I like both DD-MM- and -MM-DD. I just dislike MM-DD- and -DD-MM.
On 4/4/14, Jeff Garzik jgar...@bitpay.com wrote:
On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 3:01 AM, Wladimir laa...@gmail.com wrote:
Personally I'd prefer to standardize on ISO 8601 (-MM-DD) dates as
well.
+1 for all-numeric,
On Saturday, 5 April 2014, at 12:21 pm, Jorge Timón wrote:
I like both DD-MM- and -MM-DD. I just dislike MM-DD- and
-DD-MM.
Your preferences reflect a cultural bias. The only entirely numeric date format
that is unambiguous across all cultures is -MM-DD. (No culture uses
On 4/5/14, Matt Whitlock b...@mattwhitlock.name wrote:
On Saturday, 5 April 2014, at 12:21 pm, Jorge Timón wrote:
I like both DD-MM- and -MM-DD. I just dislike MM-DD- and
-DD-MM.
Your preferences reflect a cultural bias. The only entirely numeric date
format that is
On Sat, Apr 5, 2014 at 12:40 PM, Matt Whitlock b...@mattwhitlock.namewrote:
On Saturday, 5 April 2014, at 12:21 pm, Jorge Timón wrote:
I like both DD-MM- and -MM-DD. I just dislike MM-DD- and
-DD-MM.
Your preferences reflect a cultural bias. The only entirely numeric date
-MM-DD sorts more naturally.
On 04/05/2014 06:28 AM, Wladimir wrote:
On Sat, Apr 5, 2014 at 12:40 PM, Matt Whitlock b...@mattwhitlock.name
mailto:b...@mattwhitlock.name wrote:
On Saturday, 5 April 2014, at 12:21 pm, Jorge Timón wrote:
I like both DD-MM- and -MM-DD. I
On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 8:41 PM, kjj bitcoin-de...@jerviss.org wrote:
At first, I thought this was a second April Fool's joke, but then I
looked and saw that all of the BIPs really do use this format. As far
as I can tell, we are using this insane format because RFC 822 predates
ISO 8601 by
Matt Whitlock wrote:
The creation date in your BIP header has the wrong format. It should be
01-04-2014, per BIP 1.
At first, I thought this was a second April Fool's joke, but then I
looked and saw that all of the BIPs really do use this format. As far
as I can tell, we are using this
Hi all,
I understand this is a controversial proposal, but bear with me please.
I believe we cannot accept the current subsidy schedule anymore, so I
wrote a small draft BIP with a proposal to turn Bitcoin into a
limited-supply currency. Dogecoin has already shown how easy such
changes are, so I
The creation date in your BIP header has the wrong format. It should be
01-04-2014, per BIP 1.
:-)
On Tuesday, 1 April 2014, at 9:00 pm, Pieter Wuille wrote:
Hi all,
I understand this is a controversial proposal, but bear with me please.
I believe we cannot accept the current subsidy
On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 12:00 PM, Pieter Wuille pieter.wui...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi all,
I understand this is a controversial proposal, but bear with me please.
I believe we cannot accept the current subsidy schedule anymore, so I
wrote a small draft BIP with a proposal to turn Bitcoin into a
This proposal will destroy Bitcoin. I would expect nothing less coming from
a Google employee.
--
___
Bitcoin-development mailing list
Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
On Tuesday, April 01, 2014 7:00:07 PM Pieter Wuille wrote:
Hi all,
I understand this is a controversial proposal, but bear with me please.
I believe we cannot accept the current subsidy schedule anymore, so I
wrote a small draft BIP with a proposal to turn Bitcoin into a
limited-supply
luke, you might enjoy the book Topos of Music. It's a complete
mathematical music theory by a student of Grothendieck. He advanced
Euler's theories of harmony based on advanced category theory. I'm
sure there are many applications to Bitcoin.
On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 9:12 PM, Luke-Jr
Please, *music* is obsolete, but inline replies *are not*!
On Tuesday, April 01, 2014 7:16:42 PM Benjamin Cordes wrote:
luke, you might enjoy the book Topos of Music. It's a complete
mathematical music theory by a student of Grothendieck. He advanced
Euler's theories of harmony based on
I disagree with this proposal both in spirit and in practice.
We all know satoshi was the best programmer like no one ever was. Clearly he
intended this monetary supply from the beginning, who are we but mere mortals
to go against satoshi's will?
Also, should we really do this with a soft fork
On Tue, Apr 01, 2014 at 09:00:07PM +0200, Pieter Wuille wrote:
Hi all,
I understand this is a controversial proposal, but bear with me please.
I believe we cannot accept the current subsidy schedule anymore, so I
wrote a small draft BIP with a proposal to turn Bitcoin into a
On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 10:00 PM, Peter Todd p...@petertodd.org wrote:
On Tue, Apr 01, 2014 at 09:00:07PM +0200, Pieter Wuille wrote:
The text can be found here: https://gist.github.com/sipa/9920696
What's interesting about this bug is we could also fix the problem - the
economic shock - by
On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 9:04 PM, Matt Whitlock b...@mattwhitlock.name wrote:
The creation date in your BIP header has the wrong format. It should be
01-04-2014, per BIP 1.
Thanks - fixed!
--
Pieter
--
On 4/1/14, Matt Corallo bitcoin-l...@bluematt.me wrote:
Also, should we really do this with a soft fork when we can take this
opportunity to redesign the whole system with a hard fork? This is out
chance to switch to a whole new script engine!
+1
The hard fork also forces the whole community
On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 1:53 PM, Pieter Wuille pieter.wui...@gmail.com wrote:
In case there are no further objections (excluding from people who
disagree with me), I'd like to request a BIP number for this. Any
number is fine, I guess, as long as it's finite.
With ten people commenting on this
On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 4:47 PM, Gregory Maxwell gmaxw...@gmail.com wrote:
But owing to a rather large bribe (or at least not less large than any
other offered by competing parties) I hereby assign BIP 42 for this
proposal.
What about BIP 420? Everyone knows if you add zero it's still the
I move to reclaim bip 42 as reserved for a bip containing either a reference to
musical dolphins or towels in the name.
Matt
On April 1, 2014 5:47:34 PM EDT, Gregory Maxwell gmaxw...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 1:53 PM, Pieter Wuille pieter.wui...@gmail.com
wrote:
In case there are
On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 5:51 PM, Daryl Banttari dbantt...@gmail.com wrote:
What about BIP 420? Everyone knows if you add zero it's still the same
number.
Similarly, everyone knows if you multiply both sides by zero, the
result is always a true statement.
--
Jeff Garzik
Bitcoin core developer
On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 11:47 PM, Gregory Maxwell gmaxw...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 1:53 PM, Pieter Wuille pieter.wui...@gmail.com wrote:
But owing to a rather large bribe (or at least not less large than any
other offered by competing parties) I hereby assign BIP 42 for this
24 matches
Mail list logo
