Gavin, my point is this:

The integer 2100000000000001 is within the range that is represented EXACTLY in double-precision floating point. On the other hand, the number 2100000.000000001 is not (and cannot be) represented exactly in double precision floating point (because it has a decimal fraction part that cannot be exactly represented in the binary encoding used for floating point).

The limit for exact integer representation in a double precision floating point number is 9,007,199,254,740,992 which is sufficient for Bitcoin's needs.

Perhaps you understood that I was saying that, and are pointing out that we are at the mercy of JSON libraries that might not correctly handle the conversion from integer to double-precision.

If the libraries are that buggy, it's pretty sad.

The child's room should be a place where the child isn't required to clean up. They need a space of their own, and it's good for them to discover and learn for themselves the advantages and disadvantages of cleaning.

Just register as an advertiser and take a look. A site owner should become familiar with how their site is presented to advertisers.

Sure, you are playing it cautious. But I see a risk of analysis paralysis setting in: trying to tie up all the loose ends while the difficulty rises and the window of opportunity starts to close...

Anyway I think a collaborative venture is a great thing to do. But it's going to have to be nimble to be successful.

It's interesting how the transaction gets split up, then later quite a few pieces of the original transaction come together again. But the splits are probably the change that goes back to the same wallet, so it's not so surprising.

And that suggests a way to determine (with a moderate degree of confidence) which part of a transaction is the "payment" and which is the "change".

Stephan's philosophy (sorry I don't have a link) is simply that if you don't wish to care for your children, you should allow others to do so. There's no need for punishment, or an arbitrary minimum standard of care.

For sure, any obligation sucks, and I would not support any obligation. It cannot be a moral imperative to let others care for your children if you don't want to (or cannot) care for them.

However, children do not choose to be born, and harm to children or neglect of children is such a terrrible thing that I expect a free society would evolve the strongest of social pressures to ensure that unwanted children were looked after by people who do care about them.

I get what you're saying, but I don't think the layman wants their cash controlled by mathematicians either. Nor does the layman want the burden of learning what a crypto-currency might be. How about:

Bitcoin is a currency controlled by you instead of by a greedy wunch of bankers.

There's a thread at their forum, seeking an alternative to PayPal for donations. Naturally I suggested Bitcoin:
http://freedomainradio.com/BOARD/forums/p/29276/225000.aspx

Site owners don't want the loading of their pages to be slowed down. Page load speed is even one of the factors in a website's position on Google.

But sure, why not increase the limit for the skyscraper ad to 50kB or 60kB in return for reducing it for the smaller ads.

Or, mining might be worthwhile if the price of bitcoins has risen enough. Or, it might be worthwhile if transaction fees are charged. Or, the difficulty rise might pause when the Northern Hemisphere summer arrives.

There are plenty of unknowns, so I think this should be considered an adventure rather than a charted course.

As you hinted, it doesn't really make sense to overlay a log graph onto a linear graph.

I'll send you 10 BTC if you finish this artwork within 10 days AND you explicitly release it to Public Domain AND the USB stick is fixed.

If you have enough bits of floating point precision, you can represent integers safely and exactly. But you can't do the same for decimal fractions, due to the binary representation within the floating point value.

So if you represent the bitcoins as bitdust (2,100,000,000,000,000) rather than as coins (21,000,000.00000000) it should work unless the library is extremely broken (in which case it's likely to be extremely broken for integers too).

But ... what about when the whole world is using bitcoin and the precision gets extended beyond 51 bits?

I found an amusing quote from Satoshi in this forum, dated 12 December 2009:


Of course, avoiding a hashing arms race presumes that there are no "bad guys".

If we could all agree to report our bitcoin balance honestly and not double-spend, the Bitcoin system wouldn't even need computers.

But you can't cash them out, so that's doesn't mean much. It will be interesting to see what the black market rate is, but it will be much less.

"What are Bitcoins?" at the FreeDomainRadio forum:
http://freedomainradio.com/BOARD/forums/t/29271.aspx


I doubt whether even 1% of libertarians have heard of Bitcoin.

Clarity for newbies is important. I think this label should be "Your receiving address".

It's not about smart or stupid, it's about getting heard above the 10,000 other things that are clamouring for his attention.

He has a huge following, many of whom would be very interested in Bitcoin. I'll post something in their forum.

Remember when the Bitcoin market cap passed one million dollars? Some guy posted that this meant nothing, because his uncle's house was worth more than a million dollars.

Some time soon, the Bitcoin market cap is going to exceed the value of that guy's uncle's house.