Amateur hour

[acoindr]

The comparison of currency to stocks by sd isn't apt. The two are not compatible.

Are you seriously saying that something about the nature of currencies means nobody would ever change shift the decimal point? Or are you just trolling me?

'Since 1960, governments of developing and transition economies have redenominated their currencies on approximately seventy occasions.'
 -- http://www.google.nl/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=remove%20zeros%20currency&source=web&cd=5&cad=rja&ved=0CEoQFjAE&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.unc.edu%2F~lmosley%2FAPSA%25202005.pdf&ei=zXc_UZLpO8iNOKvLgKgE&usg=AFQjCNEv2UciW5vxGEzB1j3kpjb-6Bh9Nw

No, I didn't say the nature of currencies means nobody would ever change or shift the decimal point. I said the comparison of currency to stocks isn't apt.

[MysteryMiner]

As a professional software developer this may be an opportune time to point out that the bitcoin code is an amateur production.

Yes it is amateur production. Bitcoin have no closed source, it does not ask for money and have no restrictive EULAs. It is not written by greedy turd.

Nevertheless, make no mistakes, the current incarnation of Bitcoin has a lot of ill-conceived design points and implementation weaknesses (as we have seen from the events of the last 24 hours).

Aside from the blunder that just resulted in a blockchain fork, there is a much larger, related issue looming on the horizon, which is the inability of the design to process large numbers of transactions.

I see the results of proprietary closed source development every month's second Tuesday. Some vulnerabilities are not publicly known for years and remains unfixed for years afterwards. Most professionals working on closed source software make really bad design choices resulting in complete lack of security when bulletproof security is needed. Compared to small glitches in Bitcoin like recent one.

It is ludicrous we have people whining about "Satoshi Dice" creating numerous transactions. I could sit down and write a software component that could easily generate billions of transactions without breaking a sweat once it is deployed to a few thousand boxes, if I so chose, and yet you are concerned about Satoishi Dice generating a few million transactions. The problem of high-volume transaction handling needs to be answered at a new level which is, unfortunately, way above the paygrade of the current development team.

You don't understand how Bitcoin transaction fees works. You can create only so much transactions than you have bitcoins to spend. Invalid transactions will not be relayed further.

Payment to development team have nothing to do with quality and possibilities of software. Best softwares out there are made by volunteers working on FOSS projects. And I know numerous occasions when developers were paid millions in cash and buggy .net code were deployed that did not even satisfy all requirements.

[acoindr]

Right now, I not planning on re-arranging my life to take an unpaid position as a bitcoin developer. I am just saying that it is inevitable that the design and development move to a new level, so we, as a community, need to adopt the mindset that evolution must occur and figure out how to do that.

Please show one piece of code you've actually written ->

The Fed doesn't pay me enough to put up with this, but ok... here is byte code for x86 that translates either a decimal or hexadecimal string to a binary value (yes, I actually wrote the byte code, and yes, I can read and write x86 machine encodings in hex):

31C053515657555231F68A0280F8307C1080F8397F0B2C3083C6015083C201EBE9C7C50A000000C 7C10100000031DB89F783FE00741058F7E101C383EE0189C8F7E589C1EBEB89D85A01FA5D5F5E59 5BC331C053515657555231F68A0280F8307C0980F8397F042C30EB0C80F8417C1080F8467F0B2C4 B83C6015083C201EBDBC7C510000000EB9F

The decimal reader is at offset 0 and expects a non-digit terminated string at an address in the EDX register. The hex reader is at offset 136 and expects the same input. Both routines return the answer in EAX register. Total bytes: 136.

Here is a more readable piece of code in Java if you are not into machine language:

   /** Number of combinations
    *  In the case that items > slots this value is items! / (slots! * (items - slots)!) .
    *  Goes up to Choose( 66, 33 ) = 7219428434016265740, the maximum that fits in a long.
    *  This is an optimal implementation that uses factorization to reach the largest exact values possible.
    *  Try Choose( 60, 30 ) in a web-based calculator, for example, and you will not get an exact answer.
    *  This is because naive implementations do not use factorization.
    *  @param items  The count of unique things to be combined.
    *  @param slots  The number of slots or opportunities into which to combine them.
    *  @return number of possible unique combinations or 0 in the event of an error or invalid input or -1 in the event of an overflow
    */
   public final static long combinationCount( int items, int slots ){
      if( items < 1 || slots < 1 ) return 0;
      if( slots > items ) return 0;
      if( slots == items ) return 1;
      int extra = items - slots;
      if( extra > slots ){
         slots = extra;
         extra = items - slots;  // extra always has as many or fewer items than slots
      }
      int[] aiNumeratorFactors = new int[100];
      for( int xNumeratorFactorial = items; xNumeratorFactorial > slots; xNumeratorFactorial-- ){
         int[] factors = factor( xNumeratorFactorial );
         if( factors == null ) return 0; // an error has occurred
         for( int xFactor = 1; xFactor <= factors[0]; xFactor++ ){ // add factors to numerator factors list
            if( aiNumeratorFactors[0] == aiNumeratorFactors.length - 1 ){ // need to expand list
               int[] aiNumeratorFactors_new = new int[aiNumeratorFactors.length * 2];
               System.arraycopy( aiNumeratorFactors, 0, aiNumeratorFactors_new, 0, aiNumeratorFactors.length );
               aiNumeratorFactors = aiNumeratorFactors_new;
            }
            aiNumeratorFactors[0]++;
            aiNumeratorFactors[aiNumeratorFactors[0]] = factors[xFactor];
         }
      }
      int[] aiDenominatorFactors = new int[100];
      for( int xDenominatorFactorial = extra; xDenominatorFactorial > 1; xDenominatorFactorial-- ){
         int[] factors = factor( xDenominatorFactorial );
         if( factors == null ) return 0; // an error has occurred
         for( int xFactor = 1; xFactor <= factors[0]; xFactor++ ){ // add factors to numerator factors list
            if( aiDenominatorFactors[0] == aiDenominatorFactors.length - 1 ){ // need to expand list
               int[] aiDenominatorFactors_new = new int[aiDenominatorFactors.length * 2];
               System.arraycopy( aiDenominatorFactors, 0, aiDenominatorFactors_new, 0, aiDenominatorFactors.length );
               aiDenominatorFactors = aiDenominatorFactors_new;
            }
            aiDenominatorFactors[0]++;
            aiDenominatorFactors[aiDenominatorFactors[0]] = factors[xFactor];
         }
      }
      int[] aiNumeratorFactors_fitted = new int[aiNumeratorFactors[0]];
      System.arraycopy( aiNumeratorFactors, 1, aiNumeratorFactors_fitted, 0, aiNumeratorFactors[0] );
      aiNumeratorFactors = aiNumeratorFactors_fitted;
      int[] aiDenominatorFactors_fitted = new int[aiDenominatorFactors[0]];
      System.arraycopy( aiDenominatorFactors, 1, aiDenominatorFactors_fitted, 0, aiDenominatorFactors[0]);
      aiDenominatorFactors = aiDenominatorFactors_fitted;
      java.util.Arrays.sort( aiNumeratorFactors );
      java.util.Arrays.sort( aiDenominatorFactors );
      long nTotal = 1;
      int xNumerator = 0;
      int xDenominator = 0;
      while( true ){
         if( xNumerator == aiNumeratorFactors.length ) return nTotal;
         if( xDenominator < aiDenominatorFactors.length && aiNumeratorFactors[xNumerator] == aiDenominatorFactors[xDenominator] ){
            xDenominator++;
         } else {
            if( Long.MAX_VALUE / nTotal < aiNumeratorFactors[xNumerator] ) return -1; // overflow
            nTotal *= aiNumeratorFactors[xNumerator];
         }
         xNumerator++;
      }
   }

