If the private key is encrypted, or the computer is offline, how are you going to steal the digital decryption key? You can protect bitcoin as well or better than regular money.
The author omitted that the cake is cut from the other end, (i.e. the maximum bid to the current cake size is selected as the cake piece. Not 0 to the maximum bid.) as specified in the paper at: http://arxiv.org/abs/1202.4507
The creators of this study aren't worried about the blind.... only aging rich people who are looking for something to worry about to fill their vapid lives.
But wouldn't a tree farm harvest more CO2 than an old growth forest with rotting dead trees everywhere? I would think that the global environment should take precedence over whatever the cost would be to the local ecology to remove an old growth forest and replace it with a tree farm.
I was thinking more like it would be for keeping a backup copy of my passwords. The film would stay undeveloped and I'd use a dark room red light to view it. In the end it was too much of a hassle, and instead I used a bunch of xor'ed random strings, (i.e ( (<passwords> xor B), (B xor C), (C xor D), (D xor E), (E)) where B - E are random strings), print them out and store them in various places. Home, office, email accounts, etc. Then if I forgot them, I'd just xor the entire set together to produce the passwords.
"See that envelope you just tore open, officer? It contained undeveloped film that had my password on it. Too bad it was exposed to the light and is gone now. Tsk, tsk, you shouldn't be so sloppy when you serve warrants."
What if alien races are using time dilation/space compression to travel? If they were able to move their planet fast enough to travel near the speed of light, they would be able to visit the entire galaxy in, to them, practically zero time. The thousands and/or millions of years that would pass for nearly stationary objects would be a buffer that would prevent contact between primitive races and advanced ones.
All the advanced alien races would then be able to contact each other, just far off in the future.
It really isn't right for Google et al to do this. Each congress member has paid handsomely for their position, and it comes with certain rights and expectations. One is the right to sneak through these kind of laws to help pay back, in a manner of speaking, those that helped them get to where they are today.
This has been the status quo for decades and people need to honor that and understand that they have no right to mess with it.
I tried to wade through Atlas Shrugged after it was recommended to me. I got to around the 500th page before not being able to continue. It presents the world into two types of people, who reminded me of flat cardboard cutouts. One group was dimwitted and lazy, and would hide behind notions of love of caring to leech off those who are better than them. The other group were intelligent, some of them geniuses, who were enslaved by the nitwits.
For some reason all the geniuses had independently come to the exact same conclusion, talked the same way, and reiterated over and over the same points and philosophy, until it became obvious they were being used as puppets to speak what Ayn Rand believed. It was full of speeches, retreading the same ground over and over again. I've heard (but I never made it that far) that it ends with a speech that goes on for 60 pages.
Conversely, the other, non-geniuses would also act the same, basically, doing and saying laughably stupid and ridiculous things. that are far beyond anything in reality. It seemed quite obvious to me that they were being set up as straw men for Ayn Rand to easily tear down with the (according to her) intelligent people. And she would, ad infinitum.
After I got deeper into the book, it became kind of a sick fascination to me. How long could she belabor her point? How many straw men could she set up and tear down, while keeping a straight face, so to speak? It was a downward spiral journey into the absurd.
By the 500th page or so, it just wasn't fun anymore. I was at the bottom of the spiral and I was tired, annoyed, and disgusted... sort of like when you have an idiot boss, and for the first few weeks, it's funny to see him flounder about. But after a month or so of dealing with the idiocy, it stops becoming funny and you can no longer appreciate the comedy of it. You reach a point where you can no longer swim above it and are just fighting to find a space to forget about it for awhile. Then you realize that an avant garde comedy is only good as long as you aren't forced to be the subject of it.
This isn't a development of the $InternetSocialMediaOverlords. It's just a bunch of nerds who know some algorithms and enjoy solving practical problems who thought this would be fun to attempt, and happen to work for the $InternetSocialMediaOverlords. Trying to look for a conspiracy in this would be akin to looking for a conspiracy in the way the leaves pile up in your driveway in the fall.
None of these things would work with their idea. The light has to come from a laser they control, because they are actually viewing hundreds of separate repeatable events and reconstructing them into a single movie.
A person seeking a job is more like an investor than a consumer. Instead of investing money to receive a profit, job seekers are investing their time and effort for the same outcome. So I agree with you that if a person is looking for a job, people gleefully spending their money is better for them (as well as any investor).
However, if you look at it from the consumer's point of view, the more other consumers are willing to spend their money the more expensive things will become.
Except this happens less and less since the name of the game these days is growth. What if they instead sit on the money or use it to buy out a competitor, eliminating redundant jobs? The only time investment is guaranteed to create jobs is when the company would not be able to operate without it.
