They're not company funds but they're still on the books. If you look at a bank's balance sheet you'll see customer deposits listed as liabilities and loans listed as assets.
When they lost $500M in Bit Coins, most of which belonged to their customers? Are they not treating customer deposits as a liability? Shouldn't that interest be represented in the bankruptcy proceeding?
In the old days before the FDIC and the Federal Reserve, bank runs and collapses were common place. The FDIC and Federal Reserve were confidence measures, meant to reassure a weary public that their money was protected against fraud and the vagaries of fractional reserve lending. The true stability of those institutions in times of systemic crisis can be debated but they do serve their purpose for isolated failures. Bitcoin is going to need similar institutions to achieve mainstream adoption.
They railed against advertising and even Facebook yet he found $16B too rich to resist. Of course I can't blame him; $16B is an insane amount of money, and he'll get a big chunk of it. But the bottom line is he sold out his principles for wealth.
They make it sound like their system is all-self-correcting. In reality it's probably a specific area they've had bugs with in the past and they put in a failsafe rollback mechanism to prevent future regressions.
But it sure is a great place to get laid. And since men go into business to make money so that they can get laid I think disintermediating the process and jumping right to the 'get laid' part is a better business decision.
"Supervolcanoes represent the second most globally cataclysmic event - next to an asteroid strike - and they have been responsible in the past for mass extinctions, long-term changes to the climate and shorter-term 'volcanic winters' caused by volcanic ash cutting out the sunlight."
Naturally if they're going to spend the money on a secure system it might as well fulfill that goal. But do these metro metering devices really need to be all that secure? I checked MARTA's fare schedule and their most expensive ticket is $5 round-trip. Doesn't seem like enough incentive for the average joe to cheat it, esp. when you consider how transit authorities use a few high-profile prosecutions to discourage people from even buying second-hand tickets let alone hacking their own. In my view the system only need be marginally more secure than the honor system.
We're still in the midst of learning how deeply our own government has violated our privacy and websites decide now is a good time for people to give up their pseudonyms and reveal their true identities? Are they that stupid?
They are in the artic measuring climate change and its affect on reduced sea ice levels yet are now trapped in ice and have called in ice-breaking ships to rescue them, which in turn will reduce the formation of sea ice.
You're not arguing that taxes don't disincentivize peole to work. You're arguing that the current tax rate doesn't disincentivize *you* to work. Would you still work if your effective tax rate were 60%? 70%? 80%? 100%? And why would you believe that your threshold of disincentivization would be the same for others?
As a small entrepreneur you don't have the same wherewithal as a large corporation to redeploy your resources to other cities, states, and countries in search of competitive advantages.
I didn't say higher taxes prevent prosperity. What I said is that taxes alter the behavior of corporations and how and where they deploy their resources.Tax policy has become a tool of centralized economic planning, using incentives and disincentives to steer companies and individuals into behaviors the government feels are the most beneficial to the economy. That works fine if countries existed in isolation since governments have no competition to their policies. However in a global economy capital and resources are mobile. If a corporation doesn't like the tax policy of a country or feels it can or needs to gain a competitive cost advantage by deploying their resources elsewhere then that's exactly what they'll do. If a country wants to be the recipient of those resources then they have to compete for them, the same as how corporations have to compete for revenue and profits.
And an entrepreneur's chief reason for starting a business is to contribute to society, right? Man has unlimited capacity for applying eloquent piousness to his most coarse of primal desires. Self-determination? Determination toward what end exactly?
Capital is the retained surplus of value earned from previous economic exchange. I use productive wealth to mean the application of that capital by private industry and citizens of their own free will without interference from centralized power. It's not about government vs private industry but about centralized planning vs a free-market economy. Put the top 1,000 economists in charge of centralized planning and they will be no match for the collective intelligence of an economy whose millions of participants make self-interested, rational decisions that maximize the value they receive and guarantee the most effective use for all factors of production.
I rationalize the existing way of doing things simply because it works.
Slashdot Mirror
They're not company funds but they're still on the books. If you look at a bank's balance sheet you'll see customer deposits listed as liabilities and loans listed as assets.
When they lost $500M in Bit Coins, most of which belonged to their customers? Are they not treating customer deposits as a liability? Shouldn't that interest be represented in the bankruptcy proceeding?
