Agreed. The only exemptions should be for allergy or other medical problems - those are sufficiently rare that herd immunity should not be compromised.
This isn't a replacement for a credit card - it's a way to convert transacted currency into cash. To do that through a regular credit card company will cost several percent and possibly a transaction fee. Same with PayPal.
In fact, you still seem to be blurring some of those lines...
That's my thing:) I like to try to see many sides to an issue. Some think it makes me seem wishy-washy or aloof.
Do you not understand how that looks?
Yes, that's why I tried to clarify. I'm not defending the record of the Bitcoin community. I'm just saying it's not inherently flawed in this respect - or at least no more so than any other currency.
Can you seriously say with a straight face that scams are as endemic in the conventional currency sector as in Bitcoin?
No, I don't think I'd make that claim - but frankly I have no data either way. It will be a long time before losses at Bitcoin sites approach Maddoff levels, and I don't know what the scale of the mortgage crisis was. I'd bet it was a significant portion of the total economy tied up in worthless securities, though. Now that you make me think about it, I'm not so sure it's such an absurd comparison.
If I used illegal drugs (I don't), I certainly wouldn't buy them online with bitcoins. Far from being truly anonymous, it creates lots of audit trails.
I don't have any use for illegal drugs, either - but Bitcoins are the only method I know of to pay for them online with. They are definitely traceable, though - unless you mined them I guess. There are probably other ways to launder the money - but buying coins at Mt. Gox or whatever and then spending them on drugs is probably pretty stupid.
It's comical how much you idiots keep pushing it despite the severe flaws which have been pointed out to you for years now.
Careful who you lump into bins. I agree with you, so that makes you an idiot, too.;p
I think the idea that Bitcoin could displace fiat currencies is laughable. But I could also see it filling a niche (as it is already doing) since it does not require a central server.
Using that kind of dishonest debating trick to spin the extremely poor security track record of Bitcoin sites doesn't make you (or Bitcoin) look good.
I wasn't trying to use any tricks, and I made no attempt to make Bitcoin site's records seem better than they are. I'm simply pointing out the fact that some degree of fraud and loss is already acceptable to people using fiat currency. It wouldn't be fair to dismiss Bitcoin simply because thieves have targeted it, but it is fair to point out that most of the major Bitcoin sites so far have been fairly Mickey Mouse.
Have you ever seen a single counterfeit bill? If I have, it was so good I never noticed.
I have, because I was a cashier and manager at a store. Once I deposited a fake hundred, and the bank called me back later to tell me it was fake. I went in and they showed me the flaw(s), which were found by their magic machine. The secret service stopped by later as well. So yeah it wasn't my money, but the owner of the store lost $100.
Still, in the interest of full disclosure (and so you don't accuse me of using debating tricks), I worked there for 6 years and probably handled over a million dollars and only that one incident occurred.
end users of Bitcoins who send them to Bitcoin-based sites are routinely scammed.
Aren't people in general routinely scammed?
Yeah, because they're actually useful currencies in the real world.
LOL, yeah you have my brain working, too:) I think if I am going to start with 2 disks, it'll definitely be a mirror, but beyond that I'll have to consider zraid2.
Cool... not only did I learn that there was a problem with the mainline client, but it was interesting to see how they reacted to it. It was also interesting to see the open source nature of the project...
Don't laugh - I had a friend at the army corp who was working on feasibility calculations to build a wall that would divert the Gulf Stream to hug the East Coast of the US.
Ahhh, that explains why the volume numbers on Wikipedia didn't pass the sniff test.
It seems they also have a bad number for the 3.3g of U per cubic meter of seawater... it should be 1000 times less than that. That did seem a tad high.
Of course, that neglects the rather painful impacts of walking away from a brand-stinking-new mobile contract in the U.S.: early termination fee, not being able to use your brand new device on the new network or under the new contract, general douchebaggish resistance from your prior provider to your migration (like slow-rolling phone number transfers...)
I learned my lesson and now do prepay. There are a few disadvantages, but totally worth it to save $30 or so per month with no contracts to deal with - and it's impossible to have a "surprise" phone bill.
It doesn't sound cost-effective to me, either. But I don't think refreshing the water will be a problem - ocean currents are very swift and move a lot of volume. Stick a mat in the Gulf Stream, and the water is moving around 4MPH past it. The volume of water in the Gulf Stream is also enormous - between 30 and 150 cubic meters per second.
