Can someone explain to me how you can avoid entire blockchain runs with Bitcoin Segwit?  What I mean is that if the blocks become congested then people with money in Lightning channels cannot clear them on the main chain.  If you can't clear your money on the main chain then your lightning channel will execute and you will receive an incorrect amount of money.  Everyone already knows this.  The real problem is that under Segwit's version of Lightning you will have to have hundreds of times more transactions off the blockchain than on the blockchain.  So its not a question of if the blockchain will get congested, its a question of when.  The most likely time for massive blockchain congestion is during economic depressions.  As far as I know the only fix for blockchain congestion that the Segwit team has to offer is to freeze transactions in the Lightning network thus giving them more time to clear on the main chain.  But again if you have an economic depression with Bitcoin Segwit that means the price of the coin is in free fall.  So basically Bitcoin Segwit will work fine until the price of the coin is in freefall and during this time you cannot clear your transaction on the main chain.  So can someone who thinks Segwit is a good idea explain to me how this is any different than fractional reserve banking with fiat money?  With fractionally reserved fiat you have more currency on the books than in the vault (just like with Bitcoin Segwit you pretend to have more blockchain on Lightning than you do on the mainchain).  The fractional reserve system for fiat works fine until depressions hit and then everyone loses massive sums of money.  So isn't Bitcoin Segwit just another fractionally reserved currency that will cause massive economic boom and bust cycles?

In case you want a summary, Bitcoin Segwit fractionally reserves the blockchain which is what backs Bitcoin just like fractional reserves originally fractionalized gold which is what backed the dollar.  Did we just trade one fractionally reserved currency for another?  I don't see how Segwit can do anything but destroy everything Bitcoin was trying to create for the world.

Every time I try to build or configure the file I get this.

./configure: line 6177: syntax error near unexpected token `,'
./configure: line 6177: `LIBCURL_CHECK_CONFIG(, 7.15.2, ,'
make: *** No targets specified and no makefile found.  Stop.

You have to actually look in the configure file on your own machine and search to line 6177 and you find this.  What is the syntax error it is talking about? Do I need to include earlier lines of code as well in order to get an answer or is this enough of the relevant code?

My point is that I have other CPU and GPU miners on my computer and they work no problem.  I don't remember the exact method in which I installed each of them, but this is the only miner that I can't get to work.  Reminding me that the EWBF miner is executable when you download it doesn't help me get tpruvot's ccminer to work so what's the point in posting about it.  What does my error mean and how do I fix it?  Is my GPU simply not capable of running this miner or what?

Again not a programmer so my questions may be worded incorrectly.  When you say the compute version may be to old I'm assuming your referring to the 30 in the nvcc Arch part I changed.  On Tpruvot's own page he says that you need to check your GPU for what to set this parameter to.  The link is here https://github.com/tpruvot/ccminer/wiki/Compatibility and it says this is what my settings should be according to my computers NVidia GeFORCE GTX 650 Ti.  Like I said I have no idea what the problem is, but it says something is wrong with the syntax in line 6177.  What does that mean?

Note me saying I wasn't a programmer so I'm not going to use the correct syntax.  I guess I built the CUDA repositories for EWBF's and then downloaded the executable miner.  Why can't I use the build function on this Miner?  You still didn't answer my question.

I can't seem to get this to build correctly.  I'm not a computer programmer but I have built other miners like EWBF's Cuda Miner on Linux.  Yet getting this one too work seems to evade me.  I have an Nvidia GeFORCE GTX 650 Ti  (this is not a rig, just my computer) and so I set the nvcc Arch to (nvcc_ARCH = -gencode=arch=compute_30,code=\"sm_30,compute_30\") as it asked but I'm getting this when I run ./build.sh

