Very nice.  

You may wish to add some extra warnings just below the divider.  Yes you did indicate the private key is used to access the money but honestly I could see someone printing the entire thing out and passing it around (dishonest person scans the private key).  Also it might be a good idea for the portion below the divider to ONLY have the private key.  Despite your warning I could see people sharing the private key to check the funds (for example you need your ATM PIN in order to check your ATM balance).

Something like

Alternative you may wish to change this into 3 separate pages.  
1) Basic instructions (use some nice icons & diagrams).  
2) The donate print out
3) The secret key page (w/ plenty of warnings, recommendations make a copy, keep it safe, lock it up, etc)

and?

"I will not go down in history as the guy who ran away from his responsibilities."

Yes you will.  You owe over $1M and have indicated you have no ability or intent to repay it.  The only outcomes that isn't "ran away from responsibilities" is repayment of the money you owe.  Period.  Your long rationalization on how/why the theft occurred is meaningless.  A guy on trial for raping someone can hardly use as a defense that when the date started it wasn't his intent to rape anyone and he didn't realize until after the attack that he might have hurt someone. 

You did intend to steal.
You did believe Pirate would pay and thus profit handsomely (even if only a small % of bets actually paid) despite having no intent to pay if you lost.
You did cause others to suffer a loss.
You do not have any intention on repaying those you owe in full.

What part of that seems like responsible?  Are you delusional enough to think merely posting on a forum with no intent to repay, somehow makes you responsible?  

314% APR is never legit.  No contract based on a usurious loan would be enforceable (beyond a scammer tag) thus the contract has no real value.

Would you loan $500 to a random person you met in the real world based on nothing more than their promise to pay you back in the future? 

Matthew indicated in the "I need help" thread" that he believed Pirate would pay and the profits from him winning the bet would help him with some real world financial problems.    It doesn't sound like a "joke".  If he had won he would have sought losers to pay.   He just never had the ability or intent to pay if he lost.  Then again he didn't think he would lose so it was a no consequence method to make money.

The purpose is to make it difficult for OUTSIDERS to track transactions through the blockchain.  If everyone used a single address and always sent change back to that address it would be beyond trivial for an entity (banks, law enforcement, governments, your boss, etc) to track anything and everything you spent money on, down to when and where, and your current net worth.

The "best" chain is the one with the highest combined difficulty.  So a longer but easier chain won't be seen as the "best/longest".

The only way to have the longer chain is to do more work then the current longest chain.

My understanding is that your coins are lost.

Well which is it Bank Wire or internal Bank Transfer?

Bank Wire =/= ACH
Bank Wire =/= Account to Account Transfers, PopMoney, p2p transfer (name may vary by bank or network)

Internal Bank Transfers or ACH are much easier reversed than Bank Wires (which usually require a court order or other legal action).  Just ask Tradehill the risks of ACH reversals.

Don't bother trying to use some logic.  It is is just hope and magic.   People buying tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands of coins hoping it follows the same path as Bitcoin and they become millionaires within a year or two.

So your revolutionary "p2p" concept is for people to send money with no recourse to a central authority (you).   Now with absolutely no legit profit motive you are either a humanitarian or there is a risk of loss.  If the risk of loss is higher than the house edge of trusted games (i.e. >2% chance you will take the coins and run) it is actually less profitable to play your game.


From your reddit post I was expecting solve clever use of multi-sig transactions but no it is "send coins and pray you get some back ".

Probably closer to $100M in annual sales required for process time in current gen Fabs.  One can think of a Fab as a $10B investment that continually depreciates in face value.  Kinda like a mining bond but on the billion dollar scale. It has to throw off utterly insane cashflow in the early years just to keep up with depreciation.

Still AMD annual revenue is ~$7B.  Global demand for ASICs is probably <$20M.  Essentially a rounding error.  If we ever get to a point where annual mining rewards (subsidy + fee) is in the tens of millions then maybe a smaller established semiconductor company might leverage connections to get into the market but even that wouldn't be worth it for a company the size of AMD.

As Danny pointed out it is M1 vs M0.  M1 is probably a better metric as under the extreme (and for the record highly implausible) scenario of Bitcoin replacing all currencies in the world not everyone is going to want to retain person local possession of their coins.  Banks holding Bitcoin reserves would emerge so if BTC replaced all global currencies we are likely talking about M1 not just M0.  Still not sure where the $12.5T comes from because M1 is closer to $50T.  Maybe they have some other metric they are using which is looser than M0 and tighter than M1.  Who knows.  For this purpose it doesn't really matter. $5T, $12.5T, $50T.  Bitcoin would do just fine.  It will be legal, social, and political challenges not technical issues that prevent this scenario.

Shouldn't this be in offf topic or trashcan?

Why 100 and not 1 or 1 trillion?  The number of units is arbitrary. Why is an ounce an ounce or a meter a meter*?


* Curious thing about units (you can safely ignore unless you want some context on how arbitrary any unit really is).  A meter was originally defined as 1/10,000,000th of the distance between the equator and the north pole.  The obvious flaw in this is the difficulty in accurately measuring the quarter circumference of a very large object.  As science improved it became obvious that "the meter" was the wrong size. The distance from the equator to the North Pole is about 0.2% more. So a meter was redefined to be 1/299,792,458 of the distance light travels in a second.  The obvious question is why 299,792,458 m/s why not 300,000,000.  It was decided that changing the unit to radically (a 0.069% increase) would have had too many complications.  So we (likely for a very long time are "stuck" with 299,792,458 m/s as the speed of light.  Now if one was making a base unit today with the high precision  that is available making a NuMeter be exactly 1/100,000th or 1/1,000,000th of the distance light travels in a second is would seem a better choice ... until you realize that a second has been redefined multiple times and is currently the clumsy value equal to "the duration of 9,192,631,770 periods of the radiation corresponding to the transition between the two hyperfine levels of the ground state of the caesium 133 atom".  Of course 9,192,631,770 periods not 9,192,631,769 or 9,192,631,771.

Anyone can sign anyone elses key.  You can't even prevent someone from signing your key if you don't want them too.  Also most PGP clients allow the option to sign offline.  This allows you to secure the key against replacement (a PGP attack vector) but keep that signing private.  Lastly different people have diffrent criteria for signing other people keys.  Hell some people just sign keys to avoid the warning message about potentially sending to an unknown party.

So yes you are making too much of it.

Don't worry he won't pay anyone back thus you won't have to poutrage. 

Make a pull.  I do know someone has been working to replace a lot of the literals with constants.

210,000, 2016, and 50 should likely all be constants.

210K is roughly 4 years @ 10 min per block.  6 per hour * 24 hours per day * 365.25 days per year * 4 years = 210,384. 

Once again a somewhat arbitrary choice but you need to start somewhere.  A smaller subsidy interval (say halving every ~3 years)  would have increased the early incentive, and a larger interval (say halving every ~10 years) would have reduced it.  He decided on 4 years.  Is 4 better than 3 or 6?  Who knows.  It likely doesn't matter that much.  Four years is long enough for the economy to prepare and adjust for the halving while short enough to provide an incentive (at each halving) for new users.

Remember this hadn't been done before.  When making a protocol you have to pick some parameters as a start.  I don't know but I imagine he probably went back and forth with a couple different set of constants. At some point you have to commit to some value so you can get working on the entire rest of the protocol/network.

Was 50 BTC per block halving every 210K blocks, w/ a block interval target of 10 minutes, and difficulty adjustment every 2016 blocks a  good choice?  It will be exciting to find out.