The default transaction fee is 0.0001 BTC. 1.2 cents.
The "Main" tab in "Options" menu of the qt client says: "Optional transaction fee per kB that helps make sure your transactions are processed quickly. Most transactions are 1kB. Fee 0.01 recommended."
Also, setting this to 0 in results in both "Debit" and "Net amount" in "Transaction details" be the same thing, and "Transaction fee" to not show up. So I conclude that 0.01 BTC is indeed the default fee.
Which is why no one should leave school without being able to solve quantum mechanical wave functions. They are, after all, about as useful to an average person as a language they never really learned and thus won't use. And no more of a nightmare being force-fed than languages are to not linquistically oriented.
Oh, I'm sorry, I forgot: it's no shame being bad at math but being bad at languages is due to laziness.
Chinese, for dealing with anyone outside the BPO / ITO / major trade companies: government, state owned and specialists yes.
And this is another thing: it's simply foolish to conduct business on you business partner's native language if it's foreign to you, since it puts you at a disadvantage. Use an interpreter rather than risk the distraction.
Apparently Plutarch already knew this little puzzle called the ship of Theseus problem.
I'm highly confident that some US judges will finally put those those annoying logicians and philosophers to rest and give us the ultimate correct solution.
The ultimate correct solution is that the definition of "ship of Theseus" is not entirely fixed, so neither is the point where it becomes something else. And that means that lawyers are exactly the correct people to decide the matter, seeing how it depends on splitting hairs over semantics.
Yes, it is. A disease which keeps on circulating in the population keeps on evolving. That means it'll eventually mutate enough to slip past the vaccine. That's what happens with influenza every damn year: it keeps on circulating on birds and pigs, until a new strain jumps the species barrier, and usually the artificially or naturally acquired immunity to previous years's strain.
I've often thought at times, that the gene pool needs a little chlorine every now and then, and this looks like a natural way for it to take care of itself.
Unfortunately, we are unlikely to clean the tendency to substitute "witty" tough guy bullshit for actual thought any time soon.
Proof? Because the competing narrative - police very reasonably includes McAfee in the list of suspects, and he's a paranoid nut from all the bath salts he's been doing, and possibly guilty, so he escapes - is actually simpler. It doesn't require us to assume corruption, government conspiracies, unknown assailants, or any other factoids we don't already know; it fits right in with all known facts.
Next best thing - burn down his house.
As opposed to simply seizing it as a criminal asset and selling it to the highest bidder, therefore depriving McAfee of it and lining their pockets?
I failed to see why this does not greatly support his narrative of what happened. He's not even there to burn it down himself...
Because houses occasionally catch fire even without any intervention from anyone, and even if they didn't, the murder victim presumably had friends who are not likely to like Mr. McAfee very much.
I mean, lets say a corrupt government was after you. Why do you think it unlikely they would burn down your house after you crossed them?
Even if any hypothethical corruption in Belizean government had anything to do with it being after McAfee, as opposed to simply doing its job and trying to round up a murder suspect, why would they destroy their own property?
High energy densities and high currents are emitted when shorted and you end up with maybe a spark. Quite a safe spark though given the pathetically small voltages they can store.
Voltage is irrelevant. If a short releases the stored energy, all of it is converted into heat, since it has nowhere else to go. If stored energy is significant, and is released in a short enough time, this results in an explosion.
So, the safety-relevant questions are: how much energy can a capacitor store, and how much currency can it supply?
Mother nature has already shown us that dog-eat-dog is the best way to adapt, survive, and even thrive.
Except that dogs adapt, survive and thrive by cooperating. In fact I'm pretty sure that a dog that resorts to cannibalism will be put down pretty fast, by humans or other dogs.
The business world is the same way.
Yes: cooperation is the best way to succeed there too. That's why we have anti-trust laws: peaceful cooperation is such a winning strategy that companies will always resort to it unless prevented by force.
I have work to do so my company can kick your company's ass and put them out of business.
I work for a paycheck, and entrepreneurs work for profit, but I guess some men just want to see the world burn.
It's no more sadistic to hate criminals than it is to hate homophobes, conservatives or Christians.
What if the homophobe lives in Iran? There, homosexuality is a crime, so according to you homosexuals must be evil, thus the homophobe is hating evil people which, again according to you, is okay.