./build.sh
make: *** No rule to make target 'distclean'.  Stop.
clean
checking build system type... x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
checking host system type... x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
checking target system type... x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
checking for a BSD-compatible install... /usr/bin/install -c
checking whether build environment is sane... yes
checking for a thread-safe mkdir -p... /bin/mkdir -p
checking for gawk... no
checking for mawk... mawk
checking whether make sets $(MAKE)... yes
checking whether make supports nested variables... yes
checking whether to enable maintainer-specific portions of Makefiles... no
checking for style of include used by make... GNU
checking for gcc... gcc
checking whether the C compiler works... yes
checking for C compiler default output file name... a.out
checking for suffix of executables...
checking whether we are cross compiling... no
checking for suffix of object files... o
checking whether we are using the GNU C compiler... yes
checking whether gcc accepts -g... yes
checking for gcc option to accept ISO C89... none needed
checking whether gcc understands -c and -o together... yes
checking dependency style of gcc... gcc3
checking for gcc option to accept ISO C99... none needed
checking how to run the C preprocessor... gcc -E
checking for grep that handles long lines and -e... /bin/grep
checking for egrep... /bin/grep -E
checking whether gcc needs -traditional... no
checking dependency style of gcc... gcc3
checking for ranlib... ranlib
checking for g++... g++
checking whether we are using the GNU C++ compiler... yes
checking whether g++ accepts -g... yes
checking dependency style of g++... gcc3
checking for gcc option to support OpenMP... -fopenmp
checking for ANSI C header files... yes
checking for sys/types.h... yes
checking for sys/stat.h... yes
checking for stdlib.h... yes
checking for string.h... yes
checking for memory.h... yes
checking for strings.h... yes
checking for inttypes.h... yes
checking for stdint.h... yes
checking for unistd.h... yes
checking sys/endian.h usability... no
checking sys/endian.h presence... no
checking for sys/endian.h... no
checking sys/param.h usability... yes
checking sys/param.h presence... yes
checking for sys/param.h... yes
checking syslog.h usability... yes
checking syslog.h presence... yes
checking for syslog.h... yes
checking for sys/sysctl.h... yes
checking whether be32dec is declared... no
checking whether le32dec is declared... no
checking whether be32enc is declared... no
checking whether le32enc is declared... no
checking for size_t... yes
checking for working alloca.h... yes
checking for alloca... yes
checking for getopt_long... yes
checking for json_loads in -ljansson... no
checking for pthread_create in -lpthread... yes
checking for gzopen in -lz... yes
checking for SSL_library_init in -lssl... yes
checking for EVP_DigestFinal_ex in -lcrypto... yes
./configure: line 6177: syntax error near unexpected token `,'
./configure: line 6177: `LIBCURL_CHECK_CONFIG(, 7.15.2, ,'
make: *** No targets specified and no makefile found.  Stop.


Sorry for the book of code but I don't know what it really means.  What exactly is going wrong?  The only thing I can think of is that I had to switch drivers for my graphics card to mine on EWBF's so maybe I need to switch back, but if this uses CUDA then I don't think I can.  Anyways I'm thoroughly confused and could use help.

Please, has anyone actually mined ZCoin with Ubuntu.  I want to know if its possible before I try.  I can't get it to work and need a sensei to teach me lol.  Like I said before I've gotten other miners to work, this is the only coin I can't get any miner to work on. 

Is it possible?  I can't get any miners to install correctly for ZCoin.  I've tried DJM34's miner and can't get it to work.  Now when I try to run tpruvot's CCminer I run ./build.sh and get this.

make: *** No rule to make target 'distclean'.  Stop.
clean
configure.ac:4: installing './config.sub'
configure.ac:6: installing './missing'
Makefile.am: installing './depcomp'
configure.ac:80: error: possibly undefined macro: AC_MSG_ERROR
      If this token and others are legitimate, please use m4_pattern_allow.
      See the Autoconf documentation.
done
checking build system type... x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
checking host system type... x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
checking target system type... x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
checking for a BSD-compatible install... /usr/bin/install -c
checking whether build environment is sane... yes
checking for a thread-safe mkdir -p... /bin/mkdir -p
checking for gawk... no
checking for mawk... mawk
checking whether make sets $(MAKE)... yes
checking whether make supports nested variables... yes
checking whether to enable maintainer-specific portions of Makefiles... no
checking for style of include used by make... GNU
checking for gcc... gcc
checking whether the C compiler works... yes
checking for C compiler default output file name... a.out
checking for suffix of executables...
checking whether we are cross compiling... no
checking for suffix of object files... o
checking whether we are using the GNU C compiler... yes
checking whether gcc accepts -g... yes
checking for gcc option to accept ISO C89... none needed
checking whether gcc understands -c and -o together... yes
checking dependency style of gcc... gcc3
checking for gcc option to accept ISO C99... none needed
checking how to run the C preprocessor... gcc -E
checking for grep that handles long lines and -e... /bin/grep
checking for egrep... /bin/grep -E
checking whether gcc needs -traditional... no
checking dependency style of gcc... gcc3
checking for ranlib... ranlib
checking for g++... g++
checking whether we are using the GNU C++ compiler... yes
checking whether g++ accepts -g... yes
checking dependency style of g++... gcc3
checking for gcc option to support OpenMP... -fopenmp
checking for ANSI C header files... yes
checking for sys/types.h... yes
checking for sys/stat.h... yes
checking for stdlib.h... yes
checking for string.h... yes
checking for memory.h... yes
checking for strings.h... yes
checking for inttypes.h... yes
checking for stdint.h... yes
checking for unistd.h... yes
checking sys/endian.h usability... no
checking sys/endian.h presence... no
checking for sys/endian.h... no
checking sys/param.h usability... yes
checking sys/param.h presence... yes
checking for sys/param.h... yes
checking syslog.h usability... yes
checking syslog.h presence... yes
checking for syslog.h... yes
checking for sys/sysctl.h... yes
checking whether be32dec is declared... no
checking whether le32dec is declared... no
checking whether be32enc is declared... no
checking whether le32enc is declared... no
checking for size_t... yes
checking for working alloca.h... yes
checking for alloca... yes
checking for getopt_long... yes
checking for json_loads in -ljansson... no
checking for pthread_create in -lpthread... yes
checking for gzopen in -lz... yes
checking for SSL_library_init in -lssl... yes
checking for EVP_DigestFinal_ex in -lcrypto... yes
./configure: line 6177: syntax error near unexpected token `,'
./configure: line 6177: `LIBCURL_CHECK_CONFIG(, 7.15.2, ,'
make: *** No targets specified and no makefile found.  Stop.