Presenting a code snippet means little. That's like someone who writes blueprints for a living showing a bathroom outline as proof he could engineer a skyscraper. A snippet means little without context and application.

[wtfvanity]

Hey, I am only 140 IQ.

My penis is bigger than yours!!!!!!!!!!!!

[bitfair]

As far as the mining is concerned, that was definitely the work of a 125. A much better idea is to increase the supply of coins proportionately to the transaction volume. This would result in price stability, an important characteristic of a currency which bitcoin currently lacks entirely. Note that the supply of bitcoins could also decrease if the transaction volume shrank. The way it should work is that the network continually adjusts the total supply of coins. Each holder does not hold coin totals, they hold a fraction of the total. So, your fraction never changes, but its valuation does depending on the volume of trades.

Your solution would incentivize a great flooding of traffic on the network -- more (spammy/useless) transactions would mean more money. Also it ignores the question of how coins come into existence in the first place.

Please rethink your proposal.

[TalkingAntColony]

I wrote this bytecode while I was taking a dump just now. I believe it solves the max block size problem with a brilliant solution that requires an IQ of at least 140 to understand. If you deny the validity of my solution then you simply do not have the mental acuteness people like Blinken and myself are blessed with. I would develop it further but I have already done enough for you people.

Code:

41 20 70 75 72 65 6c 79 20 70 65 65 72 2d 74 6f 2d 70 65 65 72 20 76 65 72 73 69 6f 6e 20 6f 66 20 65 6c 65 63 74 72 6f 6e 69 63 20 63 61 73 68 20 77 6f 75 6c 64 20 61 6c 6c 6f 77 20 6f 6e 6c 69 6e 65 0d 0a 70 61 79 6d 65 6e 74 73 20 74 6f 20 62 65 20 73 65 6e 74 20 64 69 72 65 63 74 6c 79 20 66 72 6f 6d 20 6f 6e 65 20 70 61 72 74 79 20 74 6f 20 61 6e 6f 74 68 65 72 20 77 69 74 68 6f 75 74 20 67 6f 69 6e 67 20 74 68 72 6f 75 67 68 20 61 0d 0a 66 69 6e 61 6e 63 69 61 6c 20 69 6e 73 74 69 74 75 74 69 6f 6e 2e 20 44 69 67 69 74 61 6c 20 73 69 67 6e 61 74 75 72 65 73 20 70 72 6f 76 69 64 65 20 70 61 72 74 20 6f 66 20 74 68 65 20 73 6f 6c 75 74 69 6f 6e 2c 20 62 75 74 20 74 68 65 20 6d 61 69 6e 0d 0a 62 65 6e 65 66 69 74 73 20 61 72 65 20 6c 6f 73 74 20 69 66 20 61 20 74 72 75 73 74 65 64 20 74 68 69 72 64 20 70 61 72 74 79 20 69 73 20 73 74 69 6c 6c 20 72 65 71 75 69 72 65 64 20 74 6f 20 70 72 65 76 65 6e 74 20 64 6f 75 62 6c 65 2d 73 70 65 6e 64 69 6e 67 2e 0d 0a 57 65 20 70 72 6f 70 6f 73 65 20 61 20 73 6f 6c 75 74 69 6f 6e 20 74 6f 20 74 68 65 20 64 6f 75 62 6c 65 2d 73 70 65 6e 64 69 6e 67 20 70 72 6f 62 6c 65 6d 20 75 73 69 6e 67 20 61 20 70 65 65 72 2d 74 6f 2d 70 65 65 72 20 6e 65 74 77 6f 72 6b 2e 0d 0a 54 68 65 20 6e 65 74 77 6f 72 6b 20 74 69 6d 65 73 74 61 6d 70 73 20 74 72 61 6e 73 61 63 74 69 6f 6e 73 20 62 79 20 68 61 73 68 69 6e 67 20 74 68 65 6d 20 69 6e 74 6f 20 61 6e 20 6f 6e 67 6f 69 6e 67 20 63 68 61 69 6e 20 6f 66 0d 0a 68 61 73 68 2d 62 61 73 65 64 20 70 72 6f 6f 66 2d 6f 66 2d 77 6f 72 6b 2c 20 66 6f 72 6d 69 6e 67 20 61 20 72 65 63 6f 72 64 20 74 68 61 74 20 63 61 6e 6e 6f 74 20 62 65 20 63 68 61 6e 67 65 64 20 77 69 74 68 6f 75 74 20 72 65 64 6f 69 6e 67 0d 0a 74 68 65 20 70 72 6f 6f 66 2d 6f 66 2d 77 6f 72 6b 2e 20 54 68 65 20 6c 6f 6e 67 65 73 74 20 63 68 61 69 6e 20 6e 6f 74 20 6f 6e 6c 79 20 73 65 72 76 65 73 20 61 73 20 70 72 6f 6f 66 20 6f 66 20 74 68 65 20 73 65 