Yes, my feelings are frequently hurt when I miss out on obvious pump and dump schemes. Spreading false stories to inflate the price of something is "making money off of bitcoin stories". Bit coin sure is a real "thing", a really annoying thing crawling with scammers, thieves, misinformation, and a rabid fanbase that crawls into the cracks of any discussion/forum like a cockroach.
They really need to ban bitcoin "stories" (ads) on here unless they are going to get paid for them. It's nothing more than people trying to inflate that bubble again so they can cash out. It's pitiful. May as well have stories about rumors of people becoming so damn rich from johnny woos secrets.
Not by that definition, but yes most stock offers have "scammy" elements. Anyway, a stock is a bad example to make your point a stock is basically ownership of something. A bitcoin represents confidence and nothing else, without the confidence it is worth absolutely zero. Before you bring up other currencies, yes they are confidence based to but they are backed by their countries might and economy.
Except that's not at all how they track them, if they did I would say go for it. They are getting the data from private networks they shouldn't have open access to but they do because of e911 stuff. There's a lot more at stake here than following some drug dealer. There are bad cops (and entire corrupt departments) out there and they shouldn't be able to get this kind of information without a good cause (hence the whole 4th amendment thing). Say some crazed cop wants to find his ex in hiding to beat on, no warrant needed here's all the information you need.
No, it's about 4th amendment rights. They just (like always) liken the data they get some simple "technology" like a drug dog or a "locating beeper" to justify their ruling. It is not like or the same as those things, it is them jumping on to a private network and searching your data to locate/track you. If you want to liken things, the ruling is saying it's can tap/intercept your phone calls because you were talking outside and they could have heard you if they were standing next to you. Read the ruling, it's pretty flimsy.
...our reasonable expectation of privacy and the experiment of civil liberties. The sad thing is that we have lost a lot of them to "aid in fighting" un-winnable and/or lost wars.
That's great, I guess we should re-purpose them as LFA (Lost and Found Administration) agents. They could reduce passenger losses by billions and actually serve a purpose to the taxpayer!
You and I have a pretty different definition of the word "stop". That's 1million arrests per year, of drunk people. Can you imagine the numbers of incidents not ending in an arrest? Staggering. The laws are basically just cash cows for the states/etc. They really do nothing for prevention. People like to talk about the reduction of deaths but if you look at the stats they follow right along with non-alcohol related vehicle deaths, which probably means it has a lot more to do with vehicle safety features than any meaningful reduction in DUI occurrence. Making "drink and drive" (bars, restaurants, etc) establishments illegal would do a ton more than the purely punitive laws we have. Like smoking and everything else, as far as the states concerned, the bottom line is income. Safety is the guise.
That could be possible but I have a feeling it's basically like the "old west" where your reputation is everything and once you have a good one you will do anything to keep it because it's your "word"/"honor". The whole thing is crazy to me but I can see how minus any sort of intervention the playing field levels itself out. I'd think if people were being ripped off you would hear quite a bit about it.
The resounding theme is "go big or go home" with federal crimes it would seem: Claim >x% year over year for entertainment, bend over and grab your ankles. File a completely bogus return after paying zero taxes for a 3k$ refund? Profit. Take advantage of an ATM giving out money? 6 years jail. Take advantage of holes in the SEC/Banking rules to the tune of billions? 1% fine.
There's a lot of interest in controlling the medium of communications that is bridging us into the future. Don't accept the lesser of two evils, promote a better solution. We're always on H.R. away from turning the internet into a carnival fairway.
Funny, how just a short time ago, relatively speaking, children entertained themselves for the most part. Not being condescending, we're all guilty of it.
Even if it's 50X more expensive your options for content, delivery, interface, etc are amazingly diverse and constantly improving and changing. My cable box hasn't changed much in 10 years, aside from adding a HDD to record a few shows.
It may be a bad thing that our government works this way, overall, but the thing that comes to mind for me is "the enemy of my enemy is my friend". The telcos/major ISPs are fighting tooth and nail on K street to change the model of the internet that has worked so well for us and coincidentally these large companies. Of course I am well aware of "The Scorpion and the Frog" in this scenario.
