What I want is a solution to the problem discussed in this thread. I'm not sure how what you're suggesting would accomplish that.
My defense of a sunset limit has been based on two things: It not being nearly as horrible and evil as some people seem to think and it being a potential solution to the problem. If the problem did not exist (which I still believe it does), or if someone could offer up a better solution, I would not support the implementation of said limit.

You say "market readjustment", I say "significant and harmful economic disruption". Both would be accurate.

"Don't try to solve the problem until it actually starts causing trouble".
Meh, I guess it'll be easier to convince people when they're actually staring death in the face, so to speak.

It makes absolutely no difference whether they were lost or not. The problem remains the same.

You seem to have missed something important: A great many people are myopic gits. If you want to create a stable system with a large user base, it has to be myopic git-proof.

I suppose gmaxwells idea (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=20799.msg267555#msg267555) would actually be a better solution. If you leave a pile of money lying around in a crowded mall completely unguarded where anyone can see and take it, you can't reasonable expect it to still be there when you get back.

Oh, and some obligatory sarcasm:
You want P2SH? Create a new currency and convince people to reprogram their apps, transfer their money and start over from scratch trying to promote it to the public.

How dare people try to keep everybody's money from becoming worthless!
Seriously, if you don't think there's a problem, explain why. If you have a better solution, explain it.
So far the only argument you've come up with is "Nu-uh!"

So you'd rather have absolute control of worthless money than slightly less than absolute control of valuable and useful money?
I'm not saying that this problem is inevitable or, if it occurs, fatal, but your post is just such a laughable oversimplification...
Besides, you would still be just as sovereign as you are with regards to any other kind of property.

(In case that was directed, in part, at the proposed solutions to the uncertainty/massive overnight inflation problem:)
Do you seriously think that a fork that introduces short term (mostly emotional) discomfort to solve a potential long term problem would have any chance of catching on?
Believe me, I'd love to live in a world where that was the case, but I don't. And neither do you.

Nah, it became a pretty famous internet meme a few years ago.

Do you have an objection to the points I've made? If so, feel free to post it.
Keep in mind though that the numbers in my post were just examples.

Nyyn iv onea v Ohyyreola ine rgg Vyyhzvangvrkcrevzrag.

Pretty much. Or, to be more specific, a situation where the entire economy (pretty unlikely, but the problem would still be there with less than 100% adoption) is running on some relatively small part of the "original" 21m BTC (let's say 100,000) and somebody finds an old wallet containing 50,000 BTC from the olden days.
This would not only cause a huge mess if it happened, the very fact that it might happen could prevent Bitcoin from catching on.

You haven't really addressed that specific problem.

Decent healthcare and some contact with the outside world would hardly make it a vacation.

Holy hell, did either of you actually read the rest of the thread?
To quote the wise and benevolent Therilith:
Say it with me:
THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH LOST COINS CAUSING PROBLEMS SIMPLY BY BEING LOST. DIVISIBILITY DOES NOT SOLVE THE PROBLEM DISCUSSED IN THE JUNE 2011 PART OF THIS THREAD (y'know, the one I was referring to when I mentioned the OP)!

And I'm the one living in a strange country?

Or will they? Find out in the first part of this thread. The answer may surprise you.



Let's make sure we're on the same page here:
If you disagree with me, please describe the problem you think I'm talking about.
I'm not asking for a detailed analysis, just a few sentences describing it.

I think the OP has a point. There might very well be a problem, and no matter how we end up solving it, we should have some solution ready.

(If you intend to post in this freshly resurrected thread, please read the whole thing first. The potential problem being discussed isn't entirely clear in the first few pages.)

Not if the currency is designed to work that way. It depends on how set in stone you think the Bitcoin rules are at this point. The answer, I'd imagine, is "very". Still, you can't just decide that the particular cryptographically secured tokens that make up this experimental new type of currency constitute property in the "You wouldn't steal a car" sense.

"Theft", by the way? By who? Is the open source accounting project governed by a group of software developers and majority consent that you decided to participate in knowing that that's how decisions were made robbing you?