71 75 65 6e 63 65 20 6f 66 0d 0a 65 76 65 6e 74 73 20 77 69 74 6e 65 73 73 65 64 2c 20 62 75 74 20 70 72 6f 6f 66 20 74 68 61 74 20 69 74 20 63 61 6d 65 20 66 72 6f 6d 20 74 68 65 20 6c 61 72 67 65 73 74 20 70 6f 6f 6c 20 6f 66 20 43 50 55 20 70 6f 77 65 72 2e 20 41 73 0d 0a 6c 6f 6e 67 20 61 73 20 61 20 6d 61 6a 6f 72 69 74 79 20 6f 66 20 43 50 55 20 70 6f 77 65 72 20 69 73 20 63 6f 6e 74 72 6f 6c 6c 65 64 20 62 79 20 6e 6f 64 65 73 20 74 68 61 74 20 61 72 65 20 6e 6f 74 20 63 6f 6f 70 65 72 61 74 69 6e 67 20 74 6f 0d 0a 61 74 74 61 63 6b 20 74 68 65 20 6e 65 74 77 6f 72 6b 2c 20 74 68 65 79 27 6c 6c 20 67 65 6e 65 72 61 74 65 20 74 68 65 20 6c 6f 6e 67 65 73 74 20 63 68 61 69 6e 20 61 6e 64 20 6f 75 74 70 61 63 65 20 61 74 74 61 63 6b 65 72 73 2e 20 54 68 65 0d 0a 6e 65 74 77 6f 72 6b 20 69 74 73 65 6c 66 20 72 65 71 75 69 72 65 73 20 6d 69 6e 69 6d 61 6c 20 73 74 72 75 63 74 75 72 65 2e 20 4d 65 73 73 61 67 65 73 20 61 72 65 20 62 72 6f 61 64 63 61 73 74 20 6f 6e 20 61 20 62 65 73 74 20 65 66 66 6f 72 74 0d 0a 62 61 73 69 73 2c 20 61 6e 64 20 6e 6f 64 65 73 20 63 61 6e 20 6c 65 61 76 65 20 61 6e 64 20 72 65 6a 6f 69 6e 20 74 68 65 20 6e 65 74 77 6f 72 6b 20 61 74 20 77 69 6c 6c 2c 20 61 63 63 65 70 74 69 6e 67 20 74 68 65 20 6c 6f 6e 67 65 73 74 0d 0a 70 72 6f 6f 66 2d 6f 66 2d 77 6f 72 6b 20 63 68 61 69 6e 20 61 73 20 70 72 6f 6f 66 20 6f 66 20 77 68 61 74 20 68 61 70 70 65 6e 65 64 20 77 68 69 6c 65 20 74 68 65 79 20 77 65 72 65 20 67 6f 6e 65

[Blinken]

Right now, I not planning on re-arranging my life to take an unpaid position as a bitcoin developer. I am just saying that it is inevitable that the design and development move to a new level, so we, as a community, need to adopt the mindset that evolution must occur and figure out how to do that.

Please show one piece of code you've actually written ->

The Fed doesn't pay me enough to put up with this, but ok... here is byte code for x86 that translates either a decimal or hexadecimal string to a binary value (yes, I actually wrote the byte code, and yes, I can read and write x86 machine encodings in hex):

31C053515657555231F68A0280F8307C1080F8397F0B2C3083C6015083C201EBE9C7C50A000000C 7C10100000031DB89F783FE00741058F7E101C383EE0189C8F7E589C1EBEB89D85A01FA5D5F5E59 5BC331C053515657555231F68A0280F8307C0980F8397F042C30EB0C80F8417C1080F8467F0B2C4 B83C6015083C201EBDBC7C510000000EB9F

The decimal reader is at offset 0 and expects a non-digit terminated string at an address in the EDX register. The hex reader is at offset 136 and expects the same input. Both routines return the answer in EAX register. Total bytes: 136.

Here is a more readable piece of code in Java if you are not into machine language:
....

Presenting a code snippet means little. That's like someone who writes blueprints for a living showing a bathroom outline as proof he could engineer a skyscraper. A snippet means little without context and application.

The guy just said he wanted to see ANY code I had written, so I showed 50 lines out of the nearly million lines I have written.

As far as my "snippet" is concerned, if you can produce any better implementation of a combination counting algorithm, then we can talk about the shortcomings of my code.
 

[snaxion]

Right now, I not planning on re-arranging my life to take an unpaid position as a bitcoin developer. I am just saying that it is inevitable that the design and development move to a new level, so we, as a community, need to adopt the mindset that evolution must occur and figure out how to do that.

