|
why not a stupid old serial cable? why the sound stuff? sound stuff is much vulnerable, as it can be listened to.
|
|
|
|
I can't confirm if it's hackable or not, just not that many people bother. With all the su/sudo things that need to be run...I just don't see it happening.
too complex for me, me to stupid can't understand -> UNBREAKABLE!!! your logic is failing. You are picking a fight with the wrong person, and I shouldn't be the one to talk about comprehension when you failed to comprehend first grade English grammar. LOL! U MAD? i might not comprehend english grammar, but i seem to comprehend a bit more stuff then you do. Which brings me to my question, are you kano? He is an idiot and has the same avatar. Spells the same way. I can only imagine it's you.
so every person you don't like, is teh same one? your logic is failing, dude. your logic is failing. |
|
|
|
I can't confirm if it's hackable or not, just not that many people bother. With all the su/sudo things that need to be run...I just don't see it happening.
too complex for me, me to stupid can't understand -> UNBREAKABLE!!! your logic is failing. |
|
|
|
The question is how? Most of these guys will be running Linux, and for those with Windows...you still need to download the virus and run it.
are you saying a Linux system is unhackable? WRONG!!! im a big linux fan, but your statement is just plain WRONG! |
|
|
|
Currently, CPU botnets are pointless to mine bitcoin.
......I'm not sure if there's such a thing as GPU botnet...........
Will there be an ASIC botnet in the near future?.
so infect people that own mining ASICs? it seems like a bit impossible as we are so few. GPU botnet is much more possible, every computer have a GPU capable of mining now. I'd say the large majority of computers don't have GPUs capable of mining, or at least mining much faster than a CPU anyway. i think most computers newer then 2 years are capable of mining(maybe only a few mhash/s but still capable). |
|
|
|
There are gpu botnets but guess there are more lucrative ways for botherders. I think there is no faster way for lossing bots than sprading a miner. Only a douchebag would not take action when the pc gets extremely slow.
To understand that ASICS are not infected i suggest you research virus spreading techniques.
it not the ACISs that are gonna be infected, its the devices that control them(computers, beagle boards, ...) and then turn the into a botnet. |
|
|
|
Currently, CPU botnets are pointless to mine bitcoin.
......I'm not sure if there's such a thing as GPU botnet...........
Will there be an ASIC botnet in the near future?.
so infect people that own mining ASICs? it seems like a bit impossible as we are so few. GPU botnet is much more possible, every computer have a GPU capable of mining now. |
|
|
|
I concur with DoomDumas.
that does not mean that you are right. utiltarism does not say anything about lying, cheating, killing, genocide, suicide. The only thing it states is: "Do what necessary to maximizes the sum of happiness".If that mean that you are gonna lie, or kill some people, SO BE IT! if the world is a happier place, you did the right thing. as long as the benefit outweighs the cost, every things is good. Utiltarism does say that you have to do these things, if they are what maximizes happiness(but in most situations they aren't). |
|
|
|
Rational egoism: Get ASIC mining device and mine BTC with 20X + speed
Utilitarianism: Get ASIC mining device to as much people as possible, so that a 51% attack will not be possible
the rational egoism would not want 51% attack either, not even if he is the attacker, as he would ruin the network and make bitcoin worthless(assuming that he wants bitcoin to succeed) |
|
|
|
Actually, you know what, you're right. Just like the SA forums, people can lie to each other and create a sense of happiness. But it's not love. It's ego, people lie to each other to boost their egos and miss out on the beauty of truth.
i do not like to put people in boxes, BUT you sound like a Kantian, with some weird Freudian choice of words. |
|
|
|
but from a utalitarian standpoint it would be perfectly good to lie IF it maximises happiness. eg.
scared person to you and you see which way he runs. murder comes asking "which way did he run?". do you lie and save the persons life, or tell the truth and let the person die? a utilitarian would lie, a Kantian(deontolog?) would panic and be incapable of performing any action(must not lie, must save lifes), and a rational egoist would not care.
