Everyone said the world was flat too.  "Everyone" is a very weak argument.  Payments are not money transfers.  Never have been.  Paying for a convetion center doesn't require a money transfer.  It requires a payment. 

Now if the Bitcoin Foundation ran a business where persons could deposit cash or other monetary value and the Foundation would make a PAYMENT ON THEIR BEHALF to a convention center .... THAT would be money transmission.

Your logical train is:
a) Bitcoin Foundation had a conference
b) Bitcoin Foundation received a C&D
ergo the conference caused the C&D.

I ate tacos.
I got a notice from the state of VA regarding money transmission
ergo eating tacos results in regulatory action.

Then find someone willing to relay and mine it.  Problem solved.

Nothing in 0.8.2 PREVENTS you from doing that.  Some people might not share your view that it is a beneficial use of a critical resource.  Should they be forced to relay and mine your transactions?

0.8.2. doesn't make any transaction regardless of size prohibited.  No block will be rejected even if it is 100% full of spammy garbage. 

However just because you have FREEDOM of speech doesn't mean others have an OBLIGATION to listen.  Likewise just because you can create spammy garbage doesn't mean that other nodes should be forced to relay it.

No.  That is why this is all a much ado about nothing.

If people want to create sub dust transactions, then they can find people willing to relay and mine them.   Problem solved.  The dust threshold is merely a default.  It doesn't invalidate any blocks. 

The reality (and the need for the gnashing of teeth and FUD about the death of Bitcoin) is some people simply WANT to spam the network with transactions which will NEVER be redeemed.  They also want to do it for free and have the cost of keeping those transactions in the UXTO forever paid by someone else.

Imaginary-land.

None of that is right.  Spending money is spending money it isn't money transmission.   Otherwise anyone, anyplace, any purchase would always be money transmission.  Funds always move in the sale of goods and services.

CA contention is that the Bitcoin Foundation is running a business that for profit transmits money.  Obviously that is false but it had nothing to do with spending too much money.  I mean did you honestly think this is the first business in the history of the CA to pay for a convention there.

If that sounds "like Cypress" then you probably need to read more.

Example.
Today in v0.8.2 the default min fee on low priority tx is 0.1mBTC (10,000 S) and thus the dust threshold is 5,430 S.
Current exchange rate ~$100 thus the min fee on low priority tx is ~$0.01 and dust threshold is ~$0.005 (half a penny).

Some day in the future the exchange rate has risen to $2,500 and thus some future version of the client has lowered the min mandatory fee on low priority tx to 0.004 mBTC (400 S).  This makes the dust threshold 217 S.  The purchasing power of those amounts are still ~$0.01 and $0.005.

Now how exact is that "like Cypress"?

Use the exchange account on your PC and setup 2FA on your smartphone.

If you have 2FA on your smartphone then understand that by accessing the exchange on your phone you have put both factors (account password & OTP) on the same device which reduces security.

It isn't hardcoded it is based on min mandatory tx fee.  If a node is set to only relay/mine low priority tx with a min mandatory of 0.1 mBTC (10,000 S) then the dust is 54.3% of that (5430).  IF a node is set to relay/mine low priority txs with a min mandatory fee of 0.01 (1,000 S) then the dust is 54.3% of that (543 S).  If a node is set to relay/mine low priority txs with a min fee of 0 mBTC (0 S) then the dust is 54.3% of that (0 S).

If miner X won't accept include low priority tx without a fee of Y then that same miner will reject tx which attempt to create transactions that are less than half of Y.

No none of that is in the raw transaction.  That is simply formatting to make it easier for humans (like you) to parse the transaction. The format is somewhat complex but simplified version is take only the data above remove all formatting, white space , brackets, quotes, and all text.  That is the transaction.

Well if the author is Aaron Greenspan he is the CEO of a fiat payment processing company called Think Computing so at the very least his view may not be unbiased.

Also the bolded part is somewhat ambiguous.  Will someone, somewhere, at sometime potentially go to jail over some crime related to an interaction between fiat banking world and Bitcoin?  Probably.  If he means specifically someone from the foundation will go to jail as a result of this C&D? Well his company filed a lawsuit against CA over money transmitter laws being Unconstitutional, a lawsuit which as far as public records show has gone nowhere fast in two years.  So while he may honestly think someone "may go to jail" it isn't all that uncertain how accurate his prediction will be.

Only if ...
a quantum computer capable of implementing Shor's algorithm on a 256 bit key scale (think tens of thousands of qubits)
AND
said computer can break keys in a reasonable timeframe at reasonable cost
AND
only if the public key is known

the last part is relatively simple assurance.  Don't reuse an address.

This has nothing to do with blockchain size however even the PRUNED blockchain needs the UXTO.  In economical transactions outputs have a high probability of being spent (become inputs on new transactions) thus while the blockchain may grow very fast the UXTO grows much slower.  This is a far more critical resource and will remain so even in the block limit is raised 10x or 100x larger.  

Uneconomical transactions (transactions which would require a fee larger than the value of the output to spend) are almost never spent.  Roughly half of the UXTO is transactions below 1 mBTC and roughly a quarter is below 0.01mBTC.  Since users will probably never spend them they remain unspent outputs and thus can't be pruned away.  They are necessary to validate blocks on the off chance someone ever does spend them in the future.  Nodes can't forget about them because it would be erasing Bitcoins and worse if some nodes did and some didn't then you would have a hardfork.

This means every node pays a perpetual cost for a transactions which never made economical sense to begin with.  

0.8.2 doesn't prevent spending dust it prevents (for nodes which agree to the default) relaying and including in blocks transaction which create NEW dust where dust is defined at 54.3% of min mandatory fee on low priority transactions.   

