We don't know his work history. All we know is that he was an engineer for a defense contractor at some point. There's no evidence he know how to program at all, much less possess the sort of expertise that would be needed to come up with something like bitcoin.
People who have watched too many movies seem to be assuming "works for defense contractor" == "is secretly Neo".
It's become petty clear that the guy in question ISN'T Satoshi Nakamoto. This is basically just a crazy lady writing a delusional account of the two months she spent stalking a random Japanese guy.
And if they ruled that a woman in a skirt qualifies as partially nude, they'd set a precedent that would allow women in skirts to be ticketed for indecent exposure.
They didn't rule that taking the photos was legal (i.e. you have a right to do it which cannot be abridged); they ruled it wasn't illegal (i.e. the legislature hasn't banned it even though it's within their power to do so).
No, he wasn't. King was imprisoned 29 times during his movement, during which he would not even accept being released on bail before trial. Most Notably in Birmingham, Alabama where he was almost a thousand people to be arrested. Again, getting sent to jail was the deliberate goal of the protest, as it overloaded the civil authority's ability to enforce an unjust law.
No, there's one kind of civil disobedience. It's just there's a lot of posers out there who want the "cool factor" of claiming martydom without having to following through on all the down sides of actually being a martyr.
The first step in the trail process is arraignment, where the list of charges against you are read and you are asked whether you plead guilty, not guilty, or no contest to each of them. If you don't plead not guilty, there is no trial and things skip directly to sentencing.
If you've read "On Civil Disobedience" by Thoreau, the jury didn't get a chance to find non-guilty. He didn't contest the charges. The goal is to get thrown in prison so that it becomes too expensive for the civil authority to continue enforcing the law.
Going to jail for civil disobediance has an equally long history in the US. In fact the book that coined the term was written when Thoreau was in prison for refusing to pay his war tax.
It results in inefficient use of resources. Ultimately, decisions on whether to send something by truck or train ought to be based on which gets it to its destination using the fewest resources. If you subsidize truck transport, the cutoff point gets moved so that some amount of cargo that would have been better off going by train ends up getting sent by truck instead because trucks are made to look artificially cheap. The extra resources spent trucking that cargo that should have been trained represents a dead weight loss that reduces the total amount of wealth in society as a whole.
Yes, but people are trying to make a problem with places like Flexcoin and Mt. Gox into a problem with Bitcoin itself. This is like arguing the Madoff scandal proves that dollars are worthless.
Railroads have to pay to maintain their tracks based on the wear their cargo trains do to them. Trucks, on the other hand, have the costs of maintaining the road spread onto passenger cars in a way that results in the trucks paying far less than their share of the costs. This results in billions of dollars per year effectively subsidizing truck transport.
'I think it's a tribute to the agency that we're not hiding this stuff, that we're actually out trying to describe these things, and to describe where we can get better."
Except you were hiding it, for years. You only revealed it when it caused such a crisis that it could not longer be hidden.
If we stopped incarcerating hundreds of thousands of nonviolent offenders guilty of victimless crimes like drug possession, we could afford to humanely house the actual criminals.
English does have some nice features. For example it's one of the few languages that doesn't arbitaraily assign genders to non-gendered words. If you want to talk about a table, you don't have to memorize whether someone thousands of years ago decided tables are male or female for no logical reason.
It's a simple calculation. Guaranteed loss of a crew of 7 vs. x% chance of losing a crew of nine by sending two people up on another shuttle.
7 > 9x 78% > x
If the chance of losing Atlantis on the rescue mission is less than 78%, your expected loss of life is better sending the rescue. If the chance of losing Atlantis is more than 78% chance, your expected loss of life is better not sending the rescue.
This is exactly wrong. Putting more "human" decision makers in place is exactly what lead to the Challenger disaster and Columbia disasters. Because the "feels" of public relations was more important than the "mere numbers" of astronaut safety.
Slashdot Mirror
We don't know his work history. All we know is that he was an engineer for a defense contractor at some point. There's no evidence he know how to program at all, much less possess the sort of expertise that would be needed to come up with something like bitcoin.
People who have watched too many movies seem to be assuming "works for defense contractor" == "is secretly Neo".
It's become petty clear that the guy in question ISN'T Satoshi Nakamoto. This is basically just a crazy lady writing a delusional account of the two months she spent stalking a random Japanese guy.
