Gmail offered 2 GB of storage space for free, at a time when hotmail offered 10 MB, and for pay services offered 100 MB. That made it desirable. Google+ doesn't give something for free that you cannot get elsewhere. They seem to be making the same mistake as with Wave: a tool that needs collaboration of many users needs many users. Restricting access to a social website misses the point, and will kill it.
Yep, I've always wondered. So, we've spent a trillion dollars in Afghanistan. Their GNP is 25 billion a year. Can't we just freaking bribe them by given them an extra 25 billion a year for the next 40 years, save a few lives, and pocket the interest?
So, no progress is bad. Spending every penny you have on progress is bad...If only there were some gray area, in between, where we could have some progress, without starving to death because we spent every penny of our country's GDP on research...If only someone would invent moderation...
I would, but I don't have any mod points.
I have, and right after I post this I'll give you some!
To honor tau we should update math.c with M_TAU referring to M_PI_2. BTW, what would occur more often, M_PI, or M_PI_2 in actual code? And how often do people use 2 * M_PI?
Yes, but by that time the US will be lead by the Christian Taliban, and the country will have forgotten how to build nuclear reactors. The US will have surrendered to Quebec.
So, don't clean up. Put a large fence around the area and give it back to nature. Animals with an expected lifespan of less than 5 years don't care about that level of radiation. Call it a natural reserve, and be done with it.
Of course Bush didn't lie personally. Nor did anyone in his vicinity. No person in the position of Bush, and with the resources of Bush should ever be lying. A president of the USA can simply make sure that unwelcome facts will get buried three or more levels away from him. It is that simple. If a report comes from Nigeria that supports your policies, your organisation will wholeheartedly embrace it and make sure that the good bits are highlighted. If such a report comes with unwelcome facts, you make sure that it will get researched to death. The facts don't matter, you can fabricate those.
I guess my point is simply that given the amount of resources the President of the US has to investigate stuff, the fact that a series of statements turned out to be wrong, is almost conclusive proof that the president was not interested in the truth. I consider that lying.
Yes I know what "Nazi" is short for. Do you know that the socialist, communist, social-democratic and anarchist anthem. is called "The Internationale"? Now put 2 and 2 together, and think about what a Nazi would sing.
The intelligence report on uranium was false. It was flaunted at the UN as absolute proof that Iraq was after WMD. It was untrue. Plame-gate showed that this was known at the time. Therefore it was a lie. The CIA is part of the federal government. Bush headed this federal government. Bush therefore lied, even if he carefully made sure that he couldn't have known the details.
And this is just one. The media was filled with government officials claiming ties between Saddam and Al-Quaida. There were none. More lies. Blix told two months before the invasion that there were no WMD in Iraq. Bush said that it was untrue.
I'm pretty sure that you can weasel your way out of this trying to claim that Bush might possibly had no personal knowledge of all this, but that's irrelevant. The machinery that he commanded was creating lies, smoke-screens and a media frenzy to come to one conclusion: the attack on Iraq. He is ultimately responsible for this. Maybe Bush didn't lie, the Bush administration surely did, and that's what matters.
Ah, you surely deserve your nick. This is about the biggest load of bull I've seen in a while. Hitler was a socialist, and IBM helped Hitler with his national health care program. Until deep in the second world war, with personal involvement of Watson. Watson must have surely cared for the health of the German population to risk charges of treason. As said, you deserve your nick.
All IBM has to do to corroborate your hypothesis is to open up their archives, and show through written communication that the international leadership was indeed side-stepped by the SA goons. IBM hasn't opened up these archives, unlike most other companies involved with the Nazis, therefore I highly doubt that the head-honchos in New York at the time were innocent.
In my country the USD is just a piece of paper, roughly worth 70 cents today. It tends to fluctuate. It is not legal tender, but people will accept it if it's all you've got. Not the tax office though, for them, I have to first translate it to real money. I think most of USD's value is speculative.
The intrinsic value of a dollar note used as toilet paper w.r.t. the value printed on it quite possibly exceeds the intrinsic value of gold w.r.t. its current value on the market.