Would not being a party to murder reduce one's happiness? sounds meaningful, but unable to understand?? please reformulate. You claim that a rational egoist would not care about the outcome of this particular scenario. Rational egoists care about their own happiness. Being party to a murder would reduce that happiness (see the formula on page one - it would increase psychological pain) for all but the most psycho/sociopathic of them. Ergo, the rational egoist would not desire to be party to a murder, and lie to the murderer. That the murderer's happiness is reduced by this doesn't matter to the egoist. logic is sound. rational egoist would not *have to* care, unless he feels like it. better? and again he does not do it for the victim, but for himself. |
|
|
|
yes but egoism and utilitarianism is mutually exclusive, they can perform the same actions, but the difference lies in there reasoning.
I suspected this was kokjo's "logic" (but, the man having cowardly not stated it, I could not question it). He can't read me, so it's unlikely that he'll prove me how egoism and utilitarianism are mutually exclusive -- I never said that -- or that they are incompatible (I relied on the fact that they are compatible)... that is to say, how a man who is allegedly a rational egoist is somehow "incapable" of exploiting utilitarianism to justify his true desires. proof that your argument about lying politician/dictators is invalid: assume that a given person is behaving utilitarianistic. his reason could then either be: a) egoistic, that is he is behaving utilitarianistic to gain something(exploiting it), he is therefor not a true utilitarian. b) utilitarianistic, that is he is behaving that way he *thinks* it maximizes happiness(but he might be stupid, and kill a few million people). he is a true utilitarian. c) he is completely crazy, and just doing random things that look utilitarianistic. (i can feel i fail english!) |
|
|
|
This thread is vitiated with the all-too-common mistake of "I identify as Xian, and I have concluded that Z is immoral according to Xianism, so obviously I'll substitute a defense of Xianism with my own conclusions about Z".
To wit, those who say "utilitarianism is correct" and then say "lying cannot maximize global happiness" introduced as an unsubstantiated premise, punctuated with the very obvious absence of a utilitarian proof that "lying cannot maximize global happiness".
These types of conversation are unpleasant.
i do not claim that i support any moral philosophy. its Dank that is doing that. but from a utalitarian standpoint it would be perfectly good to lie IF it maximises happiness. eg.
scared person to you and you see which way he runs. murder comes asking "which way did he run?". do you lie and save the persons life, or tell the truth and let the person die? a utilitarian would lie, a Kantian(deontolog?) would panic and be incapable of performing any action(must not lie, must save lifes), and a rational egoist would not care.
Would not being a party to murder reduce one's happiness? sounds meaningful, but unable to understand?? please reformulate. |
|
|
|
|
unignoring Rudd-O, hide/show button to complicated.
|
|
|
|
in capable of reasoning logically. hitting ignore button.
Tehehe. I love how some people allege that their interlocutors are "in capable (sic) of reasoning logically", but they don't even bother pointing out what the logical error is (which should be pretty trivial, if I have indeed made a logical error). To be fair, a person like kokjo is better off not reading what I have to say. Let me try to explain. One person cannot be an honest man and a lire at the same time. Yes, he can act like an honest man, but he what he acts like does not change his true nature. If they use love to bring them power over others, they are acting on their ego, for self gain. If they are using love to bring power to others, they are acting out of love. It can't be both, even if people live in false realities, at the end of the day, they know the truth. but from a utalitarian standpoint it would be perfectly good to lie IF it maximises happiness. eg. scared person to you and you see which way he runs. murder comes asking "which way did he run?". do you lie and save the persons life, or tell the truth and let the person die? a utilitarian would lie, a Kantian(deontolog?) would panic and be incapable of performing any action(must not lie, must save lifes), and a rational egoist would not care. Lying does not maximize happiness. That is a fallacy. That's like saying going to war generates peace. so let the murder kill him! |
|
|
|
in