Please show one piece of code you've actually written ->

The Fed doesn't pay me enough to put up with this, but ok... here is byte code for x86 that translates either a decimal or hexadecimal string to a binary value (yes, I actually wrote the byte code, and yes, I can read and write x86 machine encodings in hex):

31C053515657555231F68A0280F8307C1080F8397F0B2C3083C6015083C201EBE9C7C50A000000C 7C10100000031DB89F783FE00741058F7E101C383EE0189C8F7E589C1EBEB89D85A01FA5D5F5E59 5BC331C053515657555231F68A0280F8307C0980F8397F042C30EB0C80F8417C1080F8467F0B2C4 B83C6015083C201EBDBC7C510000000EB9F

The decimal reader is at offset 0 and expects a non-digit terminated string at an address in the EDX register. The hex reader is at offset 136 and expects the same input. Both routines return the answer in EAX register. Total bytes: 136.

Here is a more readable piece of code in Java if you are not into machine language:

   /** Number of combinations
    *  In the case that items > slots this value is items! / (slots! * (items - slots)!) .
    *  Goes up to Choose( 66, 33 ) = 7219428434016265740, the maximum that fits in a long.
    *  This is an optimal implementation that uses factorization to reach the largest exact values possible.
    *  Try Choose( 60, 30 ) in a web-based calculator, for example, and you will not get an exact answer.
    *  This is because naive implementations do not use factorization.
    *  @param items  The count of unique things to be combined.
    *  @param slots  The number of slots or opportunities into which to combine them.
    *  @return number of possible unique combinations or 0 in the event of an error or invalid input or -1 in the event of an overflow
    */
   public final static long combinationCount( int items, int slots ){
      if( items < 1 || slots < 1 ) return 0;
      if( slots > items ) return 0;
      if( slots == items ) return 1;
      int extra = items - slots;
      if( extra > slots ){
         slots = extra;
         extra = items - slots;  // extra always has as many or fewer items than slots
      }
      int[] aiNumeratorFactors = new int[100];
      for( int xNumeratorFactorial = items; xNumeratorFactorial > slots; xNumeratorFactorial-- ){
         int[] factors = factor( xNumeratorFactorial );
         if( factors == null ) return 0; // an error has occurred
         for( int xFactor = 1; xFactor <= factors[0]; xFactor++ ){ // add factors to numerator factors list
            if( aiNumeratorFactors[0] == aiNumeratorFactors.length - 1 ){ // need to expand list
               int[] aiNumeratorFactors_new = new int[aiNumeratorFactors.length * 2];
               System.arraycopy( aiNumeratorFactors, 0, aiNumeratorFactors_new, 0, aiNumeratorFactors.length );
               aiNumeratorFactors = aiNumeratorFactors_new;
            }
            aiNumeratorFactors[0]++;
            aiNumeratorFactors[aiNumeratorFactors[0]] = factors[xFactor];
         }
      }
      int[] aiDenominatorFactors = new int[100];
      for( int xDenominatorFactorial = extra; xDenominatorFactorial > 1; xDenominatorFactorial-- ){
         int[] factors = factor( xDenominatorFactorial );
         if( factors == null ) return 0; // an error has occurred
         for( int xFactor = 1; xFactor <= factors[0]; xFactor++ ){ // add factors to numerator factors list
            if( aiDenominatorFactors[0] == aiDenominatorFactors.length - 1 ){ // need to expand list
               int[] aiDenominatorFactors_new = new int[aiDenominatorFactors.length * 2];
               System.arraycopy( aiDenominatorFactors, 0, aiDenominatorFactors_new, 0, aiDenominatorFactors.length );
               aiDenominatorFactors = aiDenominatorFactors_new;
            }
            aiDenominatorFactors[0]++;
            aiDenominatorFactors[aiDenominatorFactors[0]] = factors[xFactor];
         }
      }
      int[] aiNumeratorFactors_fitted = new int[aiNumeratorFactors[0]];
      System.arraycopy( aiNumeratorFactors, 1, aiNumeratorFactors_fitted, 0, aiNumeratorFactors[0] );
      aiNumeratorFactors = aiNumeratorFactors_fitted;
      int[] aiDenominatorFactors_fitted = new int[aiDenominatorFactors[0]];
      System.arraycopy( aiDenominatorFactors, 1, aiDenominatorFactors_fitted, 0, aiDenominatorFactors[0]);
      aiDenominatorFactors = aiDenominatorFactors_fitted;
      java.util.Arrays.sort( aiNumeratorFactors );
      java.util.Arrays.sort( aiDenominatorFactors );
      long nTotal = 1;
      int xNumerator = 0;
      int xDenominator = 0;
      while( true ){
         if( xNumerator == aiNumeratorFactors.length ) return nTotal;
         if( xDenominator < aiDenominatorFactors.length && aiNumeratorFactors[xNumerator] == aiDenominatorFactors[xDenominator] ){
            xDenominator++;
         } else {
            if( Long.MAX_VALUE / nTotal < aiNumeratorFactors[xNumerator] ) return -1; // overflow
            nTotal *= aiNumeratorFactors[xNumerator];
         }
         xNumerator++;
      }
   }

Snippet war! Everyone post a snippet of what they have written. I will evaluate and declare a winner

[Blinken]

I wrote this bytecode while I was taking a dump just now. I believe it solves the max block size problem with a brilliant solution that requires an IQ of at least 140 to understand. If you deny the validity of my solution then you simply do not have the mental acuteness people like Blinken and myself are blessed with. I would develop it further but I have already done enough for you people.