For that matter, what about a state that has anti-sodomy laws in books but then removes them? Are all the homosexuals instantly de-evilized when the law is struck down? And what if an Iranian homosexual and an Iranian homophobe leave Iran and enter USA? The homosexual is no longer a criminal, thus not necessarily evil, thus the homophobes justifications fall flat.
This guy appeared who said that we would all be better off without millions of useless eaters. There were only 2.3 billion humans on the planet then. Today there are 7.1 billion.
Feel free to stop eating anytime.
The thing is, we can feed the "useless eaters". Most industrial countries struggle with agricultural overproduction, not famine. What actually ends up killing lots of people - and what ultimately causes famine in developing countries nowadays, too - are the socipaths. The kind of people talk about "useless eaters". You - the Hitlers, Stalins and Maos - of this world are the real threat, not the "welfare queens" who are perfectly happy if you give them food and a tv.
Now that we have 7.1 billion, and climbing, and the jobs for them are falling, what should we do exactly?
Learn to ignore monsters like you, so we can start actually solving our problems rather than blaming them on jews, the bourgeois, the educated, the welfare queens, or whatever.
People became more productive due to technology. Now you are able to produce enough for you and your family in 40 hours / week. Before this technology advancement, you needed to work 60-80 hours / week in order to produce enough.
People didn't need to work 80 hours a week to produce enough for themselves, they needed to work 80 hours a week since the means of production were controlled by greedy assholes who only gave bare subsistence wages to the people who actually used them. And they still are, even if the labour unions and the threat of communist revolution helped curb the worst abuses of the robber barons of the Industrial Revolution.
What will happen if we are super productive as that professor claims? Have you seen the Jetsons? that is pretty much what will happen: you would work 2 days a week for 5 hours / day.
That'll only happen if you're your own boss. If you work for someone else, why would they have you work for 10 hours per week when they can keep you working 40-80 hours and pocket the increased profits?
Your job would not be canning tuna, but making sure that the machine that does it gets maintenance.
Nope, that's automated. It already should be.
We would spend our time, doing art, music, entertainment, or any other leisure related activity/job.
This would be the best outcome, and it'll eventually come to that; the question is, how painful will the transition from our current model to that be?
Consider this: we don't have to work to get air.
Nitpick: you are, in fact, doing work right now (or at least I sincerely hope you are) to get air. It's why you have muscles for it.
Jobs are not a scarce resource, labor is. There is always enough jobs for everyone that wants one and then some, even if it means being self employed. The only reason there is unemployment at all, is because of bad laws.
Unfortunately, this is not true. Being self employed means that you have to find a demand you have a skill to fulfil. Such demands might exist in quantities sufficient to employ everyone, either in actuality or in potential, but that does not mean that all unemployed people will find one.
While I do like computers, I don't spend inordinate amounts of time with one; I recognize that doing so is a problem, is unhealthy, and *gasp* do other things with my time, and don't self identify as a "computer nerd".
I openly acknowledge my abnormality.
Others here? Not so much.
Does it bother you, that these others spend their time doing what they want, rather than abstaining for the sake of and in fact basing their whole identity around appearing more pleasing to random strangers or the abstract concept of normalcy?
Internet vigilantism has only started to make an impact but will get tragically big real quick, it needs to get nipped in the bud asap.
Internet vigilantism can't be nipped as long as "tough on crime" remains popular, since it's the same thing in different guise: people like letting their sadistic impulses out every now and then, and if they can pretend they're doing it for the sake of justice it's all the more enjoyable.
True. Welfare means that public resources are used to build the social and physical infrastructure to support a good life for the citizens, with safety nets just a part of said infrastructure. In a welfare state no one lacks education or healthcare for lack of money, which leads to great social mobility. The result - healthy, educated and motivated workforce - combined with good infrastructure leads to great economic competitiviness, but it also means that even hobos don't starve, which greatly irritates some people who apparently think the purpose of life is to prove your evolutionary fitness or something.
Wild animals that receive handouts become lazy and dependent on those handouts, and humans are no different.
That's a great point, actually. Now ask yourself: which would you rather have as a neighbour, a lazy dog or a hungry wolf?
