Stopping mass market distribution has a meaningful amount of value. People/organizations do things with full knowledge it won't eliminate a problem, but will reduce it. Besides, I contend that a takedown to GitHub has increased the publicity any meaningful amount. The story was that it was available for a short period of time smack dab in GitHub. The whole horses having left the barn metaphor breaks down.. some horses are still in there, might leave tomorrow, it's an easy action to take, so it's reasonable to close it again.
Democracy is literally the proof that at large, society organizes to pay taxes rather than living in a might-is-right society where your ability to keep your house relies on you not only having a large enough family/cadre/group of friends (who by the way, would ask that you pool your wealth) to make sure that house remains yours.
Ever tried to rent a car without a credit card, you can't.
That's not buying something. That's borrowing something. You're getting upset about not being allowed to borrow something without somebody else allowing you to borrow something.
I mean, maybe, if you didn't tell them where you were - how do they know it's you if you're overseas? That's not like you. You can always withdraw your money, but you can't by shouting across the street, "Hey! It's me Jeff! Give me my money!" Did you tell them where you would be? Did you ensure you knew *how* you could withdraw money before you got there?
Nothing about this post makes any sense. I can't even picture how you think the mechanics of any of this works? They're not protecting themselves from buying bitcoin via postal mail on a flashdrive because that's not how bitcoin is sold. "Aha," you say, "it can be sold that way," and I'd say.. who the fuck cares? The bank does not, that'd be such a tiny part of how bitcoins are purchased as to be functionally meaningless in the context of their business. And it's not about being sued. They just don't want to lend people money to buy something that is going to result in a crapload of chargeback claims.
No such thing as a free lunch, even though it's effectively 90% of the message of all marketing these days.
"The discount was big enough to eat most the fees, but I still lost out."
It's almost like a company offering a bitcoin discount in the context of their business is better positioned to know who will come out on top in that kind of exchange. (It should be immediately obvious they can at least benefit from some economy of scale from a fee standpoint.)
Funny you mention mortgages. I mean, here's a credit product offered by banks that is so restrictive you can only buy one thing with it - a house. And they reason why they don't care that much on mortgages is if you default, you've already promised to give the house to them. (To say nothing that even acknowledging that you have a credit limit already points out that banks place limits on how much money you can spend, which effectively restricts what you spend it on.) They're not inspecting your finances - they're just not letting you add to your most commonly used form of credit for certain purchases, which has always been the case as long as credit cars have existed.
But technically nothing stops you from making a cash withdraw and buying bitcoins with it or buying gold and selling that to buy bitcoins or buying your groceries on credit while spending your cash on bitcoins.
Sure, do that. If you're a bank, at least at that point you've whittled down the number of people who will go through the byzantine trouble and dramatically lowered your risk surface. I think you just really wish things were simpler than they actually have to be in a real world.
Your money doesn't come from credit cards, and banks telling you how you can use your credit card isn't them telling you how you can use your money. God, I love Americans, they can't even tell the difference between what constitutes borrowing money and having money at this point.
They're going to dictate the terms such that they can sustain a credit product they can sell (the credit card) without what they deem to be too much risk. People buying toasters and people speculating on crypto currencies with the hope that they won't lose their ability to pay them back are two separate risk profiles. What are you mad at?
It's not *your* money, any more than the road you use is your road. It's our money. Your ability to earn money is inexorably linked to us pooling some percentage of it together for the common good, of which scientific progress is a part.
I mean, he has inso far as he isn't participating. But between you and an insanely rich dude, I pick the insanely rich dude for smarts. I the like "oligarchy dollar rich" euphemism for "actually rich".
But if you were sane, you'd have cashed out by now. Or if it took nothing to get, you'd ride it until after it crashes. Basically, there's no alternate universe that proves you made X dollars by doing the other thing, so why bother? The only people I've known who've held alt coins told me how much they've made while they were still holding. I've yet to meet a single person who can show me the tens of thousands they made sitting in their bank accounts right now. (Not to say they don't exist, but people also win lotteries, doesn't mean I feel bad for not playing.)
They very issue is they have such undue influence that we have better alternatives, but they're difficult to implement under the policy influence these companies have. And really its disingenuous to suggest we can't do both at the same time. "Hey, NYC politicians and lawers, go work on energy saving technology and federal policy, nobody else is doing it!" (I guess that last one is kinda true at the federal level at the moment, see my first point.)
Slashdot Mirror
Stopping mass market distribution has a meaningful amount of value. People/organizations do things with full knowledge it won't eliminate a problem, but will reduce it. Besides, I contend that a takedown to GitHub has increased the publicity any meaningful amount. The story was that it was available for a short period of time smack dab in GitHub. The whole horses having left the barn metaphor breaks down .. some horses are still in there, might leave tomorrow, it's an easy action to take, so it's reasonable to close it again.