Sorry for including everything the command line says back to me, but I'm not sure what the issue is.  I know it says there is an error on line 6177 and I can find that line but I don't know how to fix it.  What gives?

Can anyone explain to me how to download the djm34 miner for Ubuntu.  I've gotten many others to work but can't on this one (not faulting the maker, I'm just new to command line programming or whatever).  But when I go to the link provided and download the zip file the install instructions say use ./build.sh to install with default settings but I can't find that in the file and then if I try and use ./autogen.sh I get below

--configure.ac:4: installing './config.sub'
--configure.ac:6: installing './missing'
--Makefile.am: installing './depcomp'
--configure.ac:76: error: possibly undefined macro: AC_MSG_ERROR
      --If this token and others are legitimate, please use m4_pattern_allow.
      --See the Autoconf documentation.

Maybe I don't have all the required pre-requisites.  I know my CUDA works because I can mine using EWBF's Cuda Miner just fine.  Can anyone explain this I would like to mine the coin but don't know how and need a sensei to teach me how on Ubuntu.  If I ever get to mine some ZCoin I could give some to the person that taught me!

After clearing bitcoin.conf file everything is working perfectly.  Thanks. 

I'm not sure what settings I have that are wrong, but Armory is not connecting to Bitcoin Core as it normally should.  Armory will not sync unless I open Bitcoin Core first.  The bottom right hand corner says connected and the number of blocks but the letters and numbers are in purple and when I hover over it, it tells me RPC is disabled.  This coincided with my updating the Bitcoin Core client so I figured it was problems with the Bitcoin Core settings, not Armory.  I was wondering if the problem could be the rpcuser in my bitcoin.conf file, but was also unsure if publicly giving out my rpcuser in my bitcoin.conf was bad so I didn't include it here.  Anyways I might be wrong about the issue being the rpcuser in my bitcoin.conf file but RPC is disabled for some reason.

I can still use Armory, I just have to open Bitcoin Core first, which isn't a terrible issue I would just like to resolve the issue.

Anyways any and all help would be appreciated and if you ever see this post Goatpig, you are doing God's work!  Just letting you know the community loves you!

BitcoinBuilder does if you have an account with them.  You could talk to their Owner and try and work something out if it is large amount I would assume.  He answers e-mails at support@bitcoinbuilder.com and his name is Josh Jones.  He'll probably tell you no if you don't already hold your Gox BTC there but you asked for anybody. 

Am I the only person here who can't get the blockchain to download.  I can get ZCash, ZenCash, and ZCoin.  But I can't get this coin to get any connections.  What gives?

I've always thought that Bitcoin had one major flaw, there is no entity that has a profit incentive to improve the Bitcoin protocol itself.  Yes the code is open-source, yes each user has an indirect incentive to find flaws, but there is no entity that receives payment for generating more secure and user-friendly code.  The problem with having an entity that receives profit from securing the code is the problem of centralization, in other words how do you give a single entity control over the code, without granting a monopoly?  The answer seems to me to be competing Bitcoin networks that all have separate protocols, meaning there may be thousands of Bitcoin networks, each with different security, user-friendliness, and protocol for Bitcoin transfers.  This would be akin to the separation between banks and the U.S. dollar, every bank uses the same product, U.S. dollars, but they all have different protocol for doing the same work, transferring and storing money.  In a competing Bitcoin network system, each separate Bitcoin network would have protocol of how to accept Bitcoin's from another protocol, and in some cases they may not accept other Bitcoin network's Bitcoins especially in the case of negligent and fraudulent networks.  In this way you could have different networks specialized for certain tasks, miner networks specialized to the needs of miners, merchant networks specialized to the needs of merchants, etc, etc.  Each network would charge a small fee, and because these networks would not have to record the transfers themselves, but are charging a fee for maintenance of the network itself, they would still be able to do so for less than the traditional banking system.