What is the government going to spend that $0.50 on that would be better than a company investing a $1 of profit back into growing their business?
Roads, electric grid, water, sanitation, education, healthcare, public order, enviromental protection, basic research, national defense, social security...
That limit would have to be either very low, so that pretty much anyone could be a candidate, or the state would have to pay. Neither of these seems feasible.
So... What's infeasible in state paying? It's a pretty small investment for fixing the political system.
Is it bribery or do companies donate more money to politicians that agree with their policies?
Question: why should companies have policies? More precisely, why should companies have any say whatsoever in politics? They don't even really exist, but are simple legal fiction, so why should a company have its own voice? Their owners already get to speak with their own; why should they be allowed to make a sock puppet and demand the rest of us treat it as a separate entity?
Analysts need to create scripts, use dbases, etc., not to create a long standing system, but to complete the day to day tasks of compiling and reorganizing information for whatever analysis they happen to be performing today.
So they'd better hope said information is in a carefully designed database which makes arbitrary operations easy, supported by a rich set of flexible and reliable tools, otherwise they'll be in a world of pain every single day.
Slashdot Mirror
The "Main" tab in "Options" menu of the qt client says: "Optional transaction fee per kB that helps make sure your transactions are processed quickly. Most transactions are 1kB. Fee 0.01 recommended."
Also, setting this to 0 in results in both "Debit" and "Net amount" in "Transaction details" be the same thing, and "Transaction fee" to not show up. So I conclude that 0.01 BTC is indeed the default fee.
Which is why no one should leave school without being able to solve quantum mechanical wave functions. They are, after all, about as useful to an average person as a language they never really learned and thus won't use. And no more of a nightmare being force-fed than languages are to not linquistically oriented.
Oh, I'm sorry, I forgot: it's no shame being bad at math but being bad at languages is due to laziness.
And this is another thing: it's simply foolish to conduct business on you business partner's native language if it's foreign to you, since it puts you at a disadvantage. Use an interpreter rather than risk the distraction.
The ultimate correct solution is that the definition of "ship of Theseus" is not entirely fixed, so neither is the point where it becomes something else. And that means that lawyers are exactly the correct people to decide the matter, seeing how it depends on splitting hairs over semantics.
Sure they have: the grandparent just made some.
$1.2 per transaction, actually. The default transaction fee is 0.01 BTC, and current exchange rate is $120 per BTC.
That's becoming somewhat of a problem, actually.
Well, if that happens, you'll get your wish, so what was the point of your post?
Yes, it is. A disease which keeps on circulating in the population keeps on evolving. That means it'll eventually mutate enough to slip past the vaccine. That's what happens with influenza every damn year: it keeps on circulating on birds and pigs, until a new strain jumps the species barrier, and usually the artificially or naturally acquired immunity to previous years's strain.
Unfortunately, we are unlikely to clean the tendency to substitute "witty" tough guy bullshit for actual thought any time soon.
Proof? Because the competing narrative - police very reasonably includes McAfee in the list of suspects, and he's a paranoid nut from all the bath salts he's been doing, and possibly guilty, so he escapes - is actually simpler. It doesn't require us to assume corruption, government conspiracies, unknown assailants, or any other factoids we don't already know; it fits right in with all known facts.
As opposed to simply seizing it as a criminal asset and selling it to the highest bidder, therefore depriving McAfee of it and lining their pockets?
Because houses occasionally catch fire even without any intervention from anyone, and even if they didn't, the murder victim presumably had friends who are not likely to like Mr. McAfee very much.
Even if any hypothethical corruption in Belizean government had anything to do with it being after McAfee, as opposed to simply doing its job and trying to round up a murder suspect, why would they destroy their own property?
Voltage is irrelevant. If a short releases the stored energy, all of it is converted into heat, since it has nowhere else to go. If stored energy is significant, and is released in a short enough time, this results in an explosion.
So, the safety-relevant questions are: how much energy can a capacitor store, and how much currency can it supply?
Because hydroelectric sites are taken, and your customers might take issues with their clouds disappearing when eclipsed by real ones.
Except that dogs adapt, survive and thrive by cooperating. In fact I'm pretty sure that a dog that resorts to cannibalism will be put down pretty fast, by humans or other dogs.
