Topic: Bitcoin 100: Developed Specifically for Non-Profits - page 103. (Read 262771 times)

I'm curious about what Tahoe-LAFS is, too. The website description is still rather vague about actual implementations.

I'm find with Strongcoin. I see it as just an online version of a regular Bitcoin wallet. Once I have the private/public key pair, it's fairly easy to import that into both strongcoin and a local wallet. I personally see no reason to use it, since I can keep the backups and such myself, but having it accessible remotely just in case would still be a benefit.

I do have an address that starts with 1BTC1oo, but after it's a bunch of letters, and looks weird. I'm trying to generate something like 1BTC1oo1nYghe... with a 1 separating the rest of the characters. Shouldn't take more than a few hours if I'm lucky. It's not needed, but I think having something like that to easilly identify it as a Bitcoin100 charity address will be nice.

Thank you, b, for contacting dogisland with Strongcoin and having this issue addressed/resolved.

Thank you kindly, dogisland with Strongcoin, for your wonderful pledge. For clarification purposes, let me see if I have it correct. Along with donating 1 BTC to each charitable organization (no max), you're also donating the transfer fee? My understanding that instead of waiving the transfer fee, it will simply be donated into the very next pool. This way nothing will have to be changed on the backend of your site, and it would only be a matter of a couple clicks on your part when that time arrives. Once the pool has been transferred, the calculated fee amount will then be deposited into the already newly created next wallet. Correct me if I'm wrong, but if I'm right, WOW! A second thank you is in order.


First off, we'll simply add Brent's Place to the short list of CO's. From there, we'll see what we can do for them. I have a couple brain farts rolling around in my head that may work for all concerns involved.

StrongCoin is starting to grow on me, but let's see what Rassah and Roger come up with. Hopefully a merge of everything that is currently taking place can also include StrongCoin in the mix. Once solved, we'll be very near the next step: CO selection process which, for all practical purposes can be now and always ongoing, and readying the pool for approaching the first CO, with a couple others on the sideline in case a T,BNT is their reply.


We'll keep your suggestion handy as a backup plan, Bitbird. Thank you kindly for provided the links. I wish I was more tech-savvy to get my head wrapped around as to what it does and how it works. In fact, I could figure most things out, given time--time being a premium due to operating a small lumber company and occupying this forum.

Bruno

Regarding the wallet.dat storeing solutions, I want to bring up the tahoe-lafs distributed storage system. There're many posts mentioned it. I would like contributing my HD space for the node.

related posts:
The Tahoe-LAFS Bitcoin Grid - topic
Tahoe-lafs and Bitcoin Integration Bounty (210 BTC pledged)

BTW I do see one (big?) difference between opening two or more accounts with the same private key and just sharing the password on a single account.  In both cases all parties have total access to and any party can spend the coins.  But in the case of sharing the password one person can change the password and not notify the others.  In the case of multiple accounts with the same private key all parties can access and spend without regard to the password changes on other accounts.

Edit:  Actually there is no difference.  The two parties we have selected will both have the private key so either one will always be able to figure out a way to get at the coins.  For now I suggest we open one account at StrongCoin and move on to the next project:  CO selection questions.

I have an in at a small charity here in Denver:  http://brentsplace.org (close friend had a child die of cancer and now his wife works there).

BUT - I expect we want to target larger organizations?

After reading the last few posts, my brain is flashing images of a Rube Goldberg Machine. That being the case, I'll try to address the questions and concerns starting with the last post, they maybe an earlier post prior to address a concern from somewhere in the middle. Believe me, when I'm done, I'm sure more questions will arise that'll need addressing.


If Stongcoin is an option that will be utilized perhaps, instead of waiving the fee, of which would be nice, halving the fee (.5%). This way we're supporting another developer and, as a paying customer, they'll be more inclined to quickly address concerns when needed.


Unremorsefully, this aspect is over my head. But if you had asked be to find the square root of 43,560 using synthetic division, I would be able to.


