We have far too many inflationary currencies. So it feels right to have something different for people who believe that reasonable deflation is in fact a good thing. Spending and investment is not always good. It can lead to malvestment or spending "just for the spending". People will think twice, maybe three times before spending and they will buy only goods they really need. Loans would be possible but naturally discouraged.
If bitcoin gains wider adoption then there surely will be projects how to inflate it. There will be fractional reserve, loans and therefore "false bitcoins" in the form of "promises of real bitcoins". There will be far more promises than bitcoins used in backing. I have no problem with that as long as th following works:
If the BTCbank issuing false BTC goes bankrupt (unable to provide real BTC for the promises) then no one will be able to reimburse people by creating some new real BTC for them. Those people will have to decrease their standard of living (some of them might even lose their houses). And they will have to face the consequences of their mistargeted trust into BTCbank. So will all the merchants accepting false BTC from them. If this works and more reasonable "hoarders" are not forced to help them by a single bitcent then I am OK with all that. It might be that the BTCbank will never go bankrupt. Then the people and merchants will of course benefit from increased money supply. I am also OK with that as long as no one is forced (nor forbidden) to accept false bitcoins.

This fight between Keynesian/classical view on economics and Austrian school seems like neverending story. Such as fight between supporters of "giving people more freedom" and "doing right things for the people and perpetrate good even if it means forcing them".

Well that is bad .
Here might be the reason for so much advertising (it is payed): https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=162636.0;all

Perhaps you should wait another day (or two) after the weekend. Then send private message to Largo at this forum (as he seems to be connected to easycoin.net). I do not think he would want negative publicity if the problems persist. 10 BTC is quite a lot money.

+1

Just for the information, I also have problem with reseting my password (no email arrived). It is no big issue though and definitely not a priority. (There is nothing valuable in my account and I do not use this password anywhere else.)

Edit: My mistake. I entered wrong email.

I might missed the important point. By: "I recently registered and moved some of coins there, and after 3 confirmations the balance shows 0.099BTC." you mean that you moved more than 0.099 BTC in the first place?

I will play devil's advocate and ask: How do you do high frequency trading and minute-to-minute speculation with localbitcoins.com?

(I know the obvious answer: "Don't (do HFT and speculation). Bitcoin is not a get-rich-quick-in-fiat scheme." But there are many people who do and will want just that.)

I can not confirm, because I am not using their services. But online wallets work by issuing users some address to deposit and then maintaining the bitcoins of all the users centrally on one or more addresses (like the hundreds-of-coins address). They keep their own records about users, how much they owe to each one.

So the question is: Can you log in to easycoin.net? Does your balance read 0.099 BTC? Can you send/withdraw this to another address?
If all three answers are yes then you are OK. If the first two are yes then you are probably ok.

But of course there is nothing preventing then from closing the service and steal everyones bitcoins. However, this is true for most of other online wallets too.

If the new cryptocurrency will keep all the benefits and advantages of bitcoin then maybe yes. But I am afraid that some point are incompatible. (How would split-second confirmations guarantee safety against double-spending? How would logarithmic growth of storage space motivate miners to compete for it? Who will set and influence what is "useful work"?)

I had different idea, mentioned it twice, but perhaps in the wrong place so there was no answer. This thread looks like the right one :-].
I do not know how "simple machines forum" works and what it allows, but...
Would it be possible to add personalized tags to other users? This do not work as reputation as you would be the only one seeing this tags. Current possibility to Ignore/Unignore user is too crude. What if ignored person posts something reasonable in the future?

For example: Someone has may Ignores and therefore coloured ignore. But I read his posts and conclude that he does not deserve it. So I will make a personal remark for this person "Ignored because he dare asks questions that only a few dare ask". Or I would like a tag "writes long texts but worth reading" or "has been scammed by MtGox, hates them" (so everything he/she writes about exchanges in the future, I can take it with the right perspective).
And I want to see this my remark beside every post he makes. Nobody else would see this even the person who is taged. (This way it will not turn into popularity contest.)

Simpler way to make this is to enhance possibilities for ignore. For example "show all posts from this person in gray color 8pt font" - So I know I can probably ignore it, but wont miss one sentence answers. Or "Allways show this thumb up/thumb down icon besides this person posts" - So I do not get confused by users with the same generic avatar. I know that Such thing could probably be made with some script hacking like GreaseMonkey, but official functionality would be better.

Developers* have two conflicting problems or tasks.

