No, I don't believe that, and to be honest, I don't even believe you yourself understand cold storage, given your brief description. But I don't think this will stop bitcoin adoption, most people will use online wallets, or something like a "bitcoin bank", where their bitcoins will be safe or legally insured. Maintaining money in local file is just an experimental software, mostly.

No, that isn't it. This shows mostly new posts from old topics, but I only want to see new TOPICS. I.e., I would like the topics to be sorted by the date of their first post.

Please how can I see, which new topics were posted to a certain Board, or to the whole Forum?

But what if the seller is dishonest? You sent BTC and then didn't receive what was expected.

With reversibility, seller is at risk, with non-reversibility, buyer is at risk.

Never had problems with BTER.

But a lot of circumstantial evidence, which when put together, could make her claim legit.

Gabi,
I see it like this: Apple marketed its iPhone product as a smartphone, as a device which will fulfills one's mobile "computational needs". They didn't use such words, but in context of the smartphone market, there is this expectation when buying the device. Now, for many people, basic mobile phone need is to be able to manage one's own crypto-currency wealth. By them not allowing this, they are restricting my ability to handle my crypto-money when I am not at my PC, which can potentially lead to a financial loss for me.

Of course, I can buy something better, but that will mean additional financial burden for me, right? Because I can't sell my 3-year-old iPhone for a price, that will allow me to buy equivalent smartphone from other company. I probably wouldn't buy an iPhone, had I know at that time that they would not allow such an essential functionality 3 years later, but how could I predict that. I am just not so rich so I can buy new smartphone anytime I want, and why should I? I also invested additional money to buy other apps, to their ecosystem, and that would be another loss for me.

To sum it up, I think your argument is valid only for a new smartphone buyer.

Hello
I am compiling one altcoin for someone, and I am getting the following compilation error:

C:\altcoin>make -f Makefile.Release

g++ -c -pipe -O2 -frtti -fexceptions -mthreads -fdiagnostics-show-option -Wall -
Wextra -Wformat -Wformat-security -Wno-unused-parameter -DUNICODE -DQT_GUI -DBOO
ST_THREAD_USE_LIB -DBOOST_SPIRIT_THREADSAFE -DBOOST_THREAD_PROVIDES_GENERIC_SHAR
ED_MUTEX_ON_WIN -D__NO_SYSTEM_INCLUDES -DWIN32 -D_MT -DQT_DLL -DQT_NO_DEBUG -DQT
_GUI_LIB -DQT_CORE_LIB -DQT_HAVE_MMX -DQT_HAVE_3DNOW -DQT_HAVE_SSE -DQT_HAVE_MMX
EXT -DQT_HAVE_SSE2 -DQT_THREAD_SUPPORT -DQT_NEEDS_QMAIN -I"..\Qt\4.8.5\include\Q
tCore" -I"..\Qt\4.8.5\include\QtGui" -I"..\Qt\4.8.5\include" -I"src" -I"src\json
" -I"src\qt" -I"..\deps\boost" -I"..\deps\db\build_unix" -I"..\deps\ssl\include"
 -I"..\Qt\4.8.5\include\ActiveQt" -I"build" -I"build" -I"..\Qt\4.8.5\mkspecs\win
32-g++" -o build\bitcoin.o src\qt\bitcoin.cpp
g++.exe: error: srcqtbitcoin.cpp: No such file or directory
g++.exe: fatal error: no input files
compilation terminated.
make: *** [build/bitcoin.o] Error 1

This line is where the problem is:

g++.exe: error: srcqtbitcoin.cpp: No such file or directory

It seems that the make system or I don't know who mangled the file path from src\qt\bitcoin.cpp to srcqtbitcoin.cpp (backslashes are removed). Please don't you know how to fix this?

Hi
Let's say I'd like to create a closed-source windows app, which can also work with wallet. But of course, there's an issue of trust, since nobody can be sure there isn't a code inside which would steal the money after the wallet is decrypted. Is there some way to ensure that the application can't do that?

Actually, this IS already implemented, as I described in the following article:

http://btc-base.blogspot.sk/2014/01/bitcoin-transactions-why-it-is.html

Theoretically, though, I am not sure if the attacker couldn't try to fake the timestamp (he would set the timestamp of the first "private" block around one hour to the future).