Thank you kindly for your pledge, Ente. The OP list has been updated reflecting your pledge. To clarify, the number 10 after your name is the total you have pledged--1 per charitable organization meeting your approval. There will be a notification process in place once we reach that stage, but right now, as you've read, we're together solving the minor wallet issue. An issue I've bought on myself by not directly asking key players, i.e. Roger Ver, from the get-go. I thought that by asking for volunteers earlier, they'd come out of the woodwork, opposed to offering up later. (BTW, all, I'm not ranting here by any stretch of the imagination)


Thank you, b, for addressing this so that now I don't have to.


Cracking out a vanity address? I have no idea what this is about, but I'm sure it's going to be AWESOME!

MemoryDealers (Roger Ver) and Rassah (The Furball) is it, if there's no objections.

A specific charity is not picked out as of yet for being the first to approach. That will be our very next step as we approach the at least 100 pledger mark, but all feel free to express who you have in mind at any given time.

One charity--one vote. But it's not necessarily a vote as what charity will be approached, though that is somewhat true, as it is choosing to honor a pledge when the charity has been predetermined.

It'll be something like this: The charitable organization, AcmeChildren, has shown interest (or there's an in with them) in having Bitcoin as a donation option on their website. At this point, pledges will be asked to honor their pledges if they feel comfortable with contributing to them. Once they agree, Bitcoin100 will transfer no less than 100 BTC to AcmeChildren's Bitcoin account.

Special note: No charitable organizations will be displaying anything related to Bitcoin100. Only Bitcoin in general. Bitcoin100 is just an entity who's sole purpose is to help get charities on board the Bitcoin train, so to speak.


This makes sense to me and perhaps it can work in concert with all the other considerations up to this point.


No problem here.


On the same page here as I've already mentioned above.

Just got this back from dogisland (owner of StrongCoin):

Since it is for charity maybe he would waive the fee.  I will ask him.

Two people importing the same private key into two separate accounts should work just fine.

Strongcoin was just a suggestion because I thought it would be easy.  This can be done any number of ways.

Looking at strongcoin.com

Benefits:
online, access anywhere, can import vanity addresses, can export private keys

Drawbacks:
1% fee on withdrawals, (both people remembering the same password?)

? ? ?:
Can two people with two separate accounts import the same private key to have access to the same coins?
What's the benefit of this online versus offline?

I have a vanity address. I'd prefer a slightly better looking one, so I'm letting my mining rig crank out some more today.
Once I get the address, I'll import and test it to make sure it works (with my own money), then encrypt the public/private key pair and send that off to whoever else decides they want to help out. They can then encrypt the plaintext version with their own password, or print it out on paper. That is likely much more reliable than just sending out a password protected wallet.dat file. I can even snailmail a printout of the key to the other person's address with my own proof of address. Btw, MemoryDealers has a really good reputation, and more at stake to lose and gain, so I would trust him more than anyone else on here, honestly. All of this isn't that complicated or urgent though (is there even a charity in mind yet?)

Some questions:
How will we make decisions as to which charity to contribute to?
What if only half of the pledges contribute, or some contribute more than others? Will they have fewer/more votes?
Who will be in charge of soliciting charities to accept this?

Not sure what the dual private key bills have to do with this project.  Perhaps you are suggesting we set up a dual private key system so that it takes two people to spend funds.  I don't think that is needed in this case.  We just need one trusted person to be able to spend the funds - just a normal single keypair account.  Then we just need a backup person (or persons) that also have access to the same account.  The main person and the backups all would just need the StrongCoin password in order to accomplish that.

In addition to that it would not hurt to also back up the private key for safe keeping.

MemoryDealers did publicly express interest, see post #162

@Phinnaeus Gage, how about contacting casascius and ask if he already did the dual priv key bills ?
(https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/elliptic-curve-math-question-53177)

Put me on the list.

Initially, I would just be put on the list? It seems like everyone now sets a limit. In this case I pledge 10฿ for now (=minimum).

Vanity-adress:
Nice idea, I like those! I would like to have that adress generated by one of the two people managing the wallet/key/adress.

I did not read all 9 pages, and probably will not follow closely. Will you send PMs once we have a candidate willing to accept bitcoins?

Thank you for organizing this and investing a lot of time in it. I am sure it will both help promote bitcoin and do some good charity-work too.

Ente

I don't mind having a backup to the wallet/password to the account in the event of eventualities. I guess that won't involve a lot of work, unless something happens. I don't know if I'm known well enough in the community though.