Yes, that's the theory. The practice turned out to be that once the banks lost an incredible amount of money in reckless ponzi schemes, they blackmailed the world into submission by stopping doing exactly what you deem to be their primary function: give loans to businesses and individuals. At that point, the government needed to bail them out as, like a petulant child, they were pulling the rug underneath the entire economy. And even now, even after the bail out, and even after the ponzi schemes have been started up again, the bonus train is running again, they still refuse to loan out the money. It's more profitable to borrow money at ridicolously low interest rates from the government, and then lending it back to the government in the form of T-bonds.
The Glass-Steagull act was there for a reason. It split the buccaneers of high finance from the low margin, risk averse retail bankers. Now the pirates reign the bureaucrats.
Small banks are dead, killed by the pirates. The pirates are now funded by the tax payer. Be very afraid.
Fine, so houses, like gold, silver, and bitcoins, have an exchange rate in dollars associated with them that the government can use to get tax on. The true value of bitcoins, like the true value of gold, silver and houses, is not intrinsic, but merely speculative.
So, to bounce the original question back: if you can point me to the intrinsic value of gold, and demonstrate why gold holders will not massively dump gold when tax season comes, I might consider a more positive value to gold.
And yes, gold and silver have 'some' intrinsic value, but that value is nothing compared to its price. Likewise, bitcoin has some value (transactions, limited supply), yet that's nothing compared to its price. Both are speculative.
Practically, if I perform services for bitcoins, the IRS will value my services based on the current exchange rate of bitcoins, not on any 'perceived value' that can be challenged in court. This because, if I do my normal IT consultancy, it will be very hard for the IRS to figure out that I'm doing it for $300 bucks an hour rather than $30. Both extremes are common.
My point is that the moment I can do my work in bitcoins, and live using that, the US government will link bitcoins, like any commodity, to dollars, and tax it. Therefore, the taxation argument against bitcoins of the OP is bogus.
So, if I get someone crazy enough to sell them their house to me in bitcoins, sell services in bitocoins, produce goods sold in bitcoins, the US government will very nicely not tax me? I think bitcoins will have a wonderful future as everyone will exclusively start using it:)
Really, if bitcoins are useful enought to run a life, the US government will effectively recognize them in order to tax me. .
I think (b) follows automatically from (a). If drugs are legal, there is no basis for most of the criminality anymore. As the profit is out of the market, the drug cartels will dissolve, and the local pushers will need to go into other petty crime, burglary for instance. All in all, the number of criminals will considerably drop, as there is no longer a market to support them. You seem to assume crime is constant, but opportunity makes the thief. Get rid of the opportunity, and the thief will need to find honest employ or starve.
So, if I manage to exclusively work to earn bitcoins, and exclusively pay with bitcoins, never touching a dollar, the US government will very kindly not tax me?
If find it truly depressing that after 16 years of hardware development, the most ubiquitous client-server architecture around actually runs slower than ever before. What the hell are we doing with those 8+ cycles of Moore's law? Treat Javascript as if it were assembler! The trick is nifty, in a "let's put the heating on because the air-conditioning is cooling the house too much" kind of way.
So you trust the free market to work in a commercial environment where government regulation has created artificial monopolies, namely intellectual property rights on plants? Does not work. Patents are the antitheses of the free market, and only put in place because apparently, the free market is not capable of supporting innovation without government regulation.
Slashdot Mirror
Gmail offered 2 GB of storage space for free, at a time when hotmail offered 10 MB, and for pay services offered 100 MB. That made it desirable. Google+ doesn't give something for free that you cannot get elsewhere. They seem to be making the same mistake as with Wave: a tool that needs collaboration of many users needs many users. Restricting access to a social website misses the point, and will kill it.
Yep, I've always wondered. So, we've spent a trillion dollars in Afghanistan. Their GNP is 25 billion a year. Can't we just freaking bribe them by given them an extra 25 billion a year for the next 40 years, save a few lives, and pocket the interest?
So, no progress is bad. Spending every penny you have on progress is bad...If only there were some gray area, in between, where we could have some progress, without starving to death because we spent every penny of our country's GDP on research...If only someone would invent moderation...
I would, but I don't have any mod points.
I have, and right after I post this I'll give you some!
To honor tau we should update math.c with M_TAU referring to M_PI_2. BTW, what would occur more often, M_PI, or M_PI_2 in actual code? And how often do people use 2 * M_PI?
Yes, but by that time the US will be lead by the Christian Taliban, and the country will have forgotten how to build nuclear reactors. The US will have surrendered to Quebec.
