As far as I can see, these settings look right. My guess is that there is something wrong with the difficulty. I'll have a look next week if I could setup a similar testing environment, although I'm quite busy next few weeks. If someone else wants to pick this up, feel free to do so.

Core wallet code
In our previous core wallet release we moved to use the BerkeleyDB 5.3 branch, instead of using the 4.8 branch. Recently, we discovered that using the 5.3 branch raises problems on MacOSX (which is why these builds still use the 4.8 branch). Initial investigations in this problem showed that this issue is already present in the 5.0 branch. We've generated a difference file between 4.8 and 5.0, allowing us to see where the problem is introduced. The difference file is quite big and we've just started processing through this file in an attempt to isolate the misbehaving code. It could take up to a few months to go through this process, depending on how much time we have available to spend on it and how quick we identify the offending code.

Project P
Last week I told that we were asked by a third party to build a prototype device that could receive payments and act upon those. Last week, most of the time was spend on writing code that would allow parsing raw transactions, which we obtain from electrum if a payment is performed to the addresses the device will be watching. Next will be decoding the script part of the transaction ouputs to obtain the address we are watching.

Server infrastructure
Last week we continued migrating the servers and started investigating if we could move our electrum servers to the ElectrumX code base. The
insight server also has shown some stability issues lately and we started to investigate how to reduce its down time. We also setup an additional server to import the block chain data into an SQL server, which allows us to perform advanced queries on the data. This will help us gathering real live testing data for our future code.

Which algo are you mining? Have you set the "algo=<algo>" variable in auroracoin.conf? Any output in de the bug.log?

plastic cards... how outdated... have you already tried the waggle feature in the Hive wallet?... or the QR code scanning?
Who needs plastic, when you've got radio waves!

Here is an update from the developer side (I hope to publish these a bit more often).

Server migrations
As we mentioned earlier we’re in the process of moving infrastructure servers (e.g. seeds and electrum servers) to a foundation hosted account. This allows more developers to help if issues surface with one of them or if the developer maintaining the server is on holiday. The current state is that we’re in the process of setting up the first few seed servers.

Core wallet developments
When the seeds are moved to the new servers a new core wallet will be released with the new seeds encoded in it. We will also add a few new checkpoints for the block chain. In the development branch we’ve started removing all occurrences of default namespaces. While many developers add them for more compact code, it makes it less readable to outsiders and more difficult to maintain. It also increases chances of introducing errors, that’s why we’re removing them.

Project P
We decided to keep details of this project to our selves, as it is currently in a prototype stage and could potentially fail. We don’t want to be responsible for false expectations by people if the project fails. A few weeks ago the foundation was contacted by a third party from Reykjavik. They had a simple idea and asked if we could build a prototype. The main challenge for us is allowing the device to receive payments in Auroracoin. We’ve started writing the software that runs on the chip driving the device, to use the electrum interface to detect payments. Part of this project already resulted in contribution of improvements into the connectrum library (https://github.com/coinkite/connectrum). Even if this project will not be successful, we could reuse a large part of the code for future upcoming projects.

Why do you need the devs to get it added? If there are enough people asking/paying for support, won't it get listed?

Yay!!!

Bedankt, ik had al zo'n vermoeden, maar je weet maar nooit (je zou toch verwachten dat een journalist aan fact checking zou doen).

Ik las het volgende op de NOS site (http://nos.nl/artikel/2184697-grootste-bitcoin-handelaar-legt-handel-stil.html):


Eh... welke zwakke plekken in de broncode heeft deze investeerder het over? Welke hacks zijn ermee uitgevoerd?
Naar mijn weten is dit niet correct... hacks zijn voornamelijk gepleegd via overgenomen systemen of bugs in exchanges... niet in de blockchain direct.

Toch?

Nope, that's not Iceland.

Buy support dropping hard... wouldn't be surprised if it drops sub 2k.

It relates to the communication between the Auroracoin foundation and the leader of the Icelandic Pirate Party prior to the elections last year. I can't remember there were any further communications afterwards. I'm also not sure what kind of news X1235 was expecting.

Regarding ISX some questions:

I get the message that it is in maintenance mode when I want to place an order. How long will it be like this?
I see the BTC-ISX pair is being implemented... will there also be an AUR-BTC pair?

Nou, dat is al lang losgelaten hoor. De devs richten zich nu op de internationale markt (zover ze zich ergens op richten)... althans dat was wat ik begreep.

The VPS server that was running Hive died last week. The dev responsible for the Hive server is currently on holiday, but has someone else working on getting it up again (due to changes in the way we organize our servers it took a bit longer to get this person registered). If all things work out fine it should be up again within 24 hours.

This is IMHO be the best news post in months!

Why? We haven't heard anything regarding that.

No. As for keeping the same block size, reduction in block rewards/coinbase should be driving the motivation of users to include fees, not an artificial limitation on the amount of transactions that could be processed. But Auroracoin is far from that, most blocks that are generated are mostly empty.

The cap is also pure artificial, and was once created when people noticed they could start spamming the chain. Satoshi implemented it as a temporarily countermeasure, until a good solution would surface against the spamming.

xmpp is an extendible open standards communication protocol. They run a server for such service.
Google Talk is/was(?) based on that.