I believe the "backing" of bitcoin (in the way you are using it) is the network of miners that validate each transaction.
People owning a large proportion of bitcoins isn't a problem as long as they have to play by the same rules as everyone else. Well, at least not in the way fiat has a manipulation problem.
The total supply of "bitcoins" isn't such a big deal because they are divisible to.00000001 coins. So in essence, the total number of indivisible bitcoin units (not sure what they are called) would be 2.1 quadrillion. For comparison, world GDP is if we looked at world gdp ($55 trillion) it would be 5.5 quadrillion US cents. The number of actual USD in existence is much much less than this.
Also I'm not sure I accept the argument that inflation=good, deflation=bad. I mean why would anyone want to base the value of the world economy on debt? That seems alot like a ponzi scheme to me.
You can exchange near instantaneously. His only problem was he left his money in a volatile currency that's value vs USD has been trending downward for 4 months. If the value of his money went up over the weekend he wouldn't be complaining. But yes, volatility is not a desirable quality in a currency.
I don't understand why people feel so strongly that a currency needs to be a commodity first. The value of bitcoin is that it can't be counterfeited and they are easy to store and transfer. Also, the production of it is pretty much predefined, so its value cannot be manipulated by a central group of people in the same way as fiat.
The real problem is that people who like to tinker with things think that the average person will understand why the latter is to their advantage, especially given that, at least at the moment, bitcoins are not very durable or easy to keep safe from thieves unless you know what you're doing.
Assuming you understand macroeconomics...How so? I am honestly wondering. I don't know much about economics but many of the people who think bitcoin is a good idea actually seem to have a very good grasp of macroeconomics.
My understanding is that the detectors are placed underground to reduce the number of anything besides neutrinos hitting them (Thus lowering the noise).
Do you even know what "the rap" is? Or anything about the situation at all. It sounds like you have a half assed opinion that someone should be killed. That is evil.
So rather than dealing with the star directly, lets say it was possible to push.pull all the planets further and further away... how would that affect the rotational velocity? (assuming a Sol-like solar system)
They would need to be mutating the sperm/egg cells. A mutation in a skin cell (for example) is not going to get passed on. That does make me wonder if stress level is related to birth defects or anything like that though. Maybe mutations elsewhere are just an unwanted side effect. I can't see how that would be selected for.
Its also important to consider diminishing returns. Another thing to consider is that, in biology, many things are related in ways that are not immediately obvious. A third aspect is that researchers specializing in different fields will have different perspectives. So it is good to have a diverse field of study.
Testing a virtual lab rat has only the cost of the computing power.
Plus the building to house the computers, plus data storage, plus programmers, plus tech support, plus people testing the virtual results on real rats to see if the models are correct. The researchers involved in this project were given $15 million over 5 years just to begin development on this. It is not meant to replace animal studies, but to inform future animal studies so that they can be designed better.
People try to say that research costs hundreds of billions of dollars (it used to maybe 20 years ago, but is far less today).
It costs $1.50-$3.00 a day per rat cage. You can keep 1-3 rats per cage. So lets just assume 2 rats per cage at $3 a day. Thats $547 a year per rat. About 20 million rodents are used for research in US each year. Assuming all those rodents were being housed at the same time we get a cost of $11 billion dollars. This estimate is going to be on the high end. It depends on the study, but I would guess the average time an individual rodent is housed is closer to 3-4 months. So lets just say 6 months to give a reasonable estimate that $5.5 billion is spend on rodent housing each year in the US.
About 1.5% of the US federal budget, or $50 billion is spent on all biomedical research each year in the US. From the above calculations 10-20% of this is on rodent housing. So while it is a major cost it is not the primary cost. Your "hundreds of billions of dollars" number does not have a time frame associated with it so I can't really say much more on that. The drug target I am most familiar with was first discovered around 1990. A drug candidate is in phase II/III trials for spinal cord injury 20 years later and there are ongoing animal studies testing its use for stroke and brain injury patients as well as looking at other related drug targets. 20-30 years passing from initial concept until clinical use for a single drug is not unusual. We do not want to start trying things out on humans until we are as sure as possible that nothing terrible will happen, and that we are not wasting the time and money of patients and doctors based on false positives. Hopefully that gives you some idea of how this kind of thing works.
It's used as an excuse to extract money.
I'm not sure what you're saying here. Are you saying that people experiment on as many animals as possible and drag out studies for as long as possible so that they can get paid more?
I don't understand... what is the difference between a "cop" and any other person? When is it ok to kill a human being? When is it ok to kill a dog? When is it ok to kill a rat? When is it ok to kill a spider? When is it ok to kill an ant?
Slashdot Mirror
I believe the "backing" of bitcoin (in the way you are using it) is the network of miners that validate each transaction.
People owning a large proportion of bitcoins isn't a problem as long as they have to play by the same rules as everyone else. Well, at least not in the way fiat has a manipulation problem.
The total supply of "bitcoins" isn't such a big deal because they are divisible to .00000001 coins. So in essence, the total number of indivisible bitcoin units (not sure what they are called) would be 2.1 quadrillion.
For comparison, world GDP is if we looked at world gdp ($55 trillion) it would be 5.5 quadrillion US cents. The number of actual USD in existence is much much less than this.
Also I'm not sure I accept the argument that inflation=good, deflation=bad. I mean why would anyone want to base the value of the world economy on debt? That seems alot like a ponzi scheme to me.
You can exchange near instantaneously. His only problem was he left his money in a volatile currency that's value vs USD has been trending downward for 4 months. If the value of his money went up over the weekend he wouldn't be complaining. But yes, volatility is not a desirable quality in a currency.
I don't understand why people feel so strongly that a currency needs to be a commodity first. The value of bitcoin is that it can't be counterfeited and they are easy to store and transfer. Also, the production of it is pretty much predefined, so its value cannot be manipulated by a central group of people in the same way as fiat.
The real problem is that people who like to tinker with things think that the average person will understand why the latter is to their advantage, especially given that, at least at the moment, bitcoins are not very durable or easy to keep safe from thieves unless you know what you're doing.
Assuming you understand macroeconomics...How so? I am honestly wondering. I don't know much about economics but many of the people who think bitcoin is a good idea actually seem to have a very good grasp of macroeconomics.
hes pro-outlaw abortion
My understanding is that the detectors are placed underground to reduce the number of anything besides neutrinos hitting them (Thus lowering the noise).
source?
It probably means that there is only a 10% chance of a false negative (in untrained subjects). Meanwhile false positives are through the roof.
If we're talking about gene targeting I dont think microorganisms will be a big problem.
True, but, since I don't know much about the technicalities of star formation, the mining thing seemed like a more interesting question to ask.
Do you even know what "the rap" is? Or anything about the situation at all. It sounds like you have a half assed opinion that someone should be killed. That is evil.
So rather than dealing with the star directly, lets say it was possible to push.pull all the planets further and further away... how would that affect the rotational velocity? (assuming a Sol-like solar system)
Yes, this is almost exactly what I was thinking.. Dyson sphere then induce solar flares then collect somehow. Thanks.
Someone mined the heavier elements.
So the next question is: How would someone go about mining a star?
What is "Zen"?
Actually, here is the paper . They say it does occur in the testes.
They would need to be mutating the sperm/egg cells. A mutation in a skin cell (for example) is not going to get passed on. That does make me wonder if stress level is related to birth defects or anything like that though. Maybe mutations elsewhere are just an unwanted side effect. I can't see how that would be selected for.
Thats not a bad idea actually. I'm not a physicist so I can't weigh in on why noone thinks that happens, but its a good set of questions.
Its also important to consider diminishing returns. Another thing to consider is that, in biology, many things are related in ways that are not immediately obvious. A third aspect is that researchers specializing in different fields will have different perspectives. So it is good to have a diverse field of study.
Plus the building to house the computers, plus data storage, plus programmers, plus tech support, plus people testing the virtual results on real rats to see if the models are correct. The researchers involved in this project were given $15 million over 5 years just to begin development on this. It is not meant to replace animal studies, but to inform future animal studies so that they can be designed better.
It costs $1.50-$3.00 a day per rat cage. You can keep 1-3 rats per cage. So lets just assume 2 rats per cage at $3 a day. Thats $547 a year per rat. About
20 million rodents are used for research in US each year. Assuming all those rodents were being housed at the same time we get a cost of $11 billion dollars. This estimate is going to be on the high end. It depends on the study, but I would guess the average time an individual rodent is housed is closer to 3-4 months. So lets just say 6 months to give a reasonable estimate that $5.5 billion is spend on rodent housing each year in the US.
About 1.5% of the US federal budget, or $50 billion is spent on all biomedical research each year in the US. From the above calculations 10-20% of this is on rodent housing. So while it is a major cost it is not the primary cost. Your "hundreds of billions of dollars" number does not have a time frame associated with it so I can't really say much more on that. The drug target I am most familiar with was first discovered around 1990. A drug candidate is in phase II/III trials for spinal cord injury 20 years later and there are ongoing animal studies testing its use for stroke and brain injury patients as well as looking at other related drug targets. 20-30 years passing from initial concept until clinical use for a single drug is not unusual. We do not want to start trying things out on humans until we are as sure as possible that nothing terrible will happen, and that we are not wasting the time and money of patients and doctors based on false positives. Hopefully that gives you some idea of how this kind of thing works.
I'm not sure what you're saying here. Are you saying that people experiment on as many animals as possible and drag out studies for as long as possible so that they can get paid more?
I just killed a spider because it was in my bathroom.
I don't understand... what is the difference between a "cop" and any other person? When is it ok to kill a human being? When is it ok to kill a dog? When is it ok to kill a rat? When is it ok to kill a spider? When is it ok to kill an ant?
What do you mean? I am honestly confused.
I'm sure you've committed multiple crimes today