If you are using the prime video, books, free shipping, then 99$ is completely reasonable, an exceptional deal actually. If you just use one or the other probably not. (isn't netflix alone like 90$ a year?)
I can see them scaring off the people they want (infrequent shippers) and keeping who they don't (low value, frequent shippers).
Also, I don't know why they stick with the yearly subscription. I can't imagine most people wouldn't shrug off a monthly increase from 6.50 to 8.25. 79$-99$ *seems* like a lot more. Actually at a monthly rate I think most people are bad enough at math they could get away with a much higher yearly rate in monthly payements.
What drives me insane is that it's a large part of their demographic whining about the other 1/3rd of social programs going to poor people and social programs.
Pitiful.
Makes me want to join up with them and pull the plug on all of the programs because they will be hit the worst. There would be hoovertowns of broken sick seniors begging for a handout.
..has been proposed or enacted by the federal government on bitcoin.
The problem is that this marketplace doesn't want a competing currency, they want a way to electronically move money around "anonymously".
The government is saying no to sidestepping financial regulations and other laws. You're right about one thing. I seemed to take much longer than expected.
Yea, every single story I have read has a magic void between "someone throwing popcorn" and "shots fired". Some of the stories basically frame it as the guy texting and the ex-cop executes him.
The "shooter" did exactly what a person should. Asked the guy to put it away (repeatedly) and then went to get an employee, when he came back the texter escalated the situation and it is completely unclear at this point what happened next; "someone" threw popcorn and that's the last detail we have aside from the wives hands being in the path of the bullet which could indicate she was trying to restrain the texter. We have no indication if there was/wasn't a physical assault involved.
Texting on your phone in a darkened theater and refusing to stop after being asked to several times and then throwing a fit when someone goes to complain about you.
Seriously though. The lesson to be learned here is that there are better reasons to be courteous than just because it makes for a better society: There are lunatics out there one straw away.
If the fact that pretty much every "legitimate business" that has been involved with bitcoin has either gotten royally screwed or has royally screwed its customers hasn't dissuaded them this surely won't.
I wouldn't be surprised if the coin client linked in that article has some trojan.
Good point. But wait...why don't my cheetos cost 1400$ a bag then?
Ohh yea, there is a regulatory body in place to make sure that wild valuation swings don't happen minute to minute.
It amuses me that people think they have a new idea about currency when in such a short time it has exampled the pitfalls of every single unregulated on before it.
Yes, my cashier usually spot checks forex to see how many bags of cheetos I can afford because the dollar value fluctuates wildly due to its nature as a purely speculative vehicle.
Trying to sidestep the feds when it comes to possible financial crimes is never a good idea. If they tell you to knock something off be glad that's all it was and move on.
This guy is being paid anonymously in what he considers a currency to send a physical representation of that to another location to which he does not verify is the originator. From my very limited understanding of the law that is what the feds are taking issue with.
Also, he is essence creating a physical currency. But I'll let the feds figure out what is and isn't legal with those coins and what is and isn't transferring funds.
Anyway, the point is that they are going to attack anywhere bitcoin tries to leave "the cloud". Silk road put bitcoin in the feds crosshairs and they aren't going away.
....That it took this long for the feds to come in to play. No matter how neato your new currency is; if it's heavily used to electronically launder money and/or buy illegal items the days are numbered. Bitcoin -> Currency has and always will be the choke point the government(s) control. Unless they somehow setup a 100% bitcoin society but I don't know how that would work.
There is most likely a corporate play in action here but I can see if the test in some way makes someone who can't afford medical testing/treatment off themselves because they know how terrible X disease can be then it's probably worth review. Or the inverse, someone not treating a very serious issue because the test came back ok (which is probably more likely).
Just look how many people show up at the doctor because they have convinced themselves their (low blood sugar) symptoms are 100% a brain tumor according to WebMD.
Yea, as sad as it is they are just trying to get ahead of the ball here because the writing is on the wall that once again a 3rd party service provider is required to act as an agency of law enforcement.
Law enforcement should be saying "sure please leave those up so we can track down the actual criminals instead of sending them to another 1000 little 'dark webs'. But alas, the easiest and most public thing is to tell google how serious they are about the problem and require them to do something about it.
Google should not have to filter any website, ever. Regardless of the content if it meets the same selection and searching algorithms every other site does. That they are or do is playing censor at the governments behest and when they are doing that they have no longer any reason to be trusted no matter what you are searching for.
We prefer the eggshell method of security: We can withstand brute force and brazen attempts but a tiny tap crumbles the whole operation.
It will be a fun day (if it already hasn't passed) when passengers are under more scrutiny than the employees, thus the TSA actually being the biggest threat.
Slashdot Mirror
If you are using the prime video, books, free shipping, then 99$ is completely reasonable, an exceptional deal actually. If you just use one or the other probably not. (isn't netflix alone like 90$ a year?)
I can see them scaring off the people they want (infrequent shippers) and keeping who they don't (low value, frequent shippers).
Also, I don't know why they stick with the yearly subscription. I can't imagine most people wouldn't shrug off a monthly increase from 6.50 to 8.25. 79$-99$ *seems* like a lot more. Actually at a monthly rate I think most people are bad enough at math they could get away with a much higher yearly rate in monthly payements.
