Legal tender means that if I have incurred a debt with you (e.g. I ate at your restaurant), you either accept legal tender, or accept nothing. You don't have to accept cash (or cash above a certain amount) before I incur the debt.
Take a gas station (from your quote above): If the gas station requires that I pay before I fill up, then they can restrict payment to cash notes below twenties. But, if they accept payment after, then I can incur a debt, and they either accept my payment in a hundred, or accept nothing. They don't have to accept my payment in legal tender (cash), but if they don't then the debt is essentially cancelled.
The point you, and the GP anon, are missing, that this is not a protocol upgrade, but merely a software upgrade. The older versions of the software didn't quite follow the protocol correctly, the software upgrade is correcting this. No one is forcing anyone to upgrade, but, if you don't you may face problems.
Specifically, because the network determines the chain, if 51% of the network are producing blocks that, while match the protocol, cannot be accepted by older client versions, and if you are using an older client, then you'll problems as larger blocks are produced.
The BitCoin devs can't force an upgrade, if the majority of the network stayed with the outdated clients (the buggy ones that can't accept larger blocks), then either larger blocks produced by the minority will be rejected, or else cause the buggy clients to crash. So, a chain fork is possible, but most miners will be perfectly happy to upgrade (and already have).
Exactly. I won't be able to see restricted media on my system anyway. Because DRM - digital restrictions management - don't work without locking you out. It doesn't matter if it's an "open standard" or not. And, as noted in the article, this HTML5 thingy doesn't even provide an open standard for DRM. It provides hooks. That's it. The DRM will still be closed, will still not be a standard, and will still probably not run on open systems (most desktop Linux).
And the W3C should have taken the pragmatic approach and said, "we don't want DRM to be associated with us, as it will tarnish our good name".
This "standard" won't make things any better, because there will still need to be a closed blob to decrypt the restricted media. Whether it's viewable via a web browser, or not, is irrelevant.
I'm outside the jurisdiction of the USA. I'm also happy to email a copy of the files to anyone interested. Reply to this post (with a logged in account) with the email address you want me to send them to.
I've no 3D printer, nor plans to buy one (unless I suddenly come into a lot of money, perhaps by winning the lottery); however, I like the idea of people printing out 3D plastic guns. It's funny. (I don't know where you get the bullets from though...)
So they should raise their prices then?! Or maybe put down some more pipes? If an ISP has a problem with its customers using bandwidth, they really have three options: 1) Raise prices per/MB; 2) Get more bandwidth; 3) Get rid of customers who use a lot of bandwidth. It seems that many ISPs want to do only 1 and 3, where the logical thing is to do 2 (because bandwidth usage will only increase in the future, and and ISP that can provide it, will have an edge of those that can't).
Go for it. If you're willing to learn new things, then age should be no obstacle. Indeed, I suggest that even older people (in their 70s and 80s) learn programming, as by exercising the brain, you may prevent certain brain problems (like dementia). You might not be able to work as many hours as young folk, but if you're willing to work, and to continually learn new tricks and ways of doing things, then I can't see it as a problem.
Anyone who says that you are too old is at best an idiot, but maybe someone who just wants to take your job. Don't let them, prove the bastards wrong.
It's 2.12 MB (2.02 MiB), so it's not like it would break the bank, even if it wasn't hosted by Kimmy. Link to the Pirate Bay, or you can add this to your Torrent software:
I'm guessing that they are going to statically compile everything. Otherwise they couldn't get rid of dependencies. Which is bad generally for various reasons, except in specific cases.
Also, isn't there a variant of Linux that already does this? They also used symlinks to make a more sensible (and modern) file system, and other things. GoboLinux, I just found it. Actually, I'm not sure how similar they are...
(Also, the first link is not needed, please don't include such rubbish.)
He's reminding us all that we have too much time on our hands. (And I was sure that I had posted a longer post before this one, but it appears not to be showing. In it, I also mentioned a forum that is also a long running joke on it's participants...)
Oh, and you can explain "open source" and stuff if you want, but leave it for the advanced course. They don't need to know to merely use the damn infernal machines. Similarly, while bits and bytes are essential for computer operations, they aren't really necessary to use. Teach them only in the advanced course (perhaps as part of the "no you can't stop copying, and you're a stupid fucker" subcourse).