If an investor is investing, and not just sitting on a pile of cash (which almost no one does, due to expectation of inflation) the money they invest has to go somewhere. If they invest in a company, and the company puts all they earn into a savings account rather then use it to expand their business, then that money should in turn be loaned out to other companies or used for a house payment, etc. (although lately it seems like banks aren't willing to loan out much money which is big issue with the economy right now)
The investor isn't foregoing buying a car to invest in Facebook. He may sell another stock to invest in the Facebook stock, but it's money earmarked for investment either way. The Facebook employee is buying a new car, so the net is +1 car.
That said, I think the "economy" is split up into two different viewpoints, the consumer and investor. More money being invested helps the consumer and more consumers buying products helps the investor. For example, if an investment results in the creation of a factory that produces a new type of ice cream, that is a net benefit to the consumer because there is more ice cream available. Some yahoo buying a car just means there is more traffic on the road, and one less car available for the consumer to purchase.
On the other hand, another ice cream factory hurts all the investors who already have money sunk into other factories, since they'll be unable to get as many customers to buy their ice cream. However, a bunch of new cars being sold would help investors, because the companies could crank up the price.
Of course the two are tied together, because more factories means more jobs, and more jobs means more money spent on consumables. Anyway, this is all just my opinion, and I could be wrong.
Leave it in disc format and get up and browse your movie collection on a bookshelf for 5 minutes before resuming your sedentary lifestyle sitting motionless for the next 2+ hours. Geez.
Wait, so the slashdot editor modified the text of what was quoted before posting the story? Why do they leave the quotes in if they rewrite the summary?
I don't see this as a problem, even if every node acts in a selfish way and miners don't distribute any transactions with fees. Miners will gladly accept any transaction with fees attached. The sender and the receiver of a transaction wants to give the transaction to as many miners possible. Therefore, the miners themselves will come up with a solution to allow the senders and receivers to send them transactions easily.
This may be in the form of a broadcasting proxy that miners must sign up to pay for transactions, or some other idea. But because there are ample selfish actors who want the transactions to get transmitted it will happen.
Slashdot Mirror
If the private key is encrypted, or the computer is offline, how are you going to steal the digital decryption key? You can protect bitcoin as well or better than regular money.
The author omitted that the cake is cut from the other end, (i.e. the maximum bid to the current cake size is selected as the cake piece. Not 0 to the maximum bid.) as specified in the paper at: http://arxiv.org/abs/1202.4507
If Zimmerman's story about having a broken nose is true, couldn't this cause an issue with voice matching?
The creators of this study aren't worried about the blind.... only aging rich people who are looking for something to worry about to fill their vapid lives.
chup tu vui ve
Why? I don't see how trying to distract oneself while doing a mindless job means addiction.
But wouldn't a tree farm harvest more CO2 than an old growth forest with rotting dead trees everywhere? I would think that the global environment should take precedence over whatever the cost would be to the local ecology to remove an old growth forest and replace it with a tree farm.
I was thinking more like it would be for keeping a backup copy of my passwords. The film would stay undeveloped and I'd use a dark room red light to view it. In the end it was too much of a hassle, and instead I used a bunch of xor'ed random strings, (i.e ( (<passwords> xor B), (B xor C), (C xor D), (D xor E), (E)) where B - E are random strings), print them out and store them in various places. Home, office, email accounts, etc. Then if I forgot them, I'd just xor the entire set together to produce the passwords.
I'm not used to typing that word. I'm not a lawyer. My mental spellchecker must of clicked in.
That order was for an earlier case in 2010 where that judge did squash the subpoena. It's not for the current case the article is written about.
I know this isn't exactly the same thing, but there is something like that for encrypted filesystems: http://cube.dyndns.org/~rsnel/scubed/
"See that envelope you just tore open, officer? It contained undeveloped film that had my password on it. Too bad it was exposed to the light and is gone now. Tsk, tsk, you shouldn't be so sloppy when you serve warrants."
The story behind Truecrypt bothers me: http://www.privacylover.com/encryption/analysis-is-there-a-backdoor-in-truecrypt-is-truecrypt-a-cia-honeypot/
Check out scubed, a much more simple and modular solution: http://cube.dyndns.org/~rsnel/scubed/
What if alien races are using time dilation/space compression to travel? If they were able to move their planet fast enough to travel near the speed of light, they would be able to visit the entire galaxy in, to them, practically zero time. The thousands and/or millions of years that would pass for nearly stationary objects would be a buffer that would prevent contact between primitive races and advanced ones.
All the advanced alien races would then be able to contact each other, just far off in the future.
Since oil produces CO2, why not just cut out the middle man and turn oil into plastic and dump that in a landfill?
It really isn't right for Google et al to do this. Each congress member has paid handsomely for their position, and it comes with certain rights and expectations. One is the right to sneak through these kind of laws to help pay back, in a manner of speaking, those that helped them get to where they are today.
