Re: [Bitcoin-development] is there a way to do bitcoin-staging?

2013-06-15 Thread Dennison Bertram
That is true, but someone is already running it as a service on the blockchain itself. See: https://www.proofofexistence.com/ You can imagine similar services cropping up for things like torrents, sending btc tweets, etc. While I am not saying these things are particularly refined ideas in an

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Bitcoin addresses -- opaque or not

2013-06-15 Thread Melvin Carvalho
On 11 June 2013 17:29, Luke-Jr wrote: > On Tuesday, June 11, 2013 1:11:33 PM Melvin Carvalho wrote: > > For the sake of argument let's say that opaque means that you can tell > > nothing about the address by examining the characters. > > This is true or false based on CONTEXT. > > Obviously, an i

Re: [Bitcoin-development] is there a way to do bitcoin-staging?

2013-06-15 Thread Melvin Carvalho
On 19 May 2013 15:23, Adam Back wrote: > Is there a way to experiment with new features - eg committed coins - that > doesnt involve an altcoin in the conventional sense, and also doesnt impose > a big testing burden on bitcoin main which is a security and testing risk? > > eg lets say some form

Re: [Bitcoin-development] is there a way to do bitcoin-staging?

2013-06-15 Thread Dennison Bertram
Why use ripple and not just use the testnet? The advantageous of allowing testnet to be used as an alt-coin are That Non standard transactions can be tested in a pseudo live environment where because the coins have some nominal value people are incentivized to try and steal and come up with cl

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Proposal: Vote on the blocksize limit with proof-of-stake voting

2013-06-15 Thread John Dillon
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 5:43 PM, Peter Todd wrote: > On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 01:25:05PM -0400, Alan Reiner wrote: >> to sign votes. Not only that, but it would require them to reveal their >> public key, which while isn't technically so terrible, l