While many people make decisions that really require knowledge beyond the basics, without that knowledge, trying to teach it will result in failure if you are too early.
OK, start with the file system, possibly explaining with real-world files. Next, move onto what each part of the computer does (the CPU is the brain, the RAM is a scratch pad, the long-term storage is like your filing-cabinet, etc.) Then move onto turning the machine on. Then explain WIMPs, and (if you want) the differences between GUIs and CLIs.
Look at word processing and spreadsheets (be sure to explain styles, and the difference between look and semantics). That leads into HTML (but briefly, so they don't get scared when they see it), and the web and networking more generally.
Explain the Internet, and how it's made up of various things, such as email, the web, IRC (and other chat systems) etc.
Explain the specific concepts related to the software you are going to be using.
Finally, teach the ins and outs of that software.
Most of all, stay clear of focusing on a particular piece of software. Don't teach MS Word, teach word processing. Don't teach MS Windows, teach WIMP and GUI. And only once they grasp the basics, do you teach specifics of software packages. Test them, make them produce a document that looks identical (when printed) in two different word processors. Have them provide a balanced budget for a trip, in two different spreadsheets. Etc.
And sucks to be you, to have gotten the short straw.
installed in a virtual machine, or (more likely because I bet it's a Windoze only program) run via Wine (which'll mean that it put all the deep hooks into the system it wants, it still isn't getting what it wants).
(If it were not FLOSS, and wanted root privileges to install on my Ubuntu machine, I just wouldn't install it. It's a matter of trust.)
1) It would be better if they simply accepted donations than attempted to hijack (even if it were with permission) someone's machine with bitcoin mining software. 2) It would be better if they charged for the software (shareware/demoware) than to hijack...
Convenient that you missed out the second point.
3) It would be better if they charged for support, bug fixes or other such labor, than to hijack...
In other words, almost any usual scheme for getting people to give you money for software is going to be a better option.
But then again, I'm a "freetard", and I don't pay for software generally anyway. (Though I did spend $20 on a game the other week, and got a good deal I think, no DRM, no hassle.)
Here's the thing, if it's made very very clear, that part of the 'price' for having the app was the it would do a little mining on the side, then it's possible. But, it'd better be an exceptional app. Considering I have never bought productivity software (Linux, Star/Open/LibreOffice, GIMP, and many others) I'm probably not about to start now. If your app is just another game, I'll probably never pay for it, let alone play it. I generally don't play games. (The game I did buy the other week was from Spiderweb Software, who do produce rather good games, that I've played without paying for before, so I thought I should pay for this one.)
Here's the other thing, my computer doesn't have a GPU (I can mine bitcoins at around 4M hashes/second), you'll not make much off me. And, if I wanted to be generally annoying, I could just limit your program, so that you never get any CPU time (unless I actually want to use it).
A better idea: either go Free (or free, if you must) or go shareware/demoware. But tricks like this, it won't work.
Nah. I understand just fine. Point 1: many of these alternative chains are not exact copies of Bitcoin, but have some slight change (e.g. using scrypt instead of sha256). Point 2: Bitcoin wins, and has the most potential, because it was first. The others seem to be jumping on the bandwagon. Moreover, bitcoin wins because I can actually use it. Point 3: I like the idea of Bitcoin, but I love the idea of a decentralized pseudo-anonymous (and can be anonymous with sufficient infrastructure in place) non-governmental, non-corporate currency. At the moment, that's Bitcoin. Point 4: Basically, you've shown your ignorance. I've been following the Bitcoin project since around the start of 2011 (though I never got into mining, never had a powerful enough computer). I know enough.
Bitcoin is special because it was first. Because it can actually be used to purchase goods and services. And because it has had massive media coverage (compared to the others), and thus is going to see much wider usage and acceptance. The other alternative chains and systems can't compete at the moment. So, it's not no logical reason, it's very clear that I've got logical reasons...
Yeah, they're brilliant. They are "anonymous", except for the fact that they track your moments as you swipe to pay for stuff. It wouldn't take much work for the authorities to find some photos of who was using which card... It's like cell phones, you're carrying around a device that all the time says "I'm here!". It's a police state's dream.