• Make bitcoin accessible to general public, accepted by common merchants (not just the geeky ones) and tolerated/reasonably regulated by authorities (by regulated I mean for example that written contract can be denominated in BTC, verified by and enforced by court).
• Watch very carefully that core principles of bitcoin remain unchanged.

I do not remember times at this forum in 2011 or earlier, my experience with bitcoins is about half a year, but the ones who do, the ones who actually spoke with Satoshi (him/her/it)self, the one who have been with bitcoins from the beginning surely feel change in the community which make the second point more and more difficult. There are more and more scammers. There more and more "uneducated users" pouring in. I mean the classical pattern when new user comes in an after few days (maybe hours) discovers fundamental flaw in the bitcoin and how it can be made right. Even after informing the people, there is shifting of the idea about what bitcoin should do.
In the future if bitcoin gets general adoption by common people, we can expect opinions prevalent among general population. That means much more pressure about: Early adopters are unfairly rewarded. , There should be some inflation/demurrage. Hoarding and speculation should be discouraged/complicated/banned. There has to be some central authority(authorities), reversible transactions, mechanism for saving people from their mistakes and stupidity and mechanism for punishing the ones taking advantage and making profit of such mistakes. There will be enormous pressure to erode core principles of bitcoin (caped supply, decentralization, irreversible transactions). Also much more nonsense about mining damaging the environment/wasting energy, endangering national security and financial stability, etc. is to be expected.

I think that developers should be more biased towards observing second problem. Because this way bitcoin can prove that (or whether) it is superior to existing fiat and altcoins solutions. Well, not superior everywhere but somewhere. There are situations altcoins will address better, there are and will be situations where cash, gold and even fiat money or PayPal will do better than bitcoins. We should not try to occupy and dominate all niches with bitcoins, we should not try to adapt it to every situation and common taste. Let the bitcoin find its own audience and uses according to what it is.

Current problems to be solved in my opinion are: transaction fees and way to implement microtransactions/colored coins. Transparent way of biding for transaction space. Question about maximal block size. And of course protocol specification including some "almost impossible to change" behavior. For experiments and alternatives there are altcoins.


* - I know "we all are developers" situation. But by developers I mean core developers who actually understand the code, made changes and development in the past, and are able to push such changes (either because they are trusted and reasonable or because it has become a custom to follow them).

As I understand it, this works through email. (You get link to reset your password.) This is in current situation better idea than classic "Enter old pass, Enter new pass, Retype new pass". This way even if someone knows your compromised pass, he cannot change it. :-]

And, Slush... have a good, refreshing and well-deserved sleep! Your handling of the situation is exemplary. :-]

Looking forward to USB stick auction :-].

Very impressive response! I hope things will settle soon. OVH has probably some explaining to do.

So I recieved a reply: Try to clean Your browser cache
And it worked.

This (bottrading 6 days ago?) is more interesting: http://bitcoinity.org/markets/bitcoin24/EUR (7day graph)

First MtGox delays, then bitcoin-24.com, then terracoin ASICwars (and terrawallet), slush DDoS, now BTC-e.

I do not know if I have been hacked, but I cannot get to my finances, balance, account setting. Written to BTCe support several minutes ago and waiting for reply.

Actually, 51% of network hash rate grants you convergence of the following probability to 1 with time: "The probability that you can double spend well-formed* transaction no matter how many confirmations it has."

* - By well formed I loosely mean: transaction which nodes relay and miners are likely to include. Transaction with very low or no fees is an exception as it probably will not be relayed and included for very long time.

If you use wallet which allows rescan of blockchain (like Multibit) then by rescanning it from the date of the no-fee transaction (or perhaps a day before that just to be sure) should make this transaction non-existent for your wallet and you will be able to try again.
If I understand it correctly, if you do nothing after rescan then the transaction would still have chance to get confirmed (in some far future). But the point is that you can actually try to send different one (with the fee) which will "win".

The address 1LxkLRyo7geb4umenGtJUJ2o4ArYJbWZZD received many small ( 0.00005 ) transactions in the past. It also received some larger amounts (such as 1.4023746 BTC). Now someone sends BTC from this address further to 17fTqG6q2HGhuP2jZPYSx46mU3c8bxWp2s and these many smalls inputs (previously outputs) and some bigger (one of them being 1.4023746 BTC) are combined to do this. Change is returned back to 1LxkLRyo7geb4umenGtJUJ2o4ArYJbWZZD.

With the current transaction fees or with lower fees? :-]

Btw. : Lifecycle of the bitcoiner - This should be archived for future generations newbies. :-]