Solid coin calculator.

Daily Revenue = HashRate (in MH/s) * KingSolidCoinReductionFactor * 0 * 0 * 0^0 * 60 * 60 * 24

Welcome.

IMHO Bitcoin is the offshore's offshore.

Miners are free to choose whatever transactions they want to include or exclude.  They can even mine empty blocks if they want less tx fee revenue.  The bitcoind provides numerous API calls to give miners flexibility in deciding how many tx to include, min fees, how many free tx, max block size, etc.

In miners are in a pool it is the pool operating setting these.

Good idea. 

There isn't enough information to answer but ...

if the tx is a high priority tx (based on age, size, and all outputs 0.01 BTC of more) then it likely will be included by a miner as a courtesey within a dozen blocks or so.  Could be more, could be less.

If the tx is low priority and as a result the lack of a fee violates the anti-spam/DOS rules then it may never be included in a block, it may not even be relayed to other nodes if your peers drop it as spam.

The genesis block wasn't ever "intentionally" unspendable.  It was an oversight however if future versions of the client "fixed" that oversight and earlier versions didn't then it would hard fork the network.

Technically it could be "fixed" in a hard fork "safe' manner but given the limited impact it likely never will.

Possibly however if you by extremely back luck (1 in ~4 billion) mistype an address which actually ends up being a valid but unknown address the most likely scenario is nobody every (not today, not tomorrow, not in 5 billion years when our sun burns out) produces the private key which corresponds to that valid but unknown address.

Hint: the odds of someone randomly producing a private key corresponding to that address is the same as the odds of someone producing a private key which corresponds to any known/active address which for all intents and purposes is ~0.0%.

The minimum mandatory fee FOR LOW PRIORITY txs is an anti-DOS mechanism. If it was modified to allow you to spam the network with massive amounts of tiny low value tx at low/no cost it would also allow an attacker to do the same thing.

While the fee may be lowered again in the future it can't be lowered to a point where there is negligible cost for tx of dubious value as that would undermine its anti-DOS purpose.  BTW it was lowered to the current amount when Bitcoin broke through $20 (the first time).  So lowering it to 0.0001 when the exchange rate is above $100 would provide roughly the same anti-DOS protection.

You can send tx without any fee if:
a) the input to the tx are "1 bitcoin day" old (high priority)
b) the total size of the tx is 10KB or less
c) each output is 0.01 BTC or more.

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

Remember all of the above applies only to the ANTI-DOS min mandatory fee.  High priority txs meeting the a,b,c criteria above are not REQUIRED to include a fee however miners are free to choose which tx to include in a block and generally will choose paying tx over free tx so high priority tx which don't include any fee may see the confirmation of the tx delayed by hours.  Low priority tx which violate the ANTI-DOS rules (requires running a custom/patched client) may see their tx never confirmed.

Maybe they feel they have too many coins ...

Probably around three fifty.

google authenticator does support "event based" codes (HOTP) although most site use the time based (TOTP) codes.  bitfloor for example uses HOTP.

https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4226

Android phones since version 3.0? have supported real-time full file system encryption and the decryption key is scrubbed from memory when the phone locks.  It is not enabled by default you will need to enable it in phone settings.  Lastly yubikeys are difficulty to copy but not impossible.  Researchers have removed private keys from FIPS certified HSM (the kind used by ATMs to authenticate messages from bank network).

If you are hyper paranoid setup MtGox to use a google authenticator code for login and a yubikey code for withdrawals.

Those are the often theorized but rarely seen antiBitcoins.  When an antiBitcoin and a Bitcoin collide they annihilate each other and are converted into energy.  Little known fact is that rogue antiBitcoins are the most common cause for wallet "corruption".

Bitcoin isn't only about mining.  It would be like saying "I would like to get started in gold but I don't have an excavator".   

Honestly mining is a zero sum game and the network is well protected.  With low barriers to entry and an unlimited number of new miners willing to accept lower and lower returns it isn't that interesting.

Make a service that supports the Bitcoin community and you will do something interest and maybe very profitable.

Just kh/s or khps.  Using both p and / would be like saying mp/h (miles per per hour).

I would love to buy some FUNNY Bitcoin t-shirts.  Got tons of funny nerdy/programmer shirts but haven't seen any "Bitcoin LOLZ" shirts.  Come on I got coins burning in my pocket. 

I see Elwar is a better poker player than me.

are you serious?

Unless on the next difficulty adjustment the block reward becomes negative it is not possible to reach $100 before total money supply reaches $1B.

So for the record: $1B.

Exactly.  That is above my paygrade.  This is one of those questions where if you ask 3 lawyers you will get three different answers.  Ultimately it gets decided in court.

Why?  If the exchange rate falls to $20 (or difficulty increases by a factor of 10) why not just imagine up a higher hashrate and make even more "profit"?  I think you could install a couple of quantum doublers and vortex fans and get those "rigs" up to 500 GH/s each pretty easy.

Clarification.  An LLC (or incorporation) doesn't protect the company.  It provides liability protection for the owners.  The reality is that like most Bitcoin based companies Bitfloor doesn't have any "real" (tangible) assets.  You can't get blood from a stone.  Unlike a company which has warehouses, inventory, office equipment, etc which can be liquidiated Bitfloor assets would be limited to the brand (which would be destroyed in a bankruptcy), and the code plus any operating capital.  Bitfloor has paid out excess operating capital on a quarterly basis so I doubt you are getting more there.

The reality is a lawsuit is in nobody best interest.  Between court costs, legal fees (including Bitfloor's legal fees which will deplete operating capital) even if one got a judgement for the full amount it simply means Bitfloor would be forced into bankruptcy and creditors would be lucky to get 5 cents on the dollar.  The liquidated value of Bitfloor (as opposed to operating value) is very low.

For those ganshing at the teeth for a lawsuit here is a practical excercise.

1) Estimate the cash on hand (both BTC & USD) that bitfloor has
2) Estimate what the assets (code base, customer lists) of bitfloor could be sold for in liquidation (note most assets liquidate for 10% to 30% of face value in BK).
3) Add 1 + 2 together and subtract bitfloor estimated legal fees.

3 is the total liquidation value of bitfloor.  Divide this by the current amount owed (in USD) and that is % each creditor could expect to receive in liquidation.  Now subtract legal fees.

It doesn't matter if it is "reasonable" or not it can't be changed.  It is what it is.  Today the amount of economic activity on the network likely doesn't warrant that level of security (like buying a $5K safe to protect $1K in gold) but the move to ASICS is essential.

"Bad guys" will always have access to ASICs, one can't simply pretend away that threat.  Today if someone wanted to attack Bitcoin they wouldn't build a GPU farm they would fab some chips and build a smaller easier to manage ASIC farm.  It wouldn't matter if BFL and Avalon didn't exist an attacker would STILL go that route because it is the most economical.

The high reward paid to miners indirectly funds the R&D necessary to make the move the transition to ASICs.  Hopefully mining will be a large enough "pie" that we will see 4 to 6 well capitalized ASIC suppliers.  2013 is going to be an interesting year.  If the network has moved to ASICs by the end of the year it permanently removes that "cheat card" vulnerability.  Sure an attacker can still use ASICs to attack Bitcoin (but they always could) however they wouldn't be able to gain a massive economic advantage (i.e. $2M in ASICS 51% attacking $20M in GPUs).