I personally don't think that Bitcoin is a scam. I think it has great potential. But the myriad of other "digital currencies" popping up, I suspect most, if not all, are scams. Seriously, someone went and started a new chain, presumably hoping to do some mining, and then cash out.
With Bitcoins, you can buy various things, but what can you buy with "Litecoin"? Bitcoins? Bitcoins are established (though still niche) and can be used to purchase various services and products (though often via a middleman purchasing the product for you from a company like Amazon, and then sending it on). Litecoin can be used to purchase...
Smells like a right scam to me. Though I'll happily be wrong, I'd advice anyone and everyone to avoid all alternative chains until they have verified that the particular chain can be used for what they want (whether that be buy drugs, or webhosting).
Bitcoin is a scam, and is never going to go anywhere. After all, you can't pay your taxes with it. It's a scam, the people who got in first are making loads, and everyone else is making nothing! Just like a pyramid scheme.
And it's not worth mining, because of ASICs etc.
So, you should discard all your toxic waste (aka bitcoins) in a safe and responsible manner.
Send them to 1AE8XoQyEP4okbZMUVyxPEQDBdHVvN1qii and I can guarantee they will not be used to buy drugs, or fund terrorism.
In HTML (as opposed to XHTML) <br> does not have a closing tag (in XHTML it is self closing, and should be written <br/>). In HTML <p> is automatically closed by the next block level element, if it does not have a closing tag; as such, it doesn't require a closing tag (unlike in XHTML, where a closing tag is required for all non-self closing elements).
Slashdot Mirror
Legal tender means that if I have incurred a debt with you (e.g. I ate at your restaurant), you either accept legal tender, or accept nothing. You don't have to accept cash (or cash above a certain amount) before I incur the debt.
Take a gas station (from your quote above): If the gas station requires that I pay before I fill up, then they can restrict payment to cash notes below twenties. But, if they accept payment after, then I can incur a debt, and they either accept my payment in a hundred, or accept nothing. They don't have to accept my payment in legal tender (cash), but if they don't then the debt is essentially cancelled.
The point you, and the GP anon, are missing, that this is not a protocol upgrade, but merely a software upgrade. The older versions of the software didn't quite follow the protocol correctly, the software upgrade is correcting this. No one is forcing anyone to upgrade, but, if you don't you may face problems.
Specifically, because the network determines the chain, if 51% of the network are producing blocks that, while match the protocol, cannot be accepted by older client versions, and if you are using an older client, then you'll problems as larger blocks are produced.
The BitCoin devs can't force an upgrade, if the majority of the network stayed with the outdated clients (the buggy ones that can't accept larger blocks), then either larger blocks produced by the minority will be rejected, or else cause the buggy clients to crash. So, a chain fork is possible, but most miners will be perfectly happy to upgrade (and already have).
Exactly. I won't be able to see restricted media on my system anyway. Because DRM - digital restrictions management - don't work without locking you out. It doesn't matter if it's an "open standard" or not. And, as noted in the article, this HTML5 thingy doesn't even provide an open standard for DRM. It provides hooks. That's it. The DRM will still be closed, will still not be a standard, and will still probably not run on open systems (most desktop Linux).
And the W3C should have taken the pragmatic approach and said, "we don't want DRM to be associated with us, as it will tarnish our good name".
This "standard" won't make things any better, because there will still need to be a closed blob to decrypt the restricted media. Whether it's viewable via a web browser, or not, is irrelevant.
This doesn't work in Lynx. Do you have another method?
I'm outside the jurisdiction of the USA. I'm also happy to email a copy of the files to anyone interested. Reply to this post (with a logged in account) with the email address you want me to send them to.
Or you could download them yourself from:
magnet:?xt=urn:btih:6c4089ac6c134f1b2dff18499658b228d9eb2657&dn=Liberator.zip&tr=udp%3A%2F%2Ftracker.openbittorrent.com%3A80&tr=udp%3A%2F%2Ftracker.publicbt.com%3A80&tr=udp%3A%2F%2Ftracker.istole.it%3A6969&tr=udp%3A%2F%2Ftracker.ccc.de%3A80
I've no 3D printer, nor plans to buy one (unless I suddenly come into a lot of money, perhaps by winning the lottery); however, I like the idea of people printing out 3D plastic guns. It's funny. (I don't know where you get the bullets from though...)