Yes: cooperation is the best way to succeed there too. That's why we have anti-trust laws: peaceful cooperation is such a winning strategy that companies will always resort to it unless prevented by force.
I work for a paycheck, and entrepreneurs work for profit, but I guess some men just want to see the world burn.
No, that's not the definition of criminal.
What if the homophobe lives in Iran? There, homosexuality is a crime, so according to you homosexuals must be evil, thus the homophobe is hating evil people which, again according to you, is okay.
For that matter, what about a state that has anti-sodomy laws in books but then removes them? Are all the homosexuals instantly de-evilized when the law is struck down? And what if an Iranian homosexual and an Iranian homophobe leave Iran and enter USA? The homosexual is no longer a criminal, thus not necessarily evil, thus the homophobes justifications fall flat.
My, it is a weird world authoritarians live in.
Feel free to stop eating anytime.
The thing is, we can feed the "useless eaters". Most industrial countries struggle with agricultural overproduction, not famine. What actually ends up killing lots of people - and what ultimately causes famine in developing countries nowadays, too - are the socipaths. The kind of people talk about "useless eaters". You - the Hitlers, Stalins and Maos - of this world are the real threat, not the "welfare queens" who are perfectly happy if you give them food and a tv.
Learn to ignore monsters like you, so we can start actually solving our problems rather than blaming them on jews, the bourgeois, the educated, the welfare queens, or whatever.
People didn't need to work 80 hours a week to produce enough for themselves, they needed to work 80 hours a week since the means of production were controlled by greedy assholes who only gave bare subsistence wages to the people who actually used them. And they still are, even if the labour unions and the threat of communist revolution helped curb the worst abuses of the robber barons of the Industrial Revolution.
That'll only happen if you're your own boss. If you work for someone else, why would they have you work for 10 hours per week when they can keep you working 40-80 hours and pocket the increased profits?
Nope, that's automated. It already should be.
This would be the best outcome, and it'll eventually come to that; the question is, how painful will the transition from our current model to that be?
Nitpick: you are, in fact, doing work right now (or at least I sincerely hope you are) to get air. It's why you have muscles for it.
Unfortunately, this is not true. Being self employed means that you have to find a demand you have a skill to fulfil. Such demands might exist in quantities sufficient to employ everyone, either in actuality or in potential, but that does not mean that all unemployed people will find one.
True Art Is Angsty, so anything lighthearted and well-written is likely to sell like ice water in Sahara and for the same reason.
Does it bother you, that these others spend their time doing what they want, rather than abstaining for the sake of and in fact basing their whole identity around appearing more pleasing to random strangers or the abstract concept of normalcy?
Internet vigilantism can't be nipped as long as "tough on crime" remains popular, since it's the same thing in different guise: people like letting their sadistic impulses out every now and then, and if they can pretend they're doing it for the sake of justice it's all the more enjoyable.
For Bitcoin mining. NASA needs to fund itself somehow.
True. Welfare means that public resources are used to build the social and physical infrastructure to support a good life for the citizens, with safety nets just a part of said infrastructure. In a welfare state no one lacks education or healthcare for lack of money, which leads to great social mobility. The result - healthy, educated and motivated workforce - combined with good infrastructure leads to great economic competitiviness, but it also means that even hobos don't starve, which greatly irritates some people who apparently think the purpose of life is to prove your evolutionary fitness or something.
That's a great point, actually. Now ask yourself: which would you rather have as a neighbour, a lazy dog or a hungry wolf?
Roads, electric grid, water, sanitation, education, healthcare, public order, enviromental protection, basic research, national defense, social security...
Well, you're facing south, so east is to your left.
That something is legal won't stop a company from suing and using court costs - both money and time - as a de facto punishment.
So... What's infeasible in state paying? It's a pretty small investment for fixing the political system.
Question: why should companies have policies? More precisely, why should companies have any say whatsoever in politics? They don't even really exist, but are simple legal fiction, so why should a company have its own voice? Their owners already get to speak with their own; why should they be allowed to make a sock puppet and demand the rest of us treat it as a separate entity?
So they'd better hope said information is in a carefully designed database which makes arbitrary operations easy, supported by a rich set of flexible and reliable tools, otherwise they'll be in a world of pain every single day.