MemoryDealers hasn't publicly shown interest in being a hosting party for this project. I don't know if anyone approached him directly though.

I suggest that once the vanity address is generated open an account at https://www.strongcoin.com and store it there and then give the passwords to both MemoryDealers (Roger) and Rassah so we have two people who can access the account.  I would personally be ok with that.

Time to address a few key issues, here.

First off, I've approached Rassah if he/she (this is effed up, I truly don't know which--my bad!) would be interested in controlling the donation wallet, via PM. After a couple messages back and front, Rassah agreed to do it. There is a concern, though, of desiring a second person to have access to the wallet in case of something unforeseen happening. Would anybody here be interested in being that second person? evoorhees? theymos? Maged?

The other point Rassah bought up is the returning of funds and knowing who contributed what. I'm going to go out on a limb here and state that, in my mind, I don't feel that may be an issue. Allow me to explain my thinking in the best way I can, with the hope that my thought process doesn't get lost in translation.

We, of course, are only talking about a little bit of money (for lack of a better term) from a handful of pledgers in a pool at any given time. Yes, 1 BTC may be will be worth more in the future, thereby a greater risk than at today's exchange rate. I'll be updating the OP (with any EDIT well noted) in the near future outlining a built-in caveat as to what the max should be when one Bitcoin soars. I'm thinking a pledge of 1 BTC maxed at $3.14159265 (pause...had to to make sure there were only 8 digits after the decimal point) USD would be a fair amount for any one contributor. That said, I feel that once the pledger transfers their Bitcoin into the charity pool, they would have no reason to have their Bitcoin returned, albeit the following two (all I can think of at the moment, but please advise me of any others) reasons: they came to the realization that this whole thing is a scam (of which it is not); or, they contributed to a certain pool thinking that it was for one charitable organization, but ended up going towards one that doesn't sit well in their craw (which would be the most likely scenario).

Let me address both scenarios in turn. The first, this being a scam. I've tried to eliminate this from people's mind by making sure that I don't have control of the funds, therefore I won't be the one stealing them. I've done this by stating, jokingly, that if I was in control of the money, I would spend it on old musty smelling wood. My hope is/was that having another member, or two, control the wallet, I'm out of that equation. All my efforts will continue to be in getting this ball rolling. Anybody here who still has reservations, or thinks otherwise, please express your opinion on this thread. I've got thick politician skin and promise not to attack any one calling me out on any issue unless, of course, your the guy who made the comment over on SA about my dirty fingernail. I've even expressed that I would personally guarantee all the funds in the wallet which, most likely, would only be about $300 USD, or thereabouts. Yes, I understand that those are only words typed into this box, then posted on this thread of this forum, but words are all that theymos allows me to use. I can't embed a video showing me swearing on the Bible that I would guarantee the funds. You'll just have to take my word for it.

Secondly, what happens when a member transfer their pledge of 1 BTC to an organization when they thought it was going to another? Yes, this can happen at the get-go, but as Bitcoin100 matures, a control mechanism of sorts will be in place to keep this from happening or, at the very least, kept from happening to a bear minimum. But when (not if) this occurs, and a member is disgruntle enough to want their Bitcoin returned, I will return it out of my personal wallet, thereby leaving the 1 BTC contribution firmly in the wallet awaiting the next charitable organization to accept Bitcoin100's proposition.

To recap, Bitcoin100 is not a scam and anyone who wants their Bitcoin back because of an error, they get it back out of my personal wallet.

The only other thing I wish to relay in regards to this issue, at this time, is this: If, by happenstance, this doesn't take traction, for whatever reason, the remaining funds will be donated to some agreed upon charitable organization, and Bitcoin100 will cease to exist.

Sorry for going long, but wanted to clarify my position on this minor issue. As Bitcoin100 moves forward, I'm sure more clarifications will be in order.

Bruno

PS: One more thing. If theymos moves this thread from Discussion, I will fire up Nikki the Bitch.   (sometimes, I just enjoy cracking myself up)

Sorry I didn't notice any of this sooner.
I've been busy with other Bitcoin stuff.

I am willing to be the custodian of the funds if needed.