And if they ruled that a woman in a skirt qualifies as partially nude, they'd set a precedent that would allow women in skirts to be ticketed for indecent exposure.
They didn't rule that taking the photos was legal (i.e. you have a right to do it which cannot be abridged); they ruled it wasn't illegal (i.e. the legislature hasn't banned it even though it's within their power to do so).
No, he wasn't. King was imprisoned 29 times during his movement, during which he would not even accept being released on bail before trial. Most Notably in Birmingham, Alabama where he was almost a thousand people to be arrested. Again, getting sent to jail was the deliberate goal of the protest, as it overloaded the civil authority's ability to enforce an unjust law.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L...
No, there's one kind of civil disobedience. It's just there's a lot of posers out there who want the "cool factor" of claiming martydom without having to following through on all the down sides of actually being a martyr.
The first step in the trail process is arraignment, where the list of charges against you are read and you are asked whether you plead guilty, not guilty, or no contest to each of them. If you don't plead not guilty, there is no trial and things skip directly to sentencing.
Not just knows it; he responds with a useful line of expository dialogue, like a character in some lousy fan fiction.
If you've read "On Civil Disobedience" by Thoreau, the jury didn't get a chance to find non-guilty. He didn't contest the charges. The goal is to get thrown in prison so that it becomes too expensive for the civil authority to continue enforcing the law.
Going to jail for civil disobediance has an equally long history in the US. In fact the book that coined the term was written when Thoreau was in prison for refusing to pay his war tax.
There's no actual concrete evidence of any of the author's claims, just tons of speculation. Yet it's being treated like it's undeniably true.
Drat, you beat me to it. ....
DAAAAANNN!!!!!
It results in inefficient use of resources. Ultimately, decisions on whether to send something by truck or train ought to be based on which gets it to its destination using the fewest resources. If you subsidize truck transport, the cutoff point gets moved so that some amount of cargo that would have been better off going by train ends up getting sent by truck instead because trucks are made to look artificially cheap. The extra resources spent trucking that cargo that should have been trained represents a dead weight loss that reduces the total amount of wealth in society as a whole.
Yes, but people are trying to make a problem with places like Flexcoin and Mt. Gox into a problem with Bitcoin itself. This is like arguing the Madoff scandal proves that dollars are worthless.
Yes, because never in history has anyone been "mugged" or "conned" or otherwise had their government regulated currency stolen by a third party.
Railroads have to pay to maintain their tracks based on the wear their cargo trains do to them. Trucks, on the other hand, have the costs of maintaining the road spread onto passenger cars in a way that results in the trucks paying far less than their share of the costs. This results in billions of dollars per year effectively subsidizing truck transport.
First Life would be a fun game if it were for the Pay2Win nature of the in game cash shop.
'I think it's a tribute to the agency that we're not hiding this stuff, that we're actually out trying to describe these things, and to describe where we can get better."
Except you were hiding it, for years. You only revealed it when it caused such a crisis that it could not longer be hidden.
If we stopped incarcerating hundreds of thousands of nonviolent offenders guilty of victimless crimes like drug possession, we could afford to humanely house the actual criminals.
"We're better off not knowing" isn't really an inspiring slogan for a science and research organization.
English does have some nice features. For example it's one of the few languages that doesn't arbitaraily assign genders to non-gendered words. If you want to talk about a table, you don't have to memorize whether someone thousands of years ago decided tables are male or female for no logical reason.
Saying that MtGox "proves" Bitcoin isn't trustworthy is like saying Bernie Madoff "proved" dollar bills aren't trustworthy.
Conmen trick people into giving them money and then run off with it. That doesn't say anything about the financial value of the currency itself.
No one knew because management made a deliberate decision to remain ignorant:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S...
It's a simple calculation. Guaranteed loss of a crew of 7 vs. x% chance of losing a crew of nine by sending two people up on another shuttle.
7 > 9x
78% > x
If the chance of losing Atlantis on the rescue mission is less than 78%, your expected loss of life is better sending the rescue. If the chance of losing Atlantis is more than 78% chance, your expected loss of life is better not sending the rescue.
This is exactly wrong. Putting more "human" decision makers in place is exactly what lead to the Challenger disaster and Columbia disasters. Because the "feels" of public relations was more important than the "mere numbers" of astronaut safety.