My favorite episode was where he made fun of this dude who was seriously terrible at building straw-men.
He references Longhorn repeatedly in the article.
And Who would volunteer to pay it?
Democracy is literally the proof that at large, society organizes to pay taxes rather than living in a might-is-right society where your ability to keep your house relies on you not only having a large enough family/cadre/group of friends (who by the way, would ask that you pool your wealth) to make sure that house remains yours.
You're a small small man. The joke is you'd never survive in a society without taxation.
Why wouldn't it be?
Ever tried to rent a car without a credit card, you can't.
That's not buying something. That's borrowing something. You're getting upset about not being allowed to borrow something without somebody else allowing you to borrow something.
I mean, maybe, if you didn't tell them where you were - how do they know it's you if you're overseas? That's not like you. You can always withdraw your money, but you can't by shouting across the street, "Hey! It's me Jeff! Give me my money!" Did you tell them where you would be? Did you ensure you knew *how* you could withdraw money before you got there?
Nothing about this post makes any sense. I can't even picture how you think the mechanics of any of this works? They're not protecting themselves from buying bitcoin via postal mail on a flashdrive because that's not how bitcoin is sold. "Aha," you say, "it can be sold that way," and I'd say .. who the fuck cares? The bank does not, that'd be such a tiny part of how bitcoins are purchased as to be functionally meaningless in the context of their business. And it's not about being sued. They just don't want to lend people money to buy something that is going to result in a crapload of chargeback claims.
No such thing as a free lunch, even though it's effectively 90% of the message of all marketing these days.
"The discount was big enough to eat most the fees, but I still lost out."
It's almost like a company offering a bitcoin discount in the context of their business is better positioned to know who will come out on top in that kind of exchange. (It should be immediately obvious they can at least benefit from some economy of scale from a fee standpoint.)
Funny you mention mortgages. I mean, here's a credit product offered by banks that is so restrictive you can only buy one thing with it - a house. And they reason why they don't care that much on mortgages is if you default, you've already promised to give the house to them. (To say nothing that even acknowledging that you have a credit limit already points out that banks place limits on how much money you can spend, which effectively restricts what you spend it on.) They're not inspecting your finances - they're just not letting you add to your most commonly used form of credit for certain purchases, which has always been the case as long as credit cars have existed.
But technically nothing stops you from making a cash withdraw and buying bitcoins with it or buying gold and selling that to buy bitcoins or buying your groceries on credit while spending your cash on bitcoins.
Sure, do that. If you're a bank, at least at that point you've whittled down the number of people who will go through the byzantine trouble and dramatically lowered your risk surface. I think you just really wish things were simpler than they actually have to be in a real world.
Your money doesn't come from credit cards, and banks telling you how you can use your credit card isn't them telling you how you can use your money. God, I love Americans, they can't even tell the difference between what constitutes borrowing money and having money at this point.
They're going to dictate the terms such that they can sustain a credit product they can sell (the credit card) without what they deem to be too much risk. People buying toasters and people speculating on crypto currencies with the hope that they won't lose their ability to pay them back are two separate risk profiles. What are you mad at?
*whack-a-racist*
It's not *your* money, any more than the road you use is your road. It's our money. Your ability to earn money is inexorably linked to us pooling some percentage of it together for the common good, of which scientific progress is a part.
You imagine you are smart, which is a function of how you are not.
Well, they were dumb enough to vote Trump into office, so ...
Yes, there are people dumb enough to believe this.
I mean, he has inso far as he isn't participating. But between you and an insanely rich dude, I pick the insanely rich dude for smarts. I the like "oligarchy dollar rich" euphemism for "actually rich".
But if you were sane, you'd have cashed out by now. Or if it took nothing to get, you'd ride it until after it crashes. Basically, there's no alternate universe that proves you made X dollars by doing the other thing, so why bother? The only people I've known who've held alt coins told me how much they've made while they were still holding. I've yet to meet a single person who can show me the tens of thousands they made sitting in their bank accounts right now. (Not to say they don't exist, but people also win lotteries, doesn't mean I feel bad for not playing.)
Whoa, dude, the universe will end at some point. That's like, deep, dude. (And useless.)
They very issue is they have such undue influence that we have better alternatives, but they're difficult to implement under the policy influence these companies have. And really its disingenuous to suggest we can't do both at the same time. "Hey, NYC politicians and lawers, go work on energy saving technology and federal policy, nobody else is doing it!" (I guess that last one is kinda true at the federal level at the moment, see my first point.)
When you travel, just tell the cc company where you'll be and when. They put a note on your account, then they don't block you.
Also a tool is available called WSLPath to convert Linux to Windows path options
Thank the lord!
This is dumb and you should feel dumb.