Code:

41 20 70 75 72 65 6c 79 20 70 65 65 72 2d 74 6f 2d 70 65 65 72 20 76 65 72 73 69 6f 6e 20 6f 66 20 65 6c 65 63 74 72 6f 6e 69 63 20 63 61 73 68 20 77 6f 75 6c 64 20 61 6c 6c 6f 77 20 6f 6e 6c 69 6e 65 0d 0a 70 61 79 6d 65 6e 74 73 20 74 6f 20 62 65 20 73 65 6e 74 20 64 69 72 65 63 74 6c 79 20 66 72 6f 6d 20 6f 6e 65 20 70 61 72 74 79 20 74 6f 20 61 6e 6f 74 68 65 72 20 77 69 74 68 6f 75 74 20 67 6f 69 6e 67 20 74 68 72 6f 75 67 68 20 61 0d 0a 66 69 6e 61 6e 63 69 61 6c 20 69 6e 73 74 69 74 75 74 69 6f 6e 2e 20 44 69 67 69 74 61 6c 20 73 69 67 6e 61 74 75 72 65 73 20 70 72 6f 76 69 64 65 20 70 61 72 74 20 6f 66 20 74 68 65 20 73 6f 6c 75 74 69 6f 6e 2c 20 62 75 74 20 74 68 65 20 6d 61 69 6e 0d 0a 62 65 6e 65 66 69 74 73 20 61 72 65 20 6c 6f 73 74 20 69 66 20 61 20 74 72 75 73 74 65 64 20 74 68 69 72 64 20 70 61 72 74 79 20 69 73 20 73 74 69 6c 6c 20 72 65 71 75 69 72 65 64 20 74 6f 20 70 72 65 76 65 6e 74 20 64 6f 75 62 6c 65 2d 73 70 65 6e 64 69 6e 67 2e 0d 0a 57 65 20 70 72 6f 70 6f 73 65 20 61 20 73 6f 6c 75 74 69 6f 6e 20 74 6f 20 74 68 65 20 64 6f 75 62 6c 65 2d 73 70 65 6e 64 69 6e 67 20 70 72 6f 62 6c 65 6d 20 75 73 69 6e 67 20 61 20 70 65 65 72 2d 74 6f 2d 70 65 65 72 20 6e 65 74 77 6f 72 6b 2e 0d 0a 54 68 65 20 6e 65 74 77 6f 72 6b 20 74 69 6d 65 73 74 61 6d 70 73 20 74 72 61 6e 73 61 63 74 69 6f 6e 73 20 62 79 20 68 61 73 68 69 6e 67 20 74 68 65 6d 20 69 6e 74 6f 20 61 6e 20 6f 6e 67 6f 69 6e 67 20 63 68 61 69 6e 20 6f 66 0d 0a 68 61 73 68 2d 62 61 73 65 64 20 70 72 6f 6f 66 2d 6f 66 2d 77 6f 72 6b 2c 20 66 6f 72 6d 69 6e 67 20 61 20 72 65 63 6f 72 64 20 74 68 61 74 20 63 61 6e 6e 6f 74 20 62 65 20 63 68 61 6e 67 65 64 20 77 69 74 68 6f 75 74 20 72 65 64 6f 69 6e 67 0d 0a 74 68 65 20 70 72 6f 6f 66 2d 6f 66 2d 77 6f 72 6b 2e 20 54 68 65 20 6c 6f 6e 67 65 73 74 20 63 68 61 69 6e 20 6e 6f 74 20 6f 6e 6c 79 20 73 65 72 76 65 73 20 61 73 20 70 72 6f 6f 66 20 6f 66 20 74 68 65 20 73 65 71 75 65 6e 63 65 20 6f 66 0d 0a 65 76 65 6e 74 73 20 77 69 74 6e 65 73 73 65 64 2c 20 62 75 74 20 70 72 6f 6f 66 20 74 68 61 74 20 69 74 20 63 61 6d 65 20 66 72 6f 6d 20 74 68 65 20 6c 61 72 67 65 73 74 20 70 6f 6f 6c 20 6f 66 20 43 50 55 20 70 6f 77 65 72 2e 20 41 73 0d 0a 6c 6f 6e 67 20 61 73 20 61 20 6d 61 6a 6f 72 69 74 79 20 6f 66 20 43 50 55 20 70 6f 77 65 72 20 69 73 20 63 6f 6e 74 72 6f 6c 6c 65 64 20 62 79 20 6e 6f 64 65 73 20 74 68 61 74 20 61 72 65 20 6e 6f 74 20 63 6f 6f 70 65 72 61 74 69 6e 67 20 74 6f 0d 0a 61 74 74 61 63 6b 20 74 68 65 20 6e 65 74 77 6f 72 6b 2c 20 74 68 65 79 27 6c 6c 20 67 65 6e 65 72 61 74 65 20 74 68 65 20 6c 6f 6e 67 65 73 74 20 63 68 61 69 6e 20 61 6e 64 20 6f 75 74 70 61 63 65 20 61 74 74 61 63 6b 65 72 73 2e 20 54 68 65 0d 0a 6e 65 74 77 6f 72 6b 20 69 74 73 65 6c 66 20 72 65 71 75 69 72 65 73 20 6d 69 6e 69 6d 61 6c 20 73 74 72 75 63 74 75 72 65 2e 20 4d 65 73 73 61 67 65 73 20 61 72 65 20 62 72 6f 61 64 63 61 73 74 20 6f 6e 20 61 20 62 65 73 74 20 65 66 66 6f 72 74 0d 0a 62 61 73 69 73 2c 20 61 6e 64 20 6e 6f 64 65 73 20 63 61 6e 20 6c 65 61 76 65 20 61 6e 64 20 72 65 6a 6f 69 6e 20 74 68 65 20 6e 65 74 77 6f 72 6b 20 61 74 20 77 69 6c 6c 2c 20 61 63 63 65 70 74 69 6e 67 20 74 68 65 20 6c 6f 6e 67 65 73 74 0d 0a 70 72 6f 6f 66 2d 6f 66 2d 77 6f 72 6b 20 63 68 61 69 6e 20 61 73 20 70 72 6f 6f 66 20 6f 66 20 77 68 61 74 20 68 61 70 70 65 6e 65 64 20 77 68 69 6c 65 20 74 68 65 79 20 77 65 72 65 20 67 6f 6e 65

Thats text, not code.

[MrCrabs]

I just fucking love this so much. I'm now late for work.