It doesn't have to mean "why are you doing personal stuff at work?" It's not really a "judgement" it is "best practices". You'd laugh til you were crying if someone posted what's the best way to get all of their personal information and credit card numbers off of a library computer, this isn't that much different. You don't own the computer (and a lot of times not even the admin rights) to the computer, why would you be storing personal passwords, CC#'s, etc on it? Every person should use a computer with the constant thought of "if someone took this out of my hands right now what could they do with it?" If the answer is anything less than "nothing, or nothing unless they can break disc encryption" then they should think about moving that direction. In this day someone can literally ruin your life with enough access to your personal data and online world, and I'm not talking about some easily reversed charges.
I'm starting to think this is astroturfing by large game developers butthurt because they are "losing" X$ because andriod isn't a pretty walled garden with antipiracy overlords doing the legwork for them. It reeks of corporate greed.
Google doesn't display ads like other sites s, yea the click is much more important. I don't see a juicy burger for my local burger store that I may go to lunch at but not click the ad.
I disagree, outside of brand marketing that really doesn't seek to increase immediate results, companies have long been able to measure the effect of advertisements. The problem with the internet is that most advertising is unfocused, "scammy" (lose weight, cash for gold, catch the monkey), and just altogether horrible. Some more popular websites remind me of the TV show in 'Idiocracy' and I'd bet a loss in CPC can be attributed to the amount of "false" "click throughs" by people just trying to navigate around pages wallpapered with ads. I also suspect that a lot of companies expect a lot more out of click throughs than is realistic.
"The man who founded Walmart" would most likely despise what his company has become, or I guess love it because he can start a NewMart that can offer even lower prices by actually having literal slave labor create goods for his virtual wage slaves. The moment Sam Walton died the jackals came in and took what was a well intended idea (having US manufacturers compete with foreign by lowering costs) and turned it into the poster child of corporate greed and scumbaggery: Lowering the standards of living for literally 10's of millions by driving a race to the bottom in wages and product quality. Remember the last time you saw a "Made In America" banner on every other rack in a walmart, probably around 1992ish? They were probably burning the signs at his wake.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, my feelings are frequently hurt when I miss out on obvious pump and dump schemes. Spreading false stories to inflate the price of something is "making money off of bitcoin stories". Bit coin sure is a real "thing", a really annoying thing crawling with scammers, thieves, misinformation, and a rabid fanbase that crawls into the cracks of any discussion/forum like a cockroach.
They really need to ban bitcoin "stories" (ads) on here unless they are going to get paid for them. It's nothing more than people trying to inflate that bubble again so they can cash out. It's pitiful. May as well have stories about rumors of people becoming so damn rich from johnny woos secrets.
Not by that definition, but yes most stock offers have "scammy" elements. Anyway, a stock is a bad example to make your point a stock is basically ownership of something. A bitcoin represents confidence and nothing else, without the confidence it is worth absolutely zero. Before you bring up other currencies, yes they are confidence based to but they are backed by their countries might and economy.
Except that's not at all how they track them, if they did I would say go for it. They are getting the data from private networks they shouldn't have open access to but they do because of e911 stuff. There's a lot more at stake here than following some drug dealer. There are bad cops (and entire corrupt departments) out there and they shouldn't be able to get this kind of information without a good cause (hence the whole 4th amendment thing). Say some crazed cop wants to find his ex in hiding to beat on, no warrant needed here's all the information you need.
No, it's about 4th amendment rights. They just (like always) liken the data they get some simple "technology" like a drug dog or a "locating beeper" to justify their ruling. It is not like or the same as those things, it is them jumping on to a private network and searching your data to locate/track you. If you want to liken things, the ruling is saying it's can tap/intercept your phone calls because you were talking outside and they could have heard you if they were standing next to you. Read the ruling, it's pretty flimsy.
...our reasonable expectation of privacy and the experiment of civil liberties. The sad thing is that we have lost a lot of them to "aid in fighting" un-winnable and/or lost wars.
...To fit the drugs in his phone. Or he had an 80's brick phone?
Produce a meteor the size of a house and drop it on the AC who's spamming today. Is there a filter to hide AC posts yet?
That's great, I guess we should re-purpose them as LFA (Lost and Found Administration) agents. They could reduce passenger losses by billions and actually serve a purpose to the taxpayer!