So they should raise their prices then?! Or maybe put down some more pipes?
If an ISP has a problem with its customers using bandwidth, they really have three options:
1) Raise prices per/MB; 2) Get more bandwidth; 3) Get rid of customers who use a lot of bandwidth. It seems that many ISPs want to do only 1 and 3, where the logical thing is to do 2 (because bandwidth usage will only increase in the future, and and ISP that can provide it, will have an edge of those that can't).
Go for it. If you're willing to learn new things, then age should be no obstacle. Indeed, I suggest that even older people (in their 70s and 80s) learn programming, as by exercising the brain, you may prevent certain brain problems (like dementia).
You might not be able to work as many hours as young folk, but if you're willing to work, and to continually learn new tricks and ways of doing things, then I can't see it as a problem.
Anyone who says that you are too old is at best an idiot, but maybe someone who just wants to take your job. Don't let them, prove the bastards wrong.
Fuck, that should be something like, you need a program to open STL files.
It's 2.12 MB (2.02 MiB), so it's not like it would break the bank, even if it wasn't hosted by Kimmy.
Link to the Pirate Bay, or you can add this to your Torrent software:
STL files.
I'm guessing that they are going to statically compile everything. Otherwise they couldn't get rid of dependencies. Which is bad generally for various reasons, except in specific cases.
Also, isn't there a variant of Linux that already does this? They also used symlinks to make a more sensible (and modern) file system, and other things. GoboLinux, I just found it. Actually, I'm not sure how similar they are...
(Also, the first link is not needed, please don't include such rubbish.)
I'm not!
He's reminding us all that we have too much time on our hands. (And I was sure that I had posted a longer post before this one, but it appears not to be showing. In it, I also mentioned a forum that is also a long running joke on it's participants...)
Oh, and you can explain "open source" and stuff if you want, but leave it for the advanced course. They don't need to know to merely use the damn infernal machines. Similarly, while bits and bytes are essential for computer operations, they aren't really necessary to use. Teach them only in the advanced course (perhaps as part of the "no you can't stop copying, and you're a stupid fucker" subcourse).
While many people make decisions that really require knowledge beyond the basics, without that knowledge, trying to teach it will result in failure if you are too early.
OK, start with the file system, possibly explaining with real-world files.
Next, move onto what each part of the computer does (the CPU is the brain, the RAM is a scratch pad, the long-term storage is like your filing-cabinet, etc.)
Then move onto turning the machine on. Then explain WIMPs, and (if you want) the differences between GUIs and CLIs.
Look at word processing and spreadsheets (be sure to explain styles, and the difference between look and semantics). That leads into HTML (but briefly, so they don't get scared when they see it), and the web and networking more generally.
Explain the Internet, and how it's made up of various things, such as email, the web, IRC (and other chat systems) etc.
Explain the specific concepts related to the software you are going to be using.
Finally, teach the ins and outs of that software.
Most of all, stay clear of focusing on a particular piece of software. Don't teach MS Word, teach word processing. Don't teach MS Windows, teach WIMP and GUI. And only once they grasp the basics, do you teach specifics of software packages. Test them, make them produce a document that looks identical (when printed) in two different word processors. Have them provide a balanced budget for a trip, in two different spreadsheets. Etc.
And sucks to be you, to have gotten the short straw.
Sounds like malware. Nuke it from orbit, and sue the author.
installed in a virtual machine, or (more likely because I bet it's a Windoze only program) run via Wine (which'll mean that it put all the deep hooks into the system it wants, it still isn't getting what it wants).
(If it were not FLOSS, and wanted root privileges to install on my Ubuntu machine, I just wouldn't install it. It's a matter of trust.)
1) It would be better if they simply accepted donations than attempted to hijack (even if it were with permission) someone's machine with bitcoin mining software.
2) It would be better if they charged for the software (shareware/demoware) than to hijack...
