lol, are you being sarcastic? Almost everything in this comment is addressed in his original post. In fact, it's described very explicitly as a voluntary system.

The majority could switch a blacklist off, but if it didn't do it simultaneously, everyone who rejects the blacklist would put their business at stake by accepting coins that might remain tainted. If we used "whitelisting" like you suggest, we are effectively trusting another party to make blacklist decisions for us. If that's the case, it's no longer voluntary. If we're willing to do that, why not just allow the blacklists themselves to blacklist other blacklists? This would remove some of the confusion anyway.

I bet if we had a discussion about legalizing child pornography here because of the ultimate existence of Tor and other services, people would be much more receptive to the theory and willing to discuss it, despite how disgusting the concept would be to so many people. Why can't the logic apply here? This thread is just being hijacked by vocal anti-intellectual forum users. How many people effectively calling Mike a statist conspirator even know what game theory is and how it applies here? This idea doesn't advance the libertarian utopia you all want, but it's still worth considering because governments will eventually consider imposing these types of restrictions anyway. We should think of reasons why it can't work, or any tangential discussions which have implications for Bitcoin's acceptance. Mike clearly loves Bitcoin and isn't suggesting something which would be imposed on others.

Controversial discussions are the best discussions.

I think Mike puts too much faith in the ability of people to stop accepting a blacklist if it's being abused. Rather, the blacklists will cascade because it puts the value of your business or coins at risk in future commerce otherwise. At best, through the ability to tailor your coins to trigger the fewest blacklists in certain contexts, the entire system would be balkanized by each country.

Maybe there is a way to democratically reject a blacklist if abuse occurs, so people aren't scared of putting their coins at risk?

Let us know what you think of 0.7.2 in a few months.

All of these devs hit show results and blushed. Don't let them lie to you.

You're just speculating that it was an easy-to-find bug. Bugs happen. They've happened before and caused hard-forks. This is experimental software, and that has been reiterated by the developers over and over, especially lately now that the price has skyrocketed again.

If you don't like it, don't send money to the Bitcoin Foundation. Send it to your own 3rd party source auditing group that can find these "easily found" bugs. Otherwise, seriously, stop embarrassing yourself over something which will correct itself.

It's your fault you invested in experimental software and can't handle occasional issues.

I've also been working on a simulator, written in javascript. It uses d3's force directed graphing and setTimeout for event management. As a result the code has become messy trying to compensate for VM's poor consistency and some weird ordering problems, making locks somewhat necessary. This is not a scientific simulator, I'm actually embarrassed to release it.

• latency/processing simulation
• simulates block propagation, height changes with color changes (wait a few seconds it'll show)
• peer discovery
• bootstrap nodes

If you want to check it out: http://pastehtml.com/raw/cur2u33ss.html

I've gotten bored with it because of the many code changes that are necessary to get this much more accurate. But it's a cute framework for anyone who wants to hack it.

couchinator Just email friedcat.

Is this the only GLBSE IPO that ever accomplished anything?

Someone's jealous.

Just kidding.

I also received 1 satoshi per share.

I'd love to hear about the failure rate, the clock rate and all sorts of stuff. Congrats to all shareholders!

Please be ASICMINER. Please be ASICMINER.

Maybe you didn't see the picture from a couple pages ago:

That's how much they could make at the current exchange rate and hashrate over the lifetime of the product. Of course they want to sell them, they make more money up front and let others incur the risk of competition. Then they can spend that money on NRE for better chips or whatever.

I believe the 800 boards are the full 12TH from the first batch, which will come online gradually.

Sorry! The plan is after deployment, but before the first dividend.

Like friedcat said, full deployment will take place in the first week or two. I think we'll have a better idea in a few days how long it'll take to deploy all of the boards.

The exchange is still slated to happen after the first dividend.

Amazing update to the board! Thanks! And speaking of boards, those demo boards are absolutely beautiful! Well done!

This looks more like a blog on first sight than a social network, because of all the wasted space.



Doesn't mean you can't have whitespace or anything, but it looks like you threw a 'social network' plugin on a wordpress theme and called it a day...

I don't think Bitcoin needs any social networks right now, it just needs some good technical analysis of Bitcoin. Right now we have a ton of blogs that just report bitcoin in the news or things that happen in the community. There are more interesting ideas to develop right now.