[kjj]

The Fed doesn't pay me enough to put up with this, but ok... here is byte code for x86 that translates either a decimal or hexadecimal string to a binary value (yes, I actually wrote the byte code, and yes, I can read and write x86 machine encodings in hex):

Welcome to ignore.  Doesn't matter if this is truth or lie, either way you've conclusively demonstrated that you will never say anything worth hearing.

[acoindr]

The guy just said he wanted to see ANY code I had written, so I showed 50 lines out of the nearly million lines I have written.

As far as my "snippet" is concerned, if you can produce any better implementation of a combination counting algorithm, then we can talk about the shortcomings of my code.  

Yeah, and if I walk up to the Sears Tower pull out a megaphone and start broadcasting "amateur hour", then some guy asks me to show a blueprint section of a bathroom as proof of my authority on the subject, and I present that ...  

I didn't say the presented code snippet has shortcomings.

[Herodes]

Blinken: No matter how skilled you are or pretend you are, it doesn't change the fact that you're a complete ass.

[scintill]

I wrote this bytecode while I was taking a dump just now. I believe it solves the max block size problem with a brilliant solution that requires an IQ of at least 140 to understand. If you deny the validity of my solution then you simply do not have the mental acuteness people like Blinken and myself are blessed with. I would develop it further but I have already done enough for you people.

Code:

41 20 70 75 72 65 6c 79 20 70 65 65 72 2d 74 6f 2d 70 65 65 72 20 76 65 72 73 69 6f 6e 20 6f 66 20 65 6c 65 63 74 72 6f 6e 69 63 20 63 61 73 68 20 77 6f 75 6c 64 20 61 6c 6c 6f 77 20 6f 6e 6c 69 6e 65 0d 0a 70 61 79 6d 65 6e 74 73 20 74 6f 20 62 65 20 73 65 6e 74 20 64 69 72 65 63 74 6c 79 20 66 72 6f 6d 20 6f 6e 65 20 70 61 72 74 79 20 74 6f 20 61 6e 6f 74 68 65 72 20 77 69 74 68 6f 75 74 20 67 6f 69 6e 67 20 74 68 72 6f 75 67 68 20 61 0d 0a 66 69 6e 61 6e 63 69 61 6c 20 69 6e 73 74 69 74 75 74 69 6f 6e 2e 20 44 69 67 69 74 61 6c 20 73 69 67 6e 61 74 75 72 65 73 20 70 72 6f 76 69 64 65 20 70 61 72 74 20 6f 66 20 74 68 65 20 73 6f 6c 75 74 69 6f 6e 2c 20 62 75 74 20 74 68 65 20 6d 61 69 6e 0d 0a 62 65 6e 65 66 69 74 73 20 61 72 65 20 6c 6f 73 74 20 69 66 20 61 20 74 72 75 73 74 65 64 20 74 68 69 72 64 20 70 61 72 74 79 20 69 73 20 73 74 69 6c 6c 20 72 65 71 75 69 72 65 64 20 74 6f 20 70 72 65 76 65 6e 74 20 64 6f 75 62 6c 65 2d 73 70 65 6e 64 69 6e 67 2e 0d 0a 57 65 20 70 72 6f 70 6f 73 65 20 61 20 73 6f 6c 75 74 69 6f 6e 20 74 6f 20 74 68 65 20 64 6f 75 62 6c 65 2d 73 70 65 6e 64 69 6e 67 20 70 72 6f 62 6c 65 6d 20 75 73 69 6e 67 20 61 20 70 65 65 72 2d 74 6f 2d 70 65 65 72 20 6e 65 74 77 6f 72 6b 2e 0d 0a 54 68 65 20 6e 65 74 77 6f 72 6b 20 74 69 6d 65 73 74 61 6d 70 73 20 74 72 61 6e 73 61 63 74 69 6f 6e 73 20 62 79 20 68 61 73 68 69 6e 67 20 74 68 65 6d 20 69 6e 74 6f 20 61 6e 20 6f 6e 67 6f 69 6e 67 20 63 68 61 69 6e 20 6f 66 0d 0a 68 61 73 68 2d 62 61 73 65 64 20 70 72 6f 6f 66 2d 6f 66 2d 77 6f 72 6b 2c 20 66 6f 72 6d 69 6e 67 20 61 20 72 65 63 6f 72 64 20 74 68 61 74 20 63 61 6e 6e 6f 74 20 62 65 20 63 68 61 6e 67 65 64 20 77 69 74 68 6f 75 74 20 72 65 64 6f 69 6e 67 0d 0a 74 68 65 20 70 72 6f 6f 66 2d 6f 66 2d 77 6f 72 6b 2e 20 54 68 65 20 6c 6f 6e 67 65 73 74 20 63 68 61 69 6e 20 6e 6f 74 20 6f 6e 6c 79 20 73 65 72 76 65 73 20 61 73 20 70 72 6f 6f 66 20 6f 66 20 74 68 65 20 73 65 71 75 65 6e 63 65 20 6f 66 0d 0a 65 76 65 6e 74 73 20 77 69 74 6e 65 73 73 65 64 2c 20 62 75 74 20 70 72 6f 6f 66 20 74 68 61 74 20 69 74 20 63 61 6d 65 20 66 72 6f 6d 20 74 68 65 20 6c 61 72 67 65 73 74 20 70 6f 6f 6c 20 6f 66 20 43 50 55 20 70 6f 77 65 72 2e 20 41 73 0d 0a 6c 6f 6e 67 20 61 73 20 61 20 6d 61 6a 6f 72 69 74 79 20 6f 66 20 43 50 55 20 70 6f 77 65 72 20 69 73 20 63 6f 6e 74 72 6f 6c 6c 65 64 20 62 79 20 6e 6f 64 65 73 20 74 68 61 74 20 61 72 65 20 6e 6f 74 20 63 6f 6f 70 65 72 61 74 69 6e 67 20 74 6f 0d 0a 61 74 74 61 63 6b 20 74 68 65 20 6e 65 74 77 6f 72 6b 2c 20 74 68 65 79 27 6c 6c 20 67 65 6e 65 72 61 74 65 20 74 68 65 20 6c 6f 6e 67 65 73 74 20 63 68 61 69 6e 20 61 6e 64 20 6f 75 74 70 61 63 65 20 61 74 74 61 63 6b 65 72 73 2e 20 54 68 65 0d 0a 6e 65 74 77 6f 72 6b 20 69 74 73 65 6c 66 20 72 65 71 75 69 72 65 73 20 6d 69 6e 69 6d 61 6c 20 73 74 72 75 63 74 75 72 65 2e 20 4d 65 73 73 61 67 65 73 20 61 72 65 20 62 72 6f 61 64 63 61 73 74 20 6f 6e 20 61 20 62 65 73 74 20 65 66 66 6f 72 74 0d 0a 62 61 73 69 73 2c 20 61 6e 64 20 6e 6f 64 65 73 20 63 61 6e 20 6c 65 61 76 65 20 61 6e 64 20 72 65 6a 6f 69 6e 20 74 68 65 20 6e 65 74 77 6f 72 6b 20 61 74 20 77 69 6c 6c 2c 20 61 63 63 65 70 74 69 6e 67 20 74 68 65 20 6c 6f 6e 67 65 73 74 0d 0a 70 72 6f 6f 66 2d 6f 66 2d 77 6f 72 6b 20 63 68 61 69 6e 20 61 73 20 70 72 6f 6f 66 20 6f 66 20 77 68 61 74 20 68 61 70 70 65 6e 65 64 20 77 68 69 6c 65 20 74 68 65 79 20 77 65 72 65 20 67 6f 6e 65