The joys of governmental interference and regulatory overhead.  It is highly improbable that the foundation meets any regulatory requirements for oversight as a MSB anymore than a trade organization for prepaid credit cards does.  In case it isn't clear they don't. 

Still the state has unalateral power to take everything you own, everything you will own, your good name, and even your freedom and/or life so stupid, pointless, massively overreaching it doesn't matter you need to drop everything and respond.

Of course there is no consequence for the state getting it wrong.  If the state had to pay costs + 20% + $5,000 punitive penalty for any improper notice there would be a lot less improper notices.  Then again it costs the state absolutely nothing.  Hell they could send a cease and desist to every human being in the country and all it would cost is the taxpayers of CA slightly more taxes.

What you want, or I want, or even the Bitcoin Foundation wants is utterly irrelivent.  You can call Bitcoin anything you want but governments around the world aren't that stupid.  If it "acts like a currency" and is "used like a currency" and has "currency like properties" what do you think THEY are going to classify it as.

I mean it would be like saying this Marijuana.  Take "bath salts" as an example.  It wasn't marketed as a drug, wasn't sold as a drug, it didn't provide instructions on how to use it as a drug however people started using it like a drug and what did various governments classify it as?  A controlled substance or a household product?

The only way xCoin doesn't get classified as a currency by various governments is if it lacks the properties of currency.  So something which isn't fungible, liquid, accepted as a medium or exchange, and doesn't store value probably won't be classified as a currency, then again why would you want to use that?

To export private keys you need the encryption passphrase.  If you have the encryption passphrase you don't need to do all that nonsense you can just use the wallet.

The QT wallet uses rather robust encryption of private keys (ask anyone who forgot even part of their passphrase).  The passphrase is hashed SHA-256 a few thousands times (exact number depends on computing power of the system running your wallet).  This generates the 256 bit key which is used by AES for the actual encryption and decryption of the wallet.  There are no backdoors and with a sufficiently complex passphrase it is beyond brute force possibility due to key hardening.  Of course all of this is open source so one could just look at the source code to realize the poster is just make up garbage.

Exactly and Bitcoin is more like a protocol than a mere static implementation of code.

I mean we all know http is doomed and the world quickly moved on to ... er wait no we are still using http today.  Protocols tend to have a longer lifespan.  TCP is almost 30 years old.

The threat of Quantum computers isn't breaking SHA256 (or any hashing algorithm) it is in theory performing a faster than brute force attack on public key cryptography such as ECDSA used by Bitcoin but the system in the OP isn't a threat to Bitcoin for a variety of reasons.

There is a difference between the freedom of speech and the requirement of someone to listen.  If you feel dust transactions are "valuable" then simply find people who are willing to relay and mine them for you.  Problem solved.   0.8.2 simply prevents nodes who don't share the "value" of massive UXTO bloat (a cost shared by all for the benefit of a few) to not actively assist you in that goal.

You do understand that dust is linked to min tx fee on low priority txs right?  That fee has declined by a factor of 100x from 0.01 to 0.0001 BTC as the exchange rate has risen.  There is nothing to indicate this won't continue to happen.   If the tx has economical value then miners have lowered their fees to below that and thus what was previously dust is no longer dust.  Also 0.8.2 doesn't prevent the spending of dust it simply prevents (for nodes that follow the default value) the creation of dust with the current default threshold set at 54.3% of the min fee


 Dust will always be dust. Low value regardless of if you measure it in fiat equivalence of the amount of goods and services which can be purchased.  They are worthless because it costs more to spend than it is worth spending.  This means (and the blockchain is good history of this) that it won't be spent and every node keeps it in the UXTO forever.  Nobody benefits, everyone pays additional overhead of being a peer. 

If you found a penny on the street but the only way to spend it was to mail it (say to your mortgage/rent holder) at a cost of $0.42?  Spend $0.43 to pay down $0.01 of your rent?  Would you?  Sure it has >0 value but seeing as it is worth less than the transaction cost if your only way to spend it was to mail at a higher cost you never would.  Now imagine everyone in the world had to keep track of the fact that you have that penny ... forever.  That is Bitcoin.

This polls like this only highlight a misconception of Bitcoin.  There is no "network" as if it is a single unified structure; the "network" is a loose association of independent nodes.  If you think the default dust threshold of 0.0543 mBTC (5430 satoshis) is too high then change the min mandatory fee required for your node to relay (and/or mine) low priority transactions.  The min mandatory fee on low priority txs in 0.8.2 is 0.1 mBTC (10,000 S).  The dust threshold is 54.3% of the min fee.  There is a reason for this as it is the relationship between the size of an input and the resulting transaction for the most common form (2 inputs, 1 output, 1 change output).  Still I wish the developers had gone with the slightly less precise but easier to explain 50% ("dust is half the min fee").  If you change the min mandatory fee for low priority transaction you can change the dust threshold.

If you run a node which has a min mandatory fee of 0.10 mBTC (10,000 S) to relay transactions CONGRATULATIONS you are using the default dust threshold of 0.0543 mBTC (5430 S)    0.1 * 54.3% = 0.0543
If you run a node which has a min mandatory fee of 0.04 mBTC ( 4,000 S) to relay transactions CONGRATULATIONS you have lowered the dust threshold to 0.02172 mBTC (2172 S)    0.04 * 54.3% = 0.02172
If you run a node which has a min mandatory fee of 0.25 mBTC (25,000 S) to relay transactions CONGRATULATIONS you have raised the dust threshold to 0.1629 mBTC (16,290 S)    0.25 * 54.3% = 0.1629

No.