are pretty much assured corruption, unless the *.dat files were properly flushed and closed by the main bitcoin executable.

"region error" means that one of the __db.00? files got damaged. At the moment I can't find the sensible description of "Resource device" error.

No matter what, the most likely cases:

1) bad disk drive (failing SSD?)
2) some real-time antivirus corrupting files

I just read your original post. You corrupted your files yourselves. You used db_dump compiled with different compiler settings which has a different layout of structures in the "region" and "log" files. It is pretty much impossible to compile Berkeley DB the same way as the core development group without using the "gitian" build system that they are using.

Check out the content of the file "db.log". It has a plain text messages about what was the problem discovered with the databases.

I don't want to start a pointless flamewar, but could you plese answer my question:

What does "rational economic analysis" say about the existence of the city of Las Vegas,Nevada,USA?

1) The City of Lost Wages should be a small, dusty hamlet.
2) There's more than one definition of "rational".
3) Something else, please explain.

Thank you very much.

Test your disk drive thorougly. Watch the EventViewer for possible errors.

It appears that you have an SSD primary drive. Be aware that bitcoin hits SSDs in their weakest point: it creates large log files that are never read.

I would just back up the system, do a security erase of the SSD (the tools are on ArsTechnica or some other technology enthusiast site) which will recondition its wear leveller maps, then reinstall from the original Dell disks. an operating system with TRIM support. I'm assuming that your SSD supports TRIM. If not, then it probably not worth using for anything important, unless you know exactly the drive access patterns and how to monitor its block failure rate.



 

Post the whole non-working but runnable code snippet. Otherwise it is hard to guess.

Edit: yeah, I'm slow. Change "true" to "JSON::true".

Pardon me jumping in, but I have one question to the audience of this thread:

Is there ANY open source PHP bulletin board software that consistently uses on PDO (PHP Data Objects) to access the database? This would mean that PHP engine needs to be at version 5.1 or newer.

Thank you, and again apologise for the intrusion.

It is much easier that you make it. Pretty much everything on Earth that is fungible is being traded using FIX protocol. With the curious exception of Bitcoin, where the primitive one-directional JSON-RPC rules. The multi-exchange trading software exists for over a decade.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financial_Information_eXchange
http://www.fixprotocol.org/

It is very curious form of myopia or gazing at their own navel. It is almost like the Bitcoin community is somehow trying to reinvent the whell and is hell bent on square whells.

I'm fine with 0%. I really have bigger fishes to fry. There were/are people planning to steal major sums by offering modified bitcoin software to various businesses.

There is at least one more hidden person to share the badge. One of the moderators undeleted my posts after they were reported for moderation and hastily deleted the same night I made them.

Anyway, I'm hoping that everyone stayed safe and nobody was defrauded or injured.

Also, I'm very thankfull that this forum continues to allow to voice the dissenting opinions.