Thats text, not code.

You're just not smart enough to recognize the machine for which it is also valid and useful bytecode.  Need 165 IQ for that.

[Bitobsessed]

Blinken: No matter how skilled you are or pretend you are, it doesn't change the fact that you're a complete ass.

Hey Blinkin!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wJcuYKyHEgs

[Blinken]

Blinken: No matter how skilled you are or pretend you are, it doesn't change the fact that you're a complete ass.

Hey, this isn't about me. I know you have some wierd fascination with me, but I didn't make the post to discuss myself.

The point is that we had a block chain fork yesterday and it can be attributed to existing serious weaknesses in the QT client code, and a failure to properly test the 0.8 release. The question is how we can step up the professionalism of the development effort to improve the design, quality and testing of the code so it doesn't happen again.

[Herodes]

The point is that we had a block chain fork yesterday and it can be attributed to existing serious weaknesses in the QT client code, and a failure to properly test the 0.8 release. The question is how we can step up the professionalism of the development effort to improve the design, quality and testing of the code so it doesn't happen again.

Then keep it professional. And contribute.

[Blinken]

Now, that I think about it, maybe the solution is to write an optional donation into the default client. If each transaction had a small donation to the development team, then they could potentially fund a larger operation, hire QC, etc.

[SgtSpike]

- Generate new bitcoins proportionally to the volume of transactions and distribute the new coins proportionately to existing holders of bitcoins; the whole mining thing is pointless and destabilizing.

Please do explain what the point of distributing new coins proportionately to existing holders of coins?  It's the equivalent of changing the decimal place and claiming you are 10 times richer because of it.

For how smart you claim to be, you sure are disappointing me with your "solutions".

P.S.  I knew a guy on the internet who claimed he owned a lambo too.   

Hey, I am only 140 IQ. You probably need somebody like 165 to solve the bitcoin problem. :-)

As far as the mining is concerned, that was definitely the work of a 125. A much better idea is to increase the supply of coins proportionately to the transaction volume. This would result in price stability, an important characteristic of a currency which bitcoin currently lacks entirely. Note that the supply of bitcoins could also decrease if the transaction volume shrank. The way it should work is that the network continually adjusts the total supply of coins. Each holder does not hold coin totals, they hold a fraction of the total. So, your fraction never changes, but its valuation does depending on the volume of trades.

Price stability is important to the economy for numerous reasons which can you read for yourself in the book "The Stability of Prices" by noted economist, Simon N. Patten.

The idea of increasing the supply of coins proportionately to the transaction volume is interesting, but how are you going to do that without identifying the person behind each Bitcoin address?  If Bitcoin addresses weren't at least partially anonymous, then everyone could know exactly how everyone else is spending their money.  That doesn't sound like a great financial system to me...

It is my belief that price stability will come with adoption.  As more and more people begin using Bitcoin, the price will become more and more stable.  I'd say with mass adoption, we'd see stability come close to that of Gold.  I could be completely wrong - I am no expert - but this is what I currently believe we will see happen.

[Littleshop]

I wrote this bytecode while I was taking a dump just now. I believe it solves the max block size problem with a brilliant solution that requires an IQ of at least 140 to understand. If you deny the validity of my solution then you simply do not have the mental acuteness people like Blinken and myself are blessed with. I would develop it further but I have already done enough for you people.

