I used to run Bitcoin but deleted it for unknown reasons.  I'm trying to re-install it and cannot get it to load.
I keep getting 'can't open blkindex.dat' This makes sense as there is no blkindex.dat file anywhere on my machine.

Obviously there is something wrong but hell if I know what it is.  

I'm running winXP if that helps. 

Thanks.

I will 2nd (3rd, 4th... whatever) this suggestion.  This would help the accounting tremendously.

and, stone man, wow, my condolences.

Ta,

Thanks for the reading material.  I'll look into it.


As to the bolded:  That is the big fallacy promulgated by the Monetarists which is nonsensical.  There is no logical reason why the money supply must increase at the same rate as economic output.  What is needed is greater resolution (divisibility) of the monetary unit.  With a more diverse market for goods of ever increasing quality and decreasing costs of production (to their commodity value lower bound, obviously) there is a need to refine the comparison of one item to the other in terms of the medium of exchange.  It is the arbitrage between the perceived value of the two items that the market is seeking to reduce to zero.  Any monetary unit with an arbitrary limit on division (say the dollar at $0.01) will fail as a means of comparison without revaluation.  This is ultimately why the Monetarists adopted the slow but steady inflation scheme as their preferred method.

Bitcoin has built into its structure nearly limitless divisibility.  Satoshi currently has 8 decimal places programmed in, but that number can be changed at will due to market pressures and the open-source nature of the software, if we're ever so fortunate to get to that point.

Ta,

B/c they can't tax it.

Ta,

Now we're beginning to talk marketplace.  It's too bad I don't eat marmalade. 

Ta,

Very useful, MG, thanks.  Spif looking stuff is nice, but data now is better than data later.

Ta,

And it's scarcity is a product of its demand. Therefore, owing to the law of supply and demand which derives solely from human desires of turning "what is" into "what I want," any gold pulled out of the ground is a product of human desire, and, by definition is NOT WASTE.  If the price and quantity demanded by the market are below the extraction cost for the miner then that demand will remain unmet.  Again, this is the opposite of waste.

Ta,

That means that the net difficulty actually dropped back to a normalized 176, from 244.  Generation rates should then improve.

Ta,

I agree with nearly everything you said, but I disagree, fundamentally, with the bolded.  Gold mining is not a waste of energy.  It is the opposite of waste, it is the measure of value people place in the 'utility of having gold as a medium of exchange' or a store of wealth, jewelry around their body parts or connectors on their home theater system.  If there was no demand for gold, the price would be zero.  Hence it is not a 'waste,' by definition.

I object strenuously to this idea, promulgated by the Monetarists, that the production of money is wasted capital which could be spent on other wealth-building projects.  It's a short-sighted argument which does not fully encompass the value we place in our money.

It's semantics, yes, but the negative connotations associated with the word "waste" is a tool of the money masters designed to confuse us and elevate their bankrupt system.

Ta,

That would be, in effect, no different than gold storage fees.  Cheaper, sure, but ultimately, you would be paying to maintain their infrastructure for off-site backup of your wallet.  That would be the cheapest service.  It would also be the least secure.  So, a real insurance plan like you originally suggested would be a premium on your ability to maintain your own wallet.  Those premiums would be higher but more secure/anonymous.

Ta,

It is why craigslist for bitcoins is an excellent idea.

ta,

Lew didn't solicit the article, I solicited him after seeing a reference to Bitcoin on the Daily Paul.  Came here, checked it out and thought about it for a few days before deciding to put something together.

Ta,

When they moved to that model the outcome was inevitable.... personal empire building.  If it continues to a point where it destroys the product, something else will rise to challenge it, as long as they don't use the gov't to enforce their 'right' to be the arbitrators of 'editorial standards.'

Ta,

North Florida. 

Ta,

Such is the problem of the entrepreneur, forever balancing fear and greed.  The early-adopters of any technology are due to make out well if that technology is accepted in the marketplace.  The amount of resolution built into Bitcoin will make it a much more liquid market than a physical commodity with similar valuations due to a limit on fungibility.

But, in order for anyone to make out like a bandit, as the thread implies, the market for Bitcoins needs to improve dramatically. 

Ta,

Ads are perfectly acceptable to me.  A smaller than 2% spread fee is acceptable as well.  I agree the site is coming along nicely.  Just put a bid up on the exchange yesterday. 

Ta,

And with the correction going on right now... most people call it 'recession' or 'depression' or 'slow-down' credit is being de-valued.  What is being destroyed right now is credit, but not money.  The AMB and M1 are rising, meaning the Fed has increased the size of the base money supply it is doing so to reflate the credit markets, but those markets are not needed right now, hence the value of them is falling and the price of commodities is rising in relation to its supply. [1]  Therefore, the commodity value of money is rising due to a liquidation of the malinvestment brought on by the manipulation of interest rates, which coordinate capital needs (commodities) through time.

The failing of many of the current crop of deflationists (Prechter, Mish, Denninger) is that they have this quaint notion that credit money is indistinguishable from commodity money [2] and the destruction of it means the destruction of commodity prices along with it.  They are wrong.  They are two distinct types of money and one can rise while the other falls.  This sends mixed pricing signals in the market and breeds all kinds of confusion, especially amongst economists, most of whom are morons.

Ta,

[1] - by holding steady, ie. the CCI is in a tight trading range, commodities are rising in value vs. the amount of credit available. 
[2] - in a fiat system, the monetary base, as defined by the central bank's balance sheet acts as the 'commodity' money.

Excellent breakdown.  That helps satisfy my worries about the process by which one type of money can supplant another.  I have not read Man, Economy and State (though I really should) and therefore, missed that portion of Rothbard's analysis. 

Thanks again.

Ta,

I'm usually a big enough splash of cold-water.  The recommendations to LRC and Mises.org happen after a fair bit of ground work has been laid.  What I've found is as events unfold people start coming to you looking for answers b/c you've established yourself as an 'expert' on these things that they've never spent a minute caring about.

Ta,