Bitcoin already has applications, such as coloredcoins, that could be used to tag each coin and the network it belongs to.  I'm not an advanced programmer so I don't know many of the technical details, but it seems something like this could be possible.  This wouldn't centralize Bitcoin because each user would choose a network or they could stick with the original non-competitive network, it wouldn't add large fees because the only fee would be for the upkeep of the network, and without this fee the network would be less stable so (as with any trade) you would get more out than you put in, and finally there would be no governmentally mandated restrictions, because the nature of Bitcoin network would make it impossible to stop competition in the market for Bitcoin networks.

Maybe I'm missing something here, but it seems like competitive networks are the way to go.  If I'm wrong please tell me because I've started to take real steps in putting together how you could structure these networks so as to protect users against fraud without incurring additional fees, and if there is something wrong with this idea that makes it unsuitable to the market, or if some internal part of Bitcoin's structure makes this impossible if you could tell me I would save myself wasted effort.

I've not watched this whole scenario for awhile, but Gox stated publicly they had a cold wallet with an average of 98% of their total Bitcoin holdings in it.  How can someone have stolen these coins?  Even if they had a hacker who stole coins from within the business itself (Karpeles mentioned in one interview that one bit of advice he would give other Bitcoin companies would be hiring full-time security guards) how can they have stolen any of the coins in the cold wallet?  And if the paper wallets were stolen, it would seem there would be some sort of security and/or a limited number of people with access to the coins making it easy to determine who the criminal was.

Finally, and this is just a hunch, but Charlie Shrem was arrested in January 2014 for money laundering (Mt Gox went offline in February 2014) after working with Federal authorities on ways to regulate Bitcoin during which he revealed different "money laundering" services he had performed in the past in the hopes that: 1. The Feds would be lenient because he was helping them learn how to regulate Bitcoin and 2.  Bitcoin was originally not legally considered property so money laundering was technically impossible in the early days of its release.  Seeing that Charlie Shrem was put under house arrest for information he voluntarily gave up, it seems likely that some of the information he released could have implicated Mark Karpeles in a criminal investigation of a similar sort and that could be where the shenanigans began.

This story still makes no sense to me, all I know is that something is very fishy, whether it is coming from Gox or governments, and seeing the track records of governments my bet is that they're fucking with us, though I'm not sure exactly how.

It seems to me it would be easier to conduct a freedom of information act request on information regarding Mt. Gox's customers Bitcoins.  This information should not give away anything about ongoing criminal investigations and should be accepted.  It would simply request different bureacracies such as the FBI or other likely involved agencies to release information as to the whereabouts and/or ownership powers over customers' Bitcoins.  Gets rid of the step of a legal case against the government which could take years.

After the request gives back information you would know whether the story is true or not, and the government would be able to continue its investigation, so it should be an easier way then forcing it to court from the get go.

It said the company is liquidating, meaning it will lose all its assets, but I cannot find anywhere that it says it is liquidating its Bitcoins into fiat, it even contains questions regarding the release of Bitcoins to customers.  One of us is misreading this and I read it twice (though it is boring and I may have missed something).  All it seems to say is Mt. Gox as a company will not come back, it may be bought out by the proper buyer although they think finding such a buyer will be difficult, and the balances shown on the website only reflect the Bitcoin balances before the alleged hack the real balances are unknown. 

Am I missing something, it seems there is zero evidence of this claim, yet people are still discussing it.  What gives?

Demand will change with regard to whatever the outcome is, it is a big event.

Ok so I've always used exchanges like banks, but am now deciding to learn how to use Bitcoin myself.  I have been creating test wallets to try all the features on Armory, and created a wallet that I backed up, deleted, recovered, made into a watching only copy, but now when I press permanently delete wallet it gives me a warning and I press yes to that, but then nothing.  The wallet's page is still open, and when I cancel out of the tab the wallet is still there.  I have created and deleted wallets before and since, and after pressing yes on the last warning pop-up, the wallet page disappears and so does the wallet, but for this specific wallet, I can press yes on the last warning pop-up, but it seems that nothing happens. 

I am very confused, deleting a wallet should be simple and I can do more complex things in Armory, but its the only thing giving me trouble at the moment, all help is appreciated.

I have lots, wouldn't sell except for 100% value, I doubt they lost any coins and all evidence seems to be pointing that way.