Code:

41 20 70 75 72 65 6c 79 20 70 65 65 72 2d 74 6f 2d 70 65 65 72 20 76 65 72 73 69 6f 6e 20 6f 66 20 65 6c 65 63 74 72 6f 6e 69 63 20 63 61 73 68 20 77 6f 75 6c 64 20 61 6c 6c 6f 77 20 6f 6e 6c 69 6e 65 0d 0a 70 61 79 6d 65 6e 74 73 20 74 6f 20 62 65 20 73 65 6e 74 20 64 69 72 65 63 74 6c 79 20 66 72 6f 6d 20 6f 6e 65 20 70 61 72 74 79 20 74 6f 20 61 6e 6f 74 68 65 72 20 77 69 74 68 6f 75 74 20 67 6f 69 6e 67 20 74 68 72 6f 75 67 68 20 61 0d 0a 66 69 6e 61 6e 63 69 61 6c 20 69 6e 73 74 69 74 75 74 69 6f 6e 2e 20 44 69 67 69 74 61 6c 20 73 69 67 6e 61 74 75 72 65 73 20 70 72 6f 76 69 64 65 20 70 61 72 74 20 6f 66 20 74 68 65 20 73 6f 6c 75 74 69 6f 6e 2c 20 62 75 74 20 74 68 65 20 6d 61 69 6e 0d 0a 62 65 6e 65 66 69 74 73 20 61 72 65 20 6c 6f 73 74 20 69 66 20 61 20 74 72 75 73 74 65 64 20 74 68 69 72 64 20 70 61 72 74 79 20 69 73 20 73 74 69 6c 6c 20 72 65 71 75 69 72 65 64 20 74 6f 20 70 72 65 76 65 6e 74 20 64 6f 75 62 6c 65 2d 73 70 65 6e 64 69 6e 67 2e 0d 0a 57 65 20 70 72 6f 70 6f 73 65 20 61 20 73 6f 6c 75 74 69 6f 6e 20 74 6f 20 74 68 65 20 64 6f 75 62 6c 65 2d 73 70 65 6e 64 69 6e 67 20 70 72 6f 62 6c 65 6d 20 75 73 69 6e 67 20 61 20 70 65 65 72 2d 74 6f 2d 70 65 65 72 20 6e 65 74 77 6f 72 6b 2e 0d 0a 54 68 65 20 6e 65 74 77 6f 72 6b 20 74 69 6d 65 73 74 61 6d 70 73 20 74 72 61 6e 73 61 63 74 69 6f 6e 73 20 62 79 20 68 61 73 68 69 6e 67 20 74 68 65 6d 20 69 6e 74 6f 20 61 6e 20 6f 6e 67 6f 69 6e 67 20 63 68 61 69 6e 20 6f 66 0d 0a 68 61 73 68 2d 62 61 73 65 64 20 70 72 6f 6f 66 2d 6f 66 2d 77 6f 72 6b 2c 20 66 6f 72 6d 69 6e 67 20 61 20 72 65 63 6f 72 64 20 74 68 61 74 20 63 61 6e 6e 6f 74 20 62 65 20 63 68 61 6e 67 65 64 20 77 69 74 68 6f 75 74 20 72 65 64 6f 69 6e 67 0d 0a 74 68 65 20 70 72 6f 6f 66 2d 6f 66 2d 77 6f 72 6b 2e 20 54 68 65 20 6c 6f 6e 67 65 73 74 20 63 68 61 69 6e 20 6e 6f 74 20 6f 6e 6c 79 20 73 65 72 76 65 73 20 61 73 20 70 72 6f 6f 66 20 6f 66 20 74 68 65 20 73 65 71 75 65 6e 63 65 20 6f 66 0d 0a 65 76 65 6e 74 73 20 77 69 74 6e 65 73 73 65 64 2c 20 62 75 74 20 70 72 6f 6f 66 20 74 68 61 74 20 69 74 20 63 61 6d 65 20 66 72 6f 6d 20 74 68 65 20 6c 61 72 67 65 73 74 20 70 6f 6f 6c 20 6f 66 20 43 50 55 20 70 6f 77 65 72 2e 20 41 73 0d 0a 6c 6f 6e 67 20 61 73 20 61 20 6d 61 6a 6f 72 69 74 79 20 6f 66 20 43 50 55 20 70 6f 77 65 72 20 69 73 20 63 6f 6e 74 72 6f 6c 6c 65 64 20 62 79 20 6e 6f 64 65 73 20 74 68 61 74 20 61 72 65 20 6e 6f 74 20 63 6f 6f 70 65 72 61 74 69 6e 67 20 74 6f 0d 0a 61 74 74 61 63 6b 20 74 68 65 20 6e 65 74 77 6f 72 6b 2c 20 74 68 65 79 27 6c 6c 20 67 65 6e 65 72 61 74 65 20 74 68 65 20 6c 6f 6e 67 65 73 74 20 63 68 61 69 6e 20 61 6e 64 20 6f 75 74 70 61 63 65 20 61 74 74 61 63 6b 65 72 73 2e 20 54 68 65 0d 0a 6e 65 74 77 6f 72 6b 20 69 74 73 65 6c 66 20 72 65 71 75 69 72 65 73 20 6d 69 6e 69 6d 61 6c 20 73 74 72 75 63 74 75 72 65 2e 20 4d 65 73 73 61 67 65 73 20 61 72 65 20 62 72 6f 61 64 63 61 73 74 20 6f 6e 20 61 20 62 65 73 74 20 65 66 66 6f 72 74 0d 0a 62 61 73 69 73 2c 20 61 6e 64 20 6e 6f 64 65 73 20 63 61 6e 20 6c 65 61 76 65 20 61 6e 64 20 72 65 6a 6f 69 6e 20 74 68 65 20 6e 65 74 77 6f 72 6b 20 61 74 20 77 69 6c 6c 2c 20 61 63 63 65 70 74 69 6e 67 20 74 68 65 20 6c 6f 6e 67 65 73 74 0d 0a 70 72 6f 6f 66 2d 6f 66 2d 77 6f 72 6b 20 63 68 61 69 6e 20 61 73 20 70 72 6f 6f 66 20 6f 66 20 77 68 61 74 20 68 61 70 70 65 6e 65 64 20 77 68 69 6c 65 20 74 68 65 79 20 77 65 72 65 20 67 6f 6e 65

Thats text, not code.

Where do we begin?  Most code is text.  Being text therefore does not make it not code.  Most people would not refer to the mentioned block as text anyhow,  they would refer to it as hexidecimal code.   

Is it valid code that executes on something?  That is above my IQ.