You and I have a pretty different definition of the word "stop". That's 1million arrests per year, of drunk people. Can you imagine the numbers of incidents not ending in an arrest? Staggering. The laws are basically just cash cows for the states/etc. They really do nothing for prevention. People like to talk about the reduction of deaths but if you look at the stats they follow right along with non-alcohol related vehicle deaths, which probably means it has a lot more to do with vehicle safety features than any meaningful reduction in DUI occurrence. Making "drink and drive" (bars, restaurants, etc) establishments illegal would do a ton more than the purely punitive laws we have. Like smoking and everything else, as far as the states concerned, the bottom line is income. Safety is the guise.
That could be possible but I have a feeling it's basically like the "old west" where your reputation is everything and once you have a good one you will do anything to keep it because it's your "word"/"honor". The whole thing is crazy to me but I can see how minus any sort of intervention the playing field levels itself out. I'd think if people were being ripped off you would hear quite a bit about it.
The resounding theme is "go big or go home" with federal crimes it would seem: Claim >x% year over year for entertainment, bend over and grab your ankles. File a completely bogus return after paying zero taxes for a 3k$ refund? Profit. Take advantage of an ATM giving out money? 6 years jail. Take advantage of holes in the SEC/Banking rules to the tune of billions? 1% fine.
There's a lot of interest in controlling the medium of communications that is bridging us into the future. Don't accept the lesser of two evils, promote a better solution. We're always on H.R. away from turning the internet into a carnival fairway.
Funny, how just a short time ago, relatively speaking, children entertained themselves for the most part. Not being condescending, we're all guilty of it.
Even if it's 50X more expensive your options for content, delivery, interface, etc are amazingly diverse and constantly improving and changing. My cable box hasn't changed much in 10 years, aside from adding a HDD to record a few shows.
It may be a bad thing that our government works this way, overall, but the thing that comes to mind for me is "the enemy of my enemy is my friend". The telcos/major ISPs are fighting tooth and nail on K street to change the model of the internet that has worked so well for us and coincidentally these large companies. Of course I am well aware of "The Scorpion and the Frog" in this scenario.
It doesn't have to mean "why are you doing personal stuff at work?" It's not really a "judgement" it is "best practices". You'd laugh til you were crying if someone posted what's the best way to get all of their personal information and credit card numbers off of a library computer, this isn't that much different. You don't own the computer (and a lot of times not even the admin rights) to the computer, why would you be storing personal passwords, CC#'s, etc on it? Every person should use a computer with the constant thought of "if someone took this out of my hands right now what could they do with it?" If the answer is anything less than "nothing, or nothing unless they can break disc encryption" then they should think about moving that direction. In this day someone can literally ruin your life with enough access to your personal data and online world, and I'm not talking about some easily reversed charges.
Heh or maybe just more androind slamming by apple fanboys, look at his code page.
I'm starting to think this is astroturfing by large game developers butthurt because they are "losing" X$ because andriod isn't a pretty walled garden with antipiracy overlords doing the legwork for them. It reeks of corporate greed.
Google doesn't display ads like other sites s, yea the click is much more important. I don't see a juicy burger for my local burger store that I may go to lunch at but not click the ad.
I disagree, outside of brand marketing that really doesn't seek to increase immediate results, companies have long been able to measure the effect of advertisements. The problem with the internet is that most advertising is unfocused, "scammy" (lose weight, cash for gold, catch the monkey), and just altogether horrible. Some more popular websites remind me of the TV show in 'Idiocracy' and I'd bet a loss in CPC can be attributed to the amount of "false" "click throughs" by people just trying to navigate around pages wallpapered with ads. I also suspect that a lot of companies expect a lot more out of click throughs than is realistic.
... with some bearded dudes riding them just rode by me, makes sense now.
"The man who founded Walmart" would most likely despise what his company has become, or I guess love it because he can start a NewMart that can offer even lower prices by actually having literal slave labor create goods for his virtual wage slaves. The moment Sam Walton died the jackals came in and took what was a well intended idea (having US manufacturers compete with foreign by lowering costs) and turned it into the poster child of corporate greed and scumbaggery: Lowering the standards of living for literally 10's of millions by driving a race to the bottom in wages and product quality. Remember the last time you saw a "Made In America" banner on every other rack in a walmart, probably around 1992ish? They were probably burning the signs at his wake.
I don't think there's a requirement the games be $0.99, that's just the name of the market.
Got the whole OBD hacking figured out but sticking a peice of tape on a camera is a mechanical feat out of their reach.