Since there are about 3.3g of U in a cubic meter of seawater, that gives a minimum of 99g/second just passing by in the Gulf Stream. The world currently consumes around 70,000 tonnes of U per year - so you'd need 70,000 * 1,000 / 0.099 = 8183 days of Gulf Stream water to get enough U for a single year.:)
I wasn't addressing the stability problem, just the cost of the service. Presumably the currency would stabilize if it saw regular use. Governments could even stabilize it if they kept large reserves.
I wouldn't quite call corporations grifters - it's more akin to an extra layer of bankruptcy law. We have an aversion to debtors prison in this country, and the corporate entity allows people to go even further, protecting most of their personal assets. The difference is that with a grifter, you didn't know what you were dealing with until you were scammed. When dealing with a corporation, you know full well what you are getting into.
Corporations can be chartered by government without being able to influence that government. Current charter rules removed most government accountability decades ago.
I agree and was not suggesting that this is an inherent problem without a solution. I happen to feel that corporations are a valuable tool, but that we need to break up the feedback cycle between corporations and government influence. Note that I feel the same way about public unions and government influence.
I guess my original post was directed more at the suggestion that there is this "military-industrial complex" has taken over government. I agree that there is a big self-feeding beast - I'm just arguing that it is a more generic problem, and that we really need to change from thinking that the problem is defined as "big corporations running the government" to "big government making their friends and allies rich through corporations". Really, it's almost the same thing, but I feel that coming from it in the other direction might be helpful in dealing with the problem.
And can "corruption" even occur in private industry? I mean, I know that technically the usage is correct (you can even "corrupt" a person's soul) - but generally private corruption isn't newsworthy: the only people who suffer when Apple has corrupt employees are people financially tied to Apple. Generally we are much harder on government officials... hell, one of our vendors just dropped off a big pile of doughnuts for us.
Slashdot Mirror
Your ideas are compelling. I think you might have stumbled upon the answer to our shortage of handicap spaces. Do you have a newsletter?
Agreed. The only exemptions should be for allergy or other medical problems - those are sufficiently rare that herd immunity should not be compromised.
Vaccines are not that profitable. Please adjust your tinfoil hat.
This isn't a replacement for a credit card - it's a way to convert transacted currency into cash. To do that through a regular credit card company will cost several percent and possibly a transaction fee. Same with PayPal.
I agree completely. I think we should increase the street price with taxes, and then use those taxes exclusively for treatment and education.
I still think employers should be allowed to drug test - especially where lives are on the line.
In fact, you still seem to be blurring some of those lines...
That's my thing :) I like to try to see many sides to an issue. Some think it makes me seem wishy-washy or aloof.
Do you not understand how that looks?
Yes, that's why I tried to clarify. I'm not defending the record of the Bitcoin community. I'm just saying it's not inherently flawed in this respect - or at least no more so than any other currency.
Can you seriously say with a straight face that scams are as endemic in the conventional currency sector as in Bitcoin?
No, I don't think I'd make that claim - but frankly I have no data either way. It will be a long time before losses at Bitcoin sites approach Maddoff levels, and I don't know what the scale of the mortgage crisis was. I'd bet it was a significant portion of the total economy tied up in worthless securities, though. Now that you make me think about it, I'm not so sure it's such an absurd comparison.
If I used illegal drugs (I don't), I certainly wouldn't buy them online with bitcoins. Far from being truly anonymous, it creates lots of audit trails.
I don't have any use for illegal drugs, either - but Bitcoins are the only method I know of to pay for them online with. They are definitely traceable, though - unless you mined them I guess. There are probably other ways to launder the money - but buying coins at Mt. Gox or whatever and then spending them on drugs is probably pretty stupid.
So will the Americans collecting charity in the form of Medicare suddenly count as having "insurance"?
I'd argue that it is in society's interests to have well-educated, content farmers - even if that means we pay a little extra for things.
It's comical how much you idiots keep pushing it despite the severe flaws which have been pointed out to you for years now.
Careful who you lump into bins. I agree with you, so that makes you an idiot, too. ;p
I think the idea that Bitcoin could displace fiat currencies is laughable. But I could also see it filling a niche (as it is already doing) since it does not require a central server.
Using that kind of dishonest debating trick to spin the extremely poor security track record of Bitcoin sites doesn't make you (or Bitcoin) look good.
I wasn't trying to use any tricks, and I made no attempt to make Bitcoin site's records seem better than they are. I'm simply pointing out the fact that some degree of fraud and loss is already acceptable to people using fiat currency. It wouldn't be fair to dismiss Bitcoin simply because thieves have targeted it, but it is fair to point out that most of the major Bitcoin sites so far have been fairly Mickey Mouse.
Have you ever seen a single counterfeit bill? If I have, it was so good I never noticed.