For the fastest replies,  anyone can email me at [email protected]

Honestly, it doesn't matter to me which one. What ever you feel is best for you and/or for the project as a whole. For this aspect, and at this point, there probably isn't a wrong choice. I'm sure that in the near future a/the better option will manifest itself. I think I forgot to say thank you for taking on the wallet address. I'll take it in trade--a thank you for five minutes with your coffee table. 

Thank you, Rassah.

Bruno

Generating a 1BTC1oo address (can't use 0's). Can also do 1BitC1oo. 1Bitcoin100 will take a few years.
Let me know if you still want this in a private wallet or an online one.

Will be addressing the latest comments, shortly. Until then, the following is the most updated list of pledgers posted in the OP. Is your name on the list?

As each member states on this thread that they want to be part of the Bitcoin100, I will add their name below.

The Bitcoin100:

#   Pseudonym (Name)   (Initial Pledge: expressed in at least (1) BTC total unless stated otherwise)

1. Phinnaeus Gage (Bruno) (100+)
2. Coinabul (2)
3. MemoryDealers (Roger Ver) (10 Per Charitable Organization ~ Initial Max at 1,000)
4. amincd (1)
5. CIYAM Pty. Ltd. (Ian Knowles) (5 Total ~ at least)
6. damnek (1)
7. BTCurious (30+)
8. Shuai (1)
9. Technomage (At Least 1 Per Charitable Organization ~ Currently Maxed at 100)
10. MaxSan (2)
11. Steve (1)
12. meanig (1)
13. Littleshop (5)
14. zhoutong (10 Per Charitable Organization ~ Initial Max at 500)
15. DeathAndTaxes (1)
16. Yankee (10 Per Charitable Organization ~ No Max on Initial Pledge)
17. dancupid (1 Per Charitable Organization ~ Currently Maxed at 150)
18. Meni Rosenfeld (1 Per Charitable Organization ~ With a Min/Max Caveat)
19. evoorhees (1)
20. Bit-pay Merchant Solutions (2 Per Charitable Organization)
21. fizzisist (10+)
22. gigasvps (1)
23. ALPHA (1)
24. paraipan (1+)
25. Isosceles (1)
26. gsan (1 Per Charitable Organization ~ Currently Maxed at 50)
27. Vince Torres (1)
28. chunglam (10+)
29. lamec (1+)
30. Jan (1)
31. hashman (50+)
32. BitcoinBug (1)
33. Clark (1 Per Charitable Organization ~ Maxed at 25)
34. freequant (1 Per C.O. ~ Intinial Max at 100 /\/\ An additional 100 BTC pledge to the Red Cross & Unicef if/when they get on-board)
35. beckspace (1+)
36. amazingrando (1 Per Charitable Organization ~ For First 20)
37. bwagner (100)
38. k (1)
39. teukon (1 Per Charitable & Non-Charitable Organizations ~ Maxed at 100)
40. Peter Lambert (5+)
41. MrGaSp (1 ~ By Proxy via Me, Bruno)
42. tetra4c (1) Really 2, for I'm matching his pledge because of comments I've made on this BBS.
43. Cory (2)
44. jake262144 (2)
45. jjiimm_64 (jimbit) (1 Per Charitable Organization ~ For First 20)
46. coblee (1 Per Charitable Organization ~ Maxed at 50)
47. Nicolai Larsen (1)
48. GoWest (1 Per Charitable Organization ~ Maxed at 100)
49. CoinLab (1 Per Charitable Organization ~ For First 100, with reservations of which all pledgers are entitled to exercise)
50. wareen (1 Per Charitable Organization ~ Maxed at 100)
51. Transisto (3 ~ 1 Per Charitable Organization)
52. Rassah (5 ~ For the Time Being)
53. TradeHill (Adam S) (10)
54.

66. phelix (6 ~ Subject to Vicissitude)

69. Available Requires a 2 BTC Pledge unless reached naturally.

77. Available

85. Matthew N. Wright (1 Per Charitable Organization ~ No Max at This Time)

88. stick_theman (1 BTC Per Charitable Organization ~ No Maximum!!!)

99. FreddyFender (Gretzky, but I somehow doubt it) (1 ~ Per Charitable Organization--adjustable to current market rates)
100. the joint (1 ~ but only if he were the 100th pledger)

101. Available

111. Bitbird (6)