So, don't clean up. Put a large fence around the area and give it back to nature. Animals with an expected lifespan of less than 5 years don't care about that level of radiation. Call it a natural reserve, and be done with it.
I guess my point is simply that given the amount of resources the President of the US has to investigate stuff, the fact that a series of statements turned out to be wrong, is almost conclusive proof that the president was not interested in the truth. I consider that lying.
Yes I know what "Nazi" is short for. Do you know that the socialist, communist, social-democratic and anarchist anthem. is called "The Internationale"? Now put 2 and 2 together, and think about what a Nazi would sing.
1`. Guns don't kill people, gun owners do.
And this is just one. The media was filled with government officials claiming ties between Saddam and Al-Quaida. There were none. More lies. Blix told two months before the invasion that there were no WMD in Iraq. Bush said that it was untrue.
I'm pretty sure that you can weasel your way out of this trying to claim that Bush might possibly had no personal knowledge of all this, but that's irrelevant. The machinery that he commanded was creating lies, smoke-screens and a media frenzy to come to one conclusion: the attack on Iraq. He is ultimately responsible for this. Maybe Bush didn't lie, the Bush administration surely did, and that's what matters.
And again, how is this more serious than starting a war without approval of congress?
Ah, you surely deserve your nick. This is about the biggest load of bull I've seen in a while. Hitler was a socialist, and IBM helped Hitler with his national health care program. Until deep in the second world war, with personal involvement of Watson. Watson must have surely cared for the health of the German population to risk charges of treason. As said, you deserve your nick.
So you've got a st00pid boss? Find a new one.
Just out of curiosity, since you don't know how this works: have you ever held a job for more than 6 months?
All IBM has to do to corroborate your hypothesis is to open up their archives, and show through written communication that the international leadership was indeed side-stepped by the SA goons. IBM hasn't opened up these archives, unlike most other companies involved with the Nazis, therefore I highly doubt that the head-honchos in New York at the time were innocent.
In my country the USD is just a piece of paper, roughly worth 70 cents today. It tends to fluctuate. It is not legal tender, but people will accept it if it's all you've got. Not the tax office though, for them, I have to first translate it to real money. I think most of USD's value is speculative.
The intrinsic value of a dollar note used as toilet paper w.r.t. the value printed on it quite possibly exceeds the intrinsic value of gold w.r.t. its current value on the market.
The Glass-Steagull act was there for a reason. It split the buccaneers of high finance from the low margin, risk averse retail bankers. Now the pirates reign the bureaucrats. Small banks are dead, killed by the pirates. The pirates are now funded by the tax payer. Be very afraid.
So, to bounce the original question back: if you can point me to the intrinsic value of gold, and demonstrate why gold holders will not massively dump gold when tax season comes, I might consider a more positive value to gold.
And yes, gold and silver have 'some' intrinsic value, but that value is nothing compared to its price. Likewise, bitcoin has some value (transactions, limited supply), yet that's nothing compared to its price. Both are speculative.
My point is that the moment I can do my work in bitcoins, and live using that, the US government will link bitcoins, like any commodity, to dollars, and tax it. Therefore, the taxation argument against bitcoins of the OP is bogus.
Really, if bitcoins are useful enought to run a life, the US government will effectively recognize them in order to tax me. .
I think (b) follows automatically from (a). If drugs are legal, there is no basis for most of the criminality anymore. As the profit is out of the market, the drug cartels will dissolve, and the local pushers will need to go into other petty crime, burglary for instance. All in all, the number of criminals will considerably drop, as there is no longer a market to support them. You seem to assume crime is constant, but opportunity makes the thief. Get rid of the opportunity, and the thief will need to find honest employ or starve.
So, if I manage to exclusively work to earn bitcoins, and exclusively pay with bitcoins, never touching a dollar, the US government will very kindly not tax me?
If find it truly depressing that after 16 years of hardware development, the most ubiquitous client-server architecture around actually runs slower than ever before. What the hell are we doing with those 8+ cycles of Moore's law? Treat Javascript as if it were assembler! The trick is nifty, in a "let's put the heating on because the air-conditioning is cooling the house too much" kind of way.
So you trust the free market to work in a commercial environment where government regulation has created artificial monopolies, namely intellectual property rights on plants? Does not work. Patents are the antitheses of the free market, and only put in place because apparently, the free market is not capable of supporting innovation without government regulation.