I have, because I was a cashier and manager at a store. Once I deposited a fake hundred, and the bank called me back later to tell me it was fake. I went in and they showed me the flaw(s), which were found by their magic machine. The secret service stopped by later as well. So yeah it wasn't my money, but the owner of the store lost $100.
Still, in the interest of full disclosure (and so you don't accuse me of using debating tricks), I worked there for 6 years and probably handled over a million dollars and only that one incident occurred.
end users of Bitcoins who send them to Bitcoin-based sites are routinely scammed.
Aren't people in general routinely scammed?
Yeah, because they're actually useful currencies in the real world.
Try buying illegal online drugs with them.
LOL, yeah you have my brain working, too :) I think if I am going to start with 2 disks, it'll definitely be a mirror, but beyond that I'll have to consider zraid2.
Mirrors sure are fast, though :)
To bring the same benefits to the Eastern US that Europe currently enjoys: milder winters and a longer growing season.
Yeah, pretty much. I'd pay to see the report.
Cool... not only did I learn that there was a problem with the mainline client, but it was interesting to see how they reacted to it. It was also interesting to see the open source nature of the project...
Don't laugh - I had a friend at the army corp who was working on feasibility calculations to build a wall that would divert the Gulf Stream to hug the East Coast of the US.
Unfortunately I took my numbers from Wikipedia, and they are all off by a million here and a thousand there :(
Ahhh, that explains why the volume numbers on Wikipedia didn't pass the sniff test.
It seems they also have a bad number for the 3.3g of U per cubic meter of seawater... it should be 1000 times less than that. That did seem a tad high.
Did you just compare the annual data to the quarterly or something?
Apple's latest quarter: $35,023,000,000
ATT latest quarter: $31,575,000,000
Of course, that neglects the rather painful impacts of walking away from a brand-stinking-new mobile contract in the U.S.: early termination fee, not being able to use your brand new device on the new network or under the new contract, general douchebaggish resistance from your prior provider to your migration (like slow-rolling phone number transfers...)
I learned my lesson and now do prepay. There are a few disadvantages, but totally worth it to save $30 or so per month with no contracts to deal with - and it's impossible to have a "surprise" phone bill.
There are cheaper sources of water on and under the surface. People are not afraid to go with desalination when necessary.
The better question is, why don't more people eat cockroaches?
It doesn't sound cost-effective to me, either. But I don't think refreshing the water will be a problem - ocean currents are very swift and move a lot of volume. Stick a mat in the Gulf Stream, and the water is moving around 4MPH past it. The volume of water in the Gulf Stream is also enormous - between 30 and 150 cubic meters per second.
Since there are about 3.3g of U in a cubic meter of seawater, that gives a minimum of 99g/second just passing by in the Gulf Stream. The world currently consumes around 70,000 tonnes of U per year - so you'd need 70,000 * 1,000 / 0.099 = 8183 days of Gulf Stream water to get enough U for a single year. :)
I wasn't addressing the stability problem, just the cost of the service. Presumably the currency would stabilize if it saw regular use. Governments could even stabilize it if they kept large reserves.
I wouldn't quite call corporations grifters - it's more akin to an extra layer of bankruptcy law. We have an aversion to debtors prison in this country, and the corporate entity allows people to go even further, protecting most of their personal assets. The difference is that with a grifter, you didn't know what you were dealing with until you were scammed. When dealing with a corporation, you know full well what you are getting into.
Corporations can be chartered by government without being able to influence that government. Current charter rules removed most government accountability decades ago.
I agree and was not suggesting that this is an inherent problem without a solution. I happen to feel that corporations are a valuable tool, but that we need to break up the feedback cycle between corporations and government influence. Note that I feel the same way about public unions and government influence.
I guess my original post was directed more at the suggestion that there is this "military-industrial complex" has taken over government. I agree that there is a big self-feeding beast - I'm just arguing that it is a more generic problem, and that we really need to change from thinking that the problem is defined as "big corporations running the government" to "big government making their friends and allies rich through corporations". Really, it's almost the same thing, but I feel that coming from it in the other direction might be helpful in dealing with the problem.
And can "corruption" even occur in private industry? I mean, I know that technically the usage is correct (you can even "corrupt" a person's soul) - but generally private corruption isn't newsworthy: the only people who suffer when Apple has corrupt employees are people financially tied to Apple. Generally we are much harder on government officials... hell, one of our vendors just dropped off a big pile of doughnuts for us.
An AC got upvoted +5 for a blatant troll? I'd say there are some people who are definitely not "true believers" on here!