Who cares abou the guy who owns them next week. He'll own them no matter whether the EFF takes the bitcoins and sells them for US dollars instantly, or if they require the donater to sell them and send the US dollars. Either way some bitcoins got traded. Taking them directly lowers the barrier to donating so they might get a few extra bucks.
That it's a bubble is completly irrelevant if you are just transacting and not ever holding.
Should they refuse a house someone wants to donate because of a property bubble? Should they refuse a silver dollar someone wants to donate because of a silver bubble? Should they refuse a US Treasury someone wants to donate because of a bond bubble? Should they refuse US dollars someone wants to donate because of a dollar bubble?
Why does it matter if something is destined to fail
But none of those uses are things most places that take them would actually do. Their entire reason for taking them is because they can sell them to other people.
You can sell bitcoins to other people too.
It doesn't matter if other people are putting value on them because they can play a game with them, or because they like how they look, or because they are idiots.
Now you wouldn't want to hold on to them, just accept and sell - it's all digital I'm sure that can be completely automated. Why not take something that you can sell for $10 this second? Who cares if it will be worth $0 next week?
I understand why they don't want to accept them. But it has nothing to do with their value likely going to end up at 0.
Alumum cans don't have any value them aside from the value that someone else will pay for them. Bitcoins are exactly the same.
And it wouldn't be foolish to accept Monopoly play money either. I'm sure the local charity store will accept a monooly game, play money and all, as a donation and happily put it on the shelf with a price sticker on it. If people have been buying just the play money, then I'm sure they'll take just that too.
They'd take pokemon cards too.
It doesn't matter if bitcoins are going to be worth 0 in the future they are worth something more now, so there's nothing foolish with accepting the donation and then selling the bitcoins.
Now there are some costs associated with them, they've decided those costs outweight the benefits, which is fine. That doesn't make it foolish in the first place though.
It's just another way to get money. If the cost/hassle isn't worth what it brings in then obviously you get rid of it.
Are charities that accept bottles that they can return for the deposit, or aluminum cans then can be paid for handing over to a recycling center or clothes they can then sell to others foolish as well?
After all they can keep asking for the key to the hidden partition they "know" is there and when you refuse to provide them (because there is no hidden partition) you get 2 years in jail (5 if they can make it look terrorism related)...
The Weimar Republic is irrelevant, the currency was what was being discussed. Governments and countries change, just because a particular currency is "safe" today doesn't mean it will be in 50 years time.
You missed c) The eurozone dumps the euro and reverts back to individual currencies.
Perhaps it's time for game publishers unwilling to release dedicated servers to be required to maintain their own multiplayer servers for a set number of years after a title's launch
How about just not buying games that don't state how long they will run their multiplayer servers.
It's a game, no one is going to be harmed because idiot consumers keep buying crap. So why regulate that aspect of it? If the players actually give a shit they won't buy games which don't have such a guarantee (or player runnable dedicated servers) and companies not offering them will go broke.
There have been plenty of games I wanted to play but didn't buy (or pirate for the people assuming that) because I didn't like something about it - the required net connection DRM* of Ruse being the prime recentish example (man I loved that in beta).
And you know what, my life really hasn't suffered for not being able to play a few particular video games.
* I don't actually care too much about DRM in general - just the stuff that makes things needlessly difficult for me.
So 1918 then, or 1914, or 1900, or 1890. Who cares on the actual date, it was a well respected currency issued by a well respected government and it crashed within the lifetime of those people. Why is the euro magically immune from such a fate?
Or are you arguing that everybody already knows that the euro is a house of cards waiting for a catasrophe today?
The US Government handed a $30 billion credit line to Bear Stearns/JP Morgan Chase in 2008. The Penn Central Railroad and Lokheed bailouts were in 1970 and 1971, so it's been at least 30 years that the US has routinely been handing over loans and credit lines to companies. Sure to try and stop them failing, but clearly them failing benefits their competitors...
It's clearly not a ponzi scheme and it's also clearly not a pyramid scheme.
The those in early benefit is standard in essentially everything. Those in early also lose the most when whatever the thing is doesn't "take off".
The people first at an area with a lot of gold in the ground get easy pickings sitting on the surface. Those in later have to spend money digging mile deep holes in the ground to get at the remaining gold.
And of the course the entire point of bitcoins isn't the "mining" it's using them as a currency. I do not mint my own coins or print my own Federal Reserve notes and yet I use them as a currency just fine. Similarly I don't need to ever "mine" a bitcoin in order to use it as a currency and if it did become a functioning currency in more than just a fringe area the vast majority of people using it wouldn't either (they would simply buy bitcoins or be paid directly in bitcoins).
Sure you could sell it over a month or two, but that isn't the same as doing it i none go, which is what "Is the market at a given time big enough to actually fulfil such a sell order" means.
Slashdot Mirror
It's an MP3 file of a given size. Yes if the MD5s match, it is the same file.
But him owning them next week isn't changed by the EFF accepting or not accepting such donations.
Who cares abou the guy who owns them next week. He'll own them no matter whether the EFF takes the bitcoins and sells them for US dollars instantly, or if they require the donater to sell them and send the US dollars. Either way some bitcoins got traded. Taking them directly lowers the barrier to donating so they might get a few extra bucks.
That it's a bubble is completly irrelevant if you are just transacting and not ever holding.
Should they refuse a house someone wants to donate because of a property bubble? Should they refuse a silver dollar someone wants to donate because of a silver bubble? Should they refuse a US Treasury someone wants to donate because of a bond bubble? Should they refuse US dollars someone wants to donate because of a dollar bubble?