Ok, I mostly agree with what you are saying. My only reservation is, that what you are describing here, is already (to a large degree) valid for litecoin as well. You need to assemble for-mining-only hardware (rig with graphics cards), otherwise you can't profit from mining (and you also have hard time to compete with those who have got free electricity). The crux of the problem is still there, and it isn't any cheaper (or easier) to build scrypt-rig, comparing to buy ASIC.

Why? It is very well possible that the price of ASICs will go down and price of BTC will go up, and you can for some time profit even when you only own very small part of the overall hashrate.

To be honest, I don't quite get this anti-ASIC sentiment. I tried to mine LTC on my PC and it wasn't worth it, and there are even no scrypt ASICs yet. I think this "no ASIC so normal people with their own PCs can mine" philosophy works only in the early stages of the scrypt-coin, after the difficulty raises it isn't worth it, when you don't have free electricity.

Today, I would need at least one rig with 3 graphics cards to mine litecoins for example, but this thing would be noisy and consumes a lot of electricity, so I basically can't put it in my apartment. I would much prefer to be able to buy dedicated scrypt ASIC and mine with it. It will be more eco-friendly and will not be mis-using graphics cards.

To sum it up, I don't support this proposal, I want the scrypt-asics to be sold.

Seems that my prediction is starting to materialize... ;-)

iBuyPower mints new CoinMine desktops for Bitcoin mining
http://www.zdnet.com/ibuypower-mints-new-coinmine-desktops-for-bitcoin-mining-7000025201/

With my economic knowledge being limited, can someone explain what are the main disadvantages of such a distribution we've got in Bitcoin?

I don't say you are not correct, but what you are saying in your post (also further down) is not exactly universal experience. Maybe you are very skilled in compiling and have working experience with 3rd party open source libraries, but it's not like this for many other people. Many programmers who knows only Visual Studio will not go to the end of the process successfully...to sum it up, you are making it easier that it is (I mean for new people especially).

Also, replacing the library with newer version don't always work. (for example with QT).

In my work, we have a source tree, and all 3rd party libraries are there, so you know exactly what you are compiling. That's especially helpful when someone new comes to a team - he just download the tree and compiles it from the root, and don't have to fiddle with installing this and installing that. And it doesn't take any more time during normal development, since those libs are compiled only once (the sources doesn't change). But I understand that the open source culture is different in this regard, it's more of a meritocracy. (I have better bragging rights, since I know more ;-)).

Anyway, the more important question is, how do we convince the main bitcoin developers to include visual studio support into the main development branch. ;-)

I vaguely remember MemoryCoin uses some type of voting, using the similar schema.

For this to work on a national scale, the following problems must be solved:

1) someone could be coerced to vote in a certain way
2) someone can sell his vote (buyer and seller meets, buyer shows him how he is voting in a desired way, and seller pays him for that).

I was thinking about the following:

When the bitcoin will become economically stronger in the (near) future, it could spawn the next generation of personal computers. The processor would be designed from scratch and the specification would be completely open-source for anyone to review. The part of the architecture would be also small ASIC miner(s) presented in such a PC.

The OS will be Linux-derived or created from scratch, and the basic bitcoin software will be build in, so every computer will be also the bitcoin node by default, p2pool, wallet and other software will be also pre-installed. Also, all services requiring privacy will be provided by decentralized blockchain, like for example Bitmessage for communication, etc.

To sum it up, it will be something also Richard Stallman would use (free in the FSF sense), and I believe bitcoin could make this economically viable. I wonder what do you think about this idea.

This is also a semantic problem, what means "to afford"? Different people have different concepts regarding what exactly it means.

I'm personally quite bullish on bitcoin, so I couldn't give an advice "don't invest more than you can't afford" in a clear conscience. On the contrary, I think it is fine for someone to borrow money to invest in Bitcoin now, if that person made his homework and believes that the price must go up with reasonably high probability. IMHO, it is not the same as lottery, where you have no chance to predict what will happen.

OP: No, I don't think you are an idiot.

I think you are overestimating the size of bitcoin infrastructure in your country comparing to world-wide infrastructure.