This has been the status quo for decades and people need to honor that and understand that they have no right to mess with it.
I tried to wade through Atlas Shrugged after it was recommended to me. I got to around the 500th page before not being able to continue. It presents the world into two types of people, who reminded me of flat cardboard cutouts. One group was dimwitted and lazy, and would hide behind notions of love of caring to leech off those who are better than them. The other group were intelligent, some of them geniuses, who were enslaved by the nitwits.
For some reason all the geniuses had independently come to the exact same conclusion, talked the same way, and reiterated over and over the same points and philosophy, until it became obvious they were being used as puppets to speak what Ayn Rand believed. It was full of speeches, retreading the same ground over and over again. I've heard (but I never made it that far) that it ends with a speech that goes on for 60 pages.
Conversely, the other, non-geniuses would also act the same, basically, doing and saying laughably stupid and ridiculous things. that are far beyond anything in reality. It seemed quite obvious to me that they were being set up as straw men for Ayn Rand to easily tear down with the (according to her) intelligent people. And she would, ad infinitum.
After I got deeper into the book, it became kind of a sick fascination to me. How long could she belabor her point? How many straw men could she set up and tear down, while keeping a straight face, so to speak? It was a downward spiral journey into the absurd.
By the 500th page or so, it just wasn't fun anymore. I was at the bottom of the spiral and I was tired, annoyed, and disgusted... sort of like when you have an idiot boss, and for the first few weeks, it's funny to see him flounder about. But after a month or so of dealing with the idiocy, it stops becoming funny and you can no longer appreciate the comedy of it. You reach a point where you can no longer swim above it and are just fighting to find a space to forget about it for awhile. Then you realize that an avant garde comedy is only good as long as you aren't forced to be the subject of it.
Please, God, no
This isn't a development of the $InternetSocialMediaOverlords. It's just a bunch of nerds who know some algorithms and enjoy solving practical problems who thought this would be fun to attempt, and happen to work for the $InternetSocialMediaOverlords. Trying to look for a conspiracy in this would be akin to looking for a conspiracy in the way the leaves pile up in your driveway in the fall.
None of these things would work with their idea. The light has to come from a laser they control, because they are actually viewing hundreds of separate repeatable events and reconstructing them into a single movie.
A person seeking a job is more like an investor than a consumer. Instead of investing money to receive a profit, job seekers are investing their time and effort for the same outcome. So I agree with you that if a person is looking for a job, people gleefully spending their money is better for them (as well as any investor).
However, if you look at it from the consumer's point of view, the more other consumers are willing to spend their money the more expensive things will become.
Except this happens less and less since the name of the game these days is growth. What if they instead sit on the money or use it to buy out a competitor, eliminating redundant jobs? The only time investment is guaranteed to create jobs is when the company would not be able to operate without it.
If an investor is investing, and not just sitting on a pile of cash (which almost no one does, due to expectation of inflation) the money they invest has to go somewhere. If they invest in a company, and the company puts all they earn into a savings account rather then use it to expand their business, then that money should in turn be loaned out to other companies or used for a house payment, etc. (although lately it seems like banks aren't willing to loan out much money which is big issue with the economy right now)
The investor isn't foregoing buying a car to invest in Facebook. He may sell another stock to invest in the Facebook stock, but it's money earmarked for investment either way. The Facebook employee is buying a new car, so the net is +1 car.
That said, I think the "economy" is split up into two different viewpoints, the consumer and investor. More money being invested helps the consumer and more consumers buying products helps the investor. For example, if an investment results in the creation of a factory that produces a new type of ice cream, that is a net benefit to the consumer because there is more ice cream available. Some yahoo buying a car just means there is more traffic on the road, and one less car available for the consumer to purchase.
On the other hand, another ice cream factory hurts all the investors who already have money sunk into other factories, since they'll be unable to get as many customers to buy their ice cream. However, a bunch of new cars being sold would help investors, because the companies could crank up the price.
Of course the two are tied together, because more factories means more jobs, and more jobs means more money spent on consumables. Anyway, this is all just my opinion, and I could be wrong.
Leave it in disc format and get up and browse your movie collection on a bookshelf for 5 minutes before resuming your sedentary lifestyle sitting motionless for the next 2+ hours. Geez.
Wait, so the slashdot editor modified the text of what was quoted before posting the story? Why do they leave the quotes in if they rewrite the summary?
I don't see this as a problem, even if every node acts in a selfish way and miners don't distribute any transactions with fees. Miners will gladly accept any transaction with fees attached. The sender and the receiver of a transaction wants to give the transaction to as many miners possible. Therefore, the miners themselves will come up with a solution to allow the senders and receivers to send them transactions easily.
This may be in the form of a broadcasting proxy that miners must sign up to pay for transactions, or some other idea. But because there are ample selfish actors who want the transactions to get transmitted it will happen.