Why does it matter if something is destined to fail
But none of those uses are things most places that take them would actually do. Their entire reason for taking them is because they can sell them to other people.
You can sell bitcoins to other people too.
It doesn't matter if other people are putting value on them because they can play a game with them, or because they like how they look, or because they are idiots.
Now you wouldn't want to hold on to them, just accept and sell - it's all digital I'm sure that can be completely automated. Why not take something that you can sell for $10 this second? Who cares if it will be worth $0 next week?
I understand why they don't want to accept them. But it has nothing to do with their value likely going to end up at 0.
Alumum cans don't have any value them aside from the value that someone else will pay for them. Bitcoins are exactly the same.
And it wouldn't be foolish to accept Monopoly play money either. I'm sure the local charity store will accept a monooly game, play money and all, as a donation and happily put it on the shelf with a price sticker on it. If people have been buying just the play money, then I'm sure they'll take just that too.
They'd take pokemon cards too.
It doesn't matter if bitcoins are going to be worth 0 in the future they are worth something more now, so there's nothing foolish with accepting the donation and then selling the bitcoins.
Now there are some costs associated with them, they've decided those costs outweight the benefits, which is fine. That doesn't make it foolish in the first place though.
You are a selfish prick.
A man wants to go prison and you work to deny him that simple thing?
Fuck you!
Why is it foolish?
It's just another way to get money. If the cost/hassle isn't worth what it brings in then obviously you get rid of it.
Are charities that accept bottles that they can return for the deposit, or aluminum cans then can be paid for handing over to a recycling center or clothes they can then sell to others foolish as well?
You can't win. Even the simplest of plans the powers that be manage to screw you over on.
Congrats you just broke every C++ program that used "lambda" (or whatever keyword you chose) as a variable/class/whatever name.
And yes, while it may seem minor to you and something that can be fixed with search-n-replace, that's something to be avoided at almost any cost.
It's the UK. Surely having a TrueCrypt partition is a slam-dunk jail sentence under http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2000/23/section/49
After all they can keep asking for the key to the hidden partition they "know" is there and when you refuse to provide them (because there is no hidden partition) you get 2 years in jail (5 if they can make it look terrorism related)...
The Weimar Republic is irrelevant, the currency was what was being discussed. Governments and countries change, just because a particular currency is "safe" today doesn't mean it will be in 50 years time.
You missed c) The eurozone dumps the euro and reverts back to individual currencies.
How about just not buying games that don't state how long they will run their multiplayer servers.
It's a game, no one is going to be harmed because idiot consumers keep buying crap. So why regulate that aspect of it? If the players actually give a shit they won't buy games which don't have such a guarantee (or player runnable dedicated servers) and companies not offering them will go broke.
There have been plenty of games I wanted to play but didn't buy (or pirate for the people assuming that) because I didn't like something about it - the required net connection DRM* of Ruse being the prime recentish example (man I loved that in beta).
And you know what, my life really hasn't suffered for not being able to play a few particular video games.
* I don't actually care too much about DRM in general - just the stuff that makes things needlessly difficult for me.
Always make sure you are carrying a TV whenever you do repaid on your truck.
Sure it makes the work ever so slighly more difficult, but you never know when you'll need something to take the shrapnel.
So 1918 then, or 1914, or 1900, or 1890. Who cares on the actual date, it was a well respected currency issued by a well respected government and it crashed within the lifetime of those people. Why is the euro magically immune from such a fate?
Or are you arguing that everybody already knows that the euro is a house of cards waiting for a catasrophe today?
I think you misunderstand the meaning of "can't".
Do you know what the word "future" means?
The German Mark was recognized by billions and backed by government in 1920 too.
Except it is not different.
The US Government handed a $30 billion credit line to Bear Stearns/JP Morgan Chase in 2008. The Penn Central Railroad and Lokheed bailouts were in 1970 and 1971, so it's been at least 30 years that the US has routinely been handing over loans and credit lines to companies. Sure to try and stop them failing, but clearly them failing benefits their competitors...
It's clearly not a ponzi scheme and it's also clearly not a pyramid scheme.
The those in early benefit is standard in essentially everything. Those in early also lose the most when whatever the thing is doesn't "take off".
The people first at an area with a lot of gold in the ground get easy pickings sitting on the surface. Those in later have to spend money digging mile deep holes in the ground to get at the remaining gold.
And of the course the entire point of bitcoins isn't the "mining" it's using them as a currency. I do not mint my own coins or print my own Federal Reserve notes and yet I use them as a currency just fine. Similarly I don't need to ever "mine" a bitcoin in order to use it as a currency and if it did become a functioning currency in more than just a fringe area the vast majority of people using it wouldn't either (they would simply buy bitcoins or be paid directly in bitcoins).
You are doing it wrong.
You are suppose to get the dollar first, then tell the secrets.
Not just give the secrets away for free in a slashdot post.
So the network cables aren't the domain of IT where you work?
It's China, it doesn't matter if you vote more than once or if someone steals your vote. Since your vote doesn't count for anything anyway.
Because, in contrast to yourself, the list creators aren't complete morons.
Except there is no getting someone else to pay for it part.
OK, 1 day's volume then.
Sure you could sell it over a month or two, but that isn't the same as doing it i none go, which is what "Is the market at a given time big enough to actually fulfil such a sell order" means.
So the privacy/etc policy of the provider doesn't matter in the slightest.
Treat it as a world readable file, doing anything else is being retarded.