Prisoners don't have access to computers?



You mention "due process". Is Blizzard taking away my +5 Sword of Swordery because I forgot to anoint it with orc spleens last Thursday theft? Why not? Because of the EULA? What if Bitcoin had a similar "we are not responsible for whatever happens to your money as a result of changes to the protocol adopted by means of majority consent" agreement? Would that change your opinion (of the "theft" aspect, at least)?

If you want to get really technical, they're not taking your money. You are free to stay on the old chain with everybody else who thinks the new rules are bad.
Don't get me wrong, I think implementing some sort of stale coin expiration should be a last resort. A big, red "use only if absolutely necessary and with the consent of a significant majority (which is the only way it could possibly be implemented anyway)" button.
Would it be theft, though? Absolutely not. No more than the government reclaiming a plot of land from somebody who's been missing for the last 100 years.

Been waiting for https://50btc.com/api/1GtBRmKBnxoEDZVQ1yyKEwvHyMdX9Lgc2c for a few days now.

Also: Hella stales.

EDIT: BTC recieved.

Fuck you too.

I have 3 tasks (flag images*2, Categorize Twitter Users) in the list of available tasks even though they've been at "0 available" for about 2 weeks now (Finished! Sorry, there is no more work available on this job at this time..).
More annoying than problematic, but still...

Fair enough.
The reason I asked was because the first time a payment didn't appear on the website instantaneously was also the first time I used an extended address, so I though the two might be connected.

EDIT: After waiting ~7 hours for my payments, I decided to try completing a task with my non-extended address. Once I finished, all the money I earned in the past 7 hours (4*3, 1*4) immediately appeared as a single payment on the website.

EDIT2: Everything seems to be working properly now.

I created an extended version of the address I've been using for a while now, started a new task (Flag images that contain adult content) and noticed that it still showed my old accuracy (95%). Working as intended?

Sometimes some of the pictures in "Flag images that contain adult content" don't load properly, forcing you to click "zoom" on each individual picture to see it. Sort of time consuming and annoying.

EDIT: Is it supposed to inform you every time you make a mistake on a control question? Sometimes my accuracy just decreases for no apparent reason.

EDIT: I've completed 3 tasks with my new extended address, and none of the payments show up on the main page or in the address activity log.

"Flag images that contain adult content (Contains mature content)"

I... can get paid for looking at pictures of naked people?

<3

"Tasks available"

"There are no tasks currently available, please check back later!"

Sweden.

Same here. I tried a new address too just in case my old one somehow ended up with a bad rep, but I can't see any tasks.
Do you need a >0 rep to do the 4 point task?

Could a malicious individual enter somebody else's BTC address and screw up their accuracy/reputation/whatever?

How long would one generally have to wait for a SEPA deposit to appear?
It's been less than 48 hours since I sent the money, so I'm just curious.

I guess this is as good a place as any to ask a few general GPU questions, especially since they relate to my plans to buy a 7970 for my main rig that will spend a fair bit of time shuffling bits. Despite being what might very well qualify as a gamer, I've never really been on the bleeding edge of hardware purchases. As such, I know embarrassingly little about GPUs.

1. I read somewhere that there is a minimum time after the release of a new card during which AMD only allows third party manufacturers to sell reference cards. If true, how long before that changes? After my purchase of a poorly labeled 6950 that had all manner of odd quirks and was even missing the dual BIOS functionality, I've decided that if I buy a 7970, it'll be a reference model. Once burned, hella paranoid.

2. I did some research on the forums, and a random internet-stranger said that the 7970 is already fairly close to the maximum possible hashrate. Are any further improvements likely?

3. Would you recommend any particular brand? If I'm buying a reference card, it would seem like price and warranty are the only things that matter.

4. Are all reference cards built with the same fans and GPU "case"?

Five blocks in five hours, and of course my mining rig had to break down ~10 hours before the first one...

Well, hopefully this completely random series of events that are in no way indicative of future results will convince more people to switch to P2Pool.