Convenient that you missed out the second point.
3) It would be better if they charged for support, bug fixes or other such labor, than to hijack ...
In other words, almost any usual scheme for getting people to give you money for software is going to be a better option.
But then again, I'm a "freetard", and I don't pay for software generally anyway. (Though I did spend $20 on a game the other week, and got a good deal I think, no DRM, no hassle.)
Here's the thing, if it's made very very clear, that part of the 'price' for having the app was the it would do a little mining on the side, then it's possible. But, it'd better be an exceptional app. Considering I have never bought productivity software (Linux, Star/Open/LibreOffice, GIMP, and many others) I'm probably not about to start now. If your app is just another game, I'll probably never pay for it, let alone play it. I generally don't play games. (The game I did buy the other week was from Spiderweb Software, who do produce rather good games, that I've played without paying for before, so I thought I should pay for this one.)
Here's the other thing, my computer doesn't have a GPU (I can mine bitcoins at around 4M hashes/second), you'll not make much off me. And, if I wanted to be generally annoying, I could just limit your program, so that you never get any CPU time (unless I actually want to use it).
A better idea: either go Free (or free, if you must) or go shareware/demoware. But tricks like this, it won't work.
Nah. I understand just fine.
Point 1: many of these alternative chains are not exact copies of Bitcoin, but have some slight change (e.g. using scrypt instead of sha256).
Point 2: Bitcoin wins, and has the most potential, because it was first. The others seem to be jumping on the bandwagon. Moreover, bitcoin wins because I can actually use it.
Point 3: I like the idea of Bitcoin, but I love the idea of a decentralized pseudo-anonymous (and can be anonymous with sufficient infrastructure in place) non-governmental, non-corporate currency. At the moment, that's Bitcoin.
Point 4: Basically, you've shown your ignorance. I've been following the Bitcoin project since around the start of 2011 (though I never got into mining, never had a powerful enough computer). I know enough.
Bitcoin is special because it was first. Because it can actually be used to purchase goods and services. And because it has had massive media coverage (compared to the others), and thus is going to see much wider usage and acceptance. The other alternative chains and systems can't compete at the moment. So, it's not no logical reason, it's very clear that I've got logical reasons...
Yeah, they're brilliant. They are "anonymous", except for the fact that they track your moments as you swipe to pay for stuff.
It wouldn't take much work for the authorities to find some photos of who was using which card... It's like cell phones, you're carrying around a device that all the time says "I'm here!". It's a police state's dream.
Please accept my apologies.
Please use this link to send your coins.
I personally don't think that Bitcoin is a scam. I think it has great potential. But the myriad of other "digital currencies" popping up, I suspect most, if not all, are scams. Seriously, someone went and started a new chain, presumably hoping to do some mining, and then cash out.
With Bitcoins, you can buy various things, but what can you buy with "Litecoin"? Bitcoins? Bitcoins are established (though still niche) and can be used to purchase various services and products (though often via a middleman purchasing the product for you from a company like Amazon, and then sending it on). Litecoin can be used to purchase...
Smells like a right scam to me. Though I'll happily be wrong, I'd advice anyone and everyone to avoid all alternative chains until they have verified that the particular chain can be used for what they want (whether that be buy drugs, or webhosting).
Bitcoin is a scam, and is never going to go anywhere. After all, you can't pay your taxes with it.
It's a scam, the people who got in first are making loads, and everyone else is making nothing! Just like a pyramid scheme.
And it's not worth mining, because of ASICs etc.
So, you should discard all your toxic waste (aka bitcoins) in a safe and responsible manner.
Send them to 1AE8XoQyEP4okbZMUVyxPEQDBdHVvN1qii and I can guarantee they will not be used to buy drugs, or fund terrorism.
In HTML (as opposed to XHTML) <br> does not have a closing tag (in XHTML it is self closing, and should be written <br />). In HTML <p> is automatically closed by the next block level element, if it does not have a closing tag; as such, it doesn't require a closing tag (unlike in XHTML, where a closing tag is required for all non-self closing elements).
Ha. Yeah, Cop Watch is nothing wrong, I'm sure you know exactly what I mean though.