... but in this case Canada is allowed since it is not treated as the 51st state.

The problem here is that this leads to blockchain bloat and it defeats pruning the blockchain https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Scalability since 1 satoshi does not equal zero.  As to why S.Dice is doing this it is simple they are using the blockchain not to transfer funds but to send a message namely that the player has lost.  Furthermore no one involved has any incentive to clean up the dust since this leads to a long term but not immediate problem.

The big cost here is the long term storage of each 1 satoshi output for the life of Bitcoin.

Then at least set the min tx value to the transaction fee. It will have the desired effect. My proposal is to deal with transactions which create one or more addresses that contain only dust leading to blockchain bloat that is very difficult if not impossible to prune. A bona fide send many transaction that creates dust as a byproduct can deal with this by adding the dust to the TX fee.  

Why not simply refuse to relay transactions where any of the outputs is less than the transaction fee?

The client can be modifed so that any "dust" left over is added to the transaction fee. Of course one could send "dust" with a 0 transaction fee but then one needs a miner willing to add it to the blockchain.

No need to Wikileak S.Dice or anyone else a la VISA, MasterCard PayPal etc.

If one only takes the trouble to dig a bit deeper one will find that the the A record for cavirtex.com points to IP 184.71.215.146, and the location of this IP is in Calgary, Alberta Canada.  The only thing here under United States jurisdiction is the technical contact of the domain and the domain itself (since it is a .com). There is no evidence here that the client data is stored on a server in the United States, quite the contrary the evidence points to the server(s) containing the client data being located in Canada. I am  very much aware of the PATRIOT act in the United States, it simply does not apply in this case. Please get the facts straight before spreading FUD about an exchange that is turning out to be a Canadian Bitcoin success story.

There is a critical difference between Canada and the United States here. Take GoldMoney for example and where they store gold on behalf of their customers. http://www.goldmoney.com/faq/where-are-metals-stored.html Canada is listed as a gold storage location but the United States is not. I wonder why. May be it has something to do with this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Order_6102

This is a very legitimate concern when it applies to the Canadian part of the deal but not to the US part of the deal since US citizens and residents are subject to US law in these matters but Canadian citizens and residents are not!  As far as US residents and citizens are concerned this is a good thing in my opinion. If they do not wish to be subject to US tax law then they should leave the US and renounce thier citizenship; otherwise this deal makes tax compliance  and funds transfers for them way easier.  In addtion for those outside the US and Canada it has the very desiriable effect of insulating MtGox from US regulation.

Nevertheless as I have indicated before I will keep an open mind on the Canadian part of the deal pending a response from Coinlab to my questions.

Here is a possible explantion. They need and are able to hire because they are processing more and more Bitcoin transactions. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=149573.0

The scale on the Bitcoin Charts all data chart has now changed.  http://bitcoincharts.com/charts/mtgoxUSD#igDailyztgSzm1g10zm2g25zvzl

If one takes a look at the subsequent charts one finds that two brutal Bitcoin bear markets that occurred in 2011 would not have helped this particular bear at all.

While those prices are certainly possible, I would not count on it. To put things into perspective suppose someone said two years ago.


http://bitcoincharts.com/charts/mtgoxUSD#rg60zczsg2010-05-01zeg2011-03-06ztgSzm1g10zm2g25zv

I very much doubt it. In any event the US Goverment will have its hands full dealing with all of those who do not comply with FACTA  worldwide to concern itself with those that do comply.  As far as I can see in the US side of this deal MtGox by partnering with a US based partner has found an excellent way to avoid having to deal with FACTA, while at the same time improving service to thier US customers and remaining 100% compliant. I fail to see why the US Government woud have a problem with this at all.

When it comes to the Canadian side of this deal all, I can say at this point is that I am waiting for answers to my questions from Coinlab.

Bitcoin will create rich people but it will be different rich people from those that are currently rich. This has happend with every disruptive technology for centuries.
Bitcoin will bring many opportunites to the world's poor. Why becasue they will no longer need a credit or debit card and / or a merchant account to participate in the worldwide Internet economy

+1

Actually the Kim Dotcom case is a prefect example where the United States government already got rebuked by a court in Canada and their case is New Zealand is slowly falling apart. So it is actually turning into a case for the exact opposite. If anything the United States has already lost influence in New Zealand because of this. Ever wonder why Kim Dotcon is using a .co.nz domain for his new venture?

As for the MTGox / Coinlab deal let us wait and see what happens when it comes to the Canada portion.  

It is USD not USA and it is as related to CAD as CNY is related to VND. Seriously just because two countries share a border it does not mean one can blindly just treat them as one.

It starts to get really tiresome sometimes when Canada is treated as if it were the 51st state of the United States.

My guess is that he is seeing the Bitcoin income come in from his current venture Mega.co.nz. By the way selling Mega for Bitcoin is far more likley to impact the BTC / USD exchange rate than another Bitcoin debit card.  

Get CafePress to accept Bitcoin and I am sure the support from the BItcoin community for your store will increase.

Your point regarding the banking transfers is well taken but I see it only as an interim solution. The reality is that in the long term the proper solution is to either setup a Canadian subsiduary or work with a Canadian partner since I doubt a US entity will have any better results in opening a Canadian bank account.  The danger I see here is that if this deal is for 10 years Canadians may as a result be relegated to less than optimal service since the opportunity of a Canadian partnership has been in effect eliminated for a decade. In short long term pain in exchange for a possible short term gain.  Nevertheless I am prepared to keep an open mind on the Canadian impacts of  this deal untill I see the responses from Coinlab.

IANAL

A Japanese company doing business in Canada is ulikely to get anywhere near the kind of scrutiny over privacy from Canadian regulators than US company will because Japan has way tougher privacy laws than the United States. In addition there is legislation in the United States that can put an US Company doing business in Canada in the near impossible position of having to break the US law or the Canadian privacy law. The PATRIOT act in the United States comes to mind. This is a well known issue in Canada that applies to a US company but not to a Japanese company.

There are many examples of US companies doing business in Canada being called to task over privacy by Canadian regulators. I would be very surprised that MtGox buy doing business in Australia is not subject to Australian privacy laws. The reality however from a practical sense is that if they follow Japanese privacy law they are unlikly to attract adverse attention from regulators is Australia. The same is not true for a US company.