Seems like a first-world pebble in the road to me.
In the old days before the FDIC and the Federal Reserve, bank runs and collapses were common place. The FDIC and Federal Reserve were confidence measures, meant to reassure a weary public that their money was protected against fraud and the vagaries of fractional reserve lending. The true stability of those institutions in times of systemic crisis can be debated but they do serve their purpose for isolated failures. Bitcoin is going to need similar institutions to achieve mainstream adoption.
They railed against advertising and even Facebook yet he found $16B too rich to resist. Of course I can't blame him; $16B is an insane amount of money, and he'll get a big chunk of it. But the bottom line is he sold out his principles for wealth.
Criminals have to eat too.
They make it sound like their system is all-self-correcting. In reality it's probably a specific area they've had bugs with in the past and they put in a failsafe rollback mechanism to prevent future regressions.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yakov_Smirnoff
But it sure is a great place to get laid. And since men go into business to make money so that they can get laid I think disintermediating the process and jumping right to the 'get laid' part is a better business decision.
"Supervolcanoes represent the second most globally cataclysmic event - next to an asteroid strike - and they have been responsible in the past for mass extinctions, long-term changes to the climate and shorter-term 'volcanic winters' caused by volcanic ash cutting out the sunlight."
their attorney will need to spend his entire opening argument introducing the jury to Blackberry phones.
he failed to predict they would have rounded corners, which everyone knows is the true genius of the smartphone.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ydw4An4wlrw#t=12s
Naturally if they're going to spend the money on a secure system it might as well fulfill that goal. But do these metro metering devices really need to be all that secure? I checked MARTA's fare schedule and their most expensive ticket is $5 round-trip. Doesn't seem like enough incentive for the average joe to cheat it, esp. when you consider how transit authorities use a few high-profile prosecutions to discourage people from even buying second-hand tickets let alone hacking their own. In my view the system only need be marginally more secure than the honor system.
I agree, freedom and democracy are a virus on humanity that should be stamped out of existence.
We're still in the midst of learning how deeply our own government has violated our privacy and websites decide now is a good time for people to give up their pseudonyms and reveal their true identities? Are they that stupid?
They are in the artic measuring climate change and its affect on reduced sea ice levels yet are now trapped in ice and have called in ice-breaking ships to rescue them, which in turn will reduce the formation of sea ice.
It's not a bug it's a feature!
Because when a lightbulb goes off in our head we'll have nothing to replace it with.
I guess I didn't drive the point home clearly enough. Man projects virtue - his true motivations are quite different.
You're not arguing that taxes don't disincentivize peole to work. You're arguing that the current tax rate doesn't disincentivize *you* to work. Would you still work if your effective tax rate were 60%? 70%? 80%? 100%? And why would you believe that your threshold of disincentivization would be the same for others?
As a small entrepreneur you don't have the same wherewithal as a large corporation to redeploy your resources to other cities, states, and countries in search of competitive advantages.
I didn't say higher taxes prevent prosperity. What I said is that taxes alter the behavior of corporations and how and where they deploy their resources.Tax policy has become a tool of centralized economic planning, using incentives and disincentives to steer companies and individuals into behaviors the government feels are the most beneficial to the economy. That works fine if countries existed in isolation since governments have no competition to their policies. However in a global economy capital and resources are mobile. If a corporation doesn't like the tax policy of a country or feels it can or needs to gain a competitive cost advantage by deploying their resources elsewhere then that's exactly what they'll do. If a country wants to be the recipient of those resources then they have to compete for them, the same as how corporations have to compete for revenue and profits.
And an entrepreneur's chief reason for starting a business is to contribute to society, right? Man has unlimited capacity for applying eloquent piousness to his most coarse of primal desires. Self-determination? Determination toward what end exactly?
Capital is the retained surplus of value earned from previous economic exchange. I use productive wealth to mean the application of that capital by private industry and citizens of their own free will without interference from centralized power. It's not about government vs private industry but about centralized planning vs a free-market economy. Put the top 1,000 economists in charge of centralized planning and they will be no match for the collective intelligence of an economy whose millions of participants make self-interested, rational decisions that maximize the value they receive and guarantee the most effective use for all factors of production.
I rationalize the existing way of doing things simply because it works.