I dunno, I'm not a marketing guy.
I don't think you have thought your plan all the way through.
What drives me insane is that it's a large part of their demographic whining about the other 1/3rd of social programs going to poor people and social programs.
Pitiful.
Makes me want to join up with them and pull the plug on all of the programs because they will be hit the worst. There would be hoovertowns of broken sick seniors begging for a handout.
500gigs of it now.
The whole thing reads like the study was geared towards producing the headline.
1. Everything else
2. Stories about 3d printers being used for.....3d printing
3. Bitcoin
When is fuckedcompany.com coming back?
Or is it just too sad to see that the internet is basically ran by 1/1000th of the amount of manpower in the 90's with 1000X the power/capacity?
..has been proposed or enacted by the federal government on bitcoin.
The problem is that this marketplace doesn't want a competing currency, they want a way to electronically move money around "anonymously".
The government is saying no to sidestepping financial regulations and other laws. You're right about one thing. I seemed to take much longer than expected.
If they were sending messages back and forth with the launderers and fellow executives about their direct involvement in it, you are probably right.
Yea, every single story I have read has a magic void between "someone throwing popcorn" and "shots fired". Some of the stories basically frame it as the guy texting and the ex-cop executes him.
The "shooter" did exactly what a person should. Asked the guy to put it away (repeatedly) and then went to get an employee, when he came back the texter escalated the situation and it is completely unclear at this point what happened next; "someone" threw popcorn and that's the last detail we have aside from the wives hands being in the path of the bullet which could indicate she was trying to restrain the texter. We have no indication if there was/wasn't a physical assault involved.
Texting on your phone in a darkened theater and refusing to stop after being asked to several times and then throwing a fit when someone goes to complain about you.
Seriously though. The lesson to be learned here is that there are better reasons to be courteous than just because it makes for a better society: There are lunatics out there one straw away.
If the fact that pretty much every "legitimate business" that has been involved with bitcoin has either gotten royally screwed or has royally screwed its customers hasn't dissuaded them this surely won't.
I wouldn't be surprised if the coin client linked in that article has some trojan.
Good point. But wait...why don't my cheetos cost 1400$ a bag then?
Ohh yea, there is a regulatory body in place to make sure that wild valuation swings don't happen minute to minute.
It amuses me that people think they have a new idea about currency when in such a short time it has exampled the pitfalls of every single unregulated on before it.
Yes, my cashier usually spot checks forex to see how many bags of cheetos I can afford because the dollar value fluctuates wildly due to its nature as a purely speculative vehicle.
Trying to sidestep the feds when it comes to possible financial crimes is never a good idea. If they tell you to knock something off be glad that's all it was and move on.
This guy is being paid anonymously in what he considers a currency to send a physical representation of that to another location to which he does not verify is the originator. From my very limited understanding of the law that is what the feds are taking issue with.
Also, he is essence creating a physical currency. But I'll let the feds figure out what is and isn't legal with those coins and what is and isn't transferring funds.
Anyway, the point is that they are going to attack anywhere bitcoin tries to leave "the cloud". Silk road put bitcoin in the feds crosshairs and they aren't going away.
Exactly. Why would we want this currency that only moves in value only .5% a month. We want a currency that moves 20-50% in hours.
Imagine the fun of grocery shopping with it by the time you get done shopping you have to either take out 1/2 of it or you get 50% off!
....That it took this long for the feds to come in to play. No matter how neato your new currency is; if it's heavily used to electronically launder money and/or buy illegal items the days are numbered. Bitcoin -> Currency has and always will be the choke point the government(s) control. Unless they somehow setup a 100% bitcoin society but I don't know how that would work.
Science project? Really this sounds like something dreamed up by a kid, one who hasn't heard of 200mph winds that that elevation.
There is most likely a corporate play in action here but I can see if the test in some way makes someone who can't afford medical testing/treatment off themselves because they know how terrible X disease can be then it's probably worth review. Or the inverse, someone not treating a very serious issue because the test came back ok (which is probably more likely).
Just look how many people show up at the doctor because they have convinced themselves their (low blood sugar) symptoms are 100% a brain tumor according to WebMD.
Yea, as sad as it is they are just trying to get ahead of the ball here because the writing is on the wall that once again a 3rd party service provider is required to act as an agency of law enforcement.
Law enforcement should be saying "sure please leave those up so we can track down the actual criminals instead of sending them to another 1000 little 'dark webs'. But alas, the easiest and most public thing is to tell google how serious they are about the problem and require them to do something about it.
Google should not have to filter any website, ever. Regardless of the content if it meets the same selection and searching algorithms every other site does. That they are or do is playing censor at the governments behest and when they are doing that they have no longer any reason to be trusted no matter what you are searching for.
It's who's selling the solution. The sales people cater to the execs/management and know the buzzwords that make the all tingly.
If the suggested solution comes from IT/Bottom up it's usually a lot of details they can't grasp and don't really care about.
I think that is probably more of a business decision. If they allow it the site would have been crushed immediately with porn and low value users.
We prefer the eggshell method of security: We can withstand brute force and brazen attempts but a tiny tap crumbles the whole operation.
It will be a fun day (if it already hasn't passed) when passengers are under more scrutiny than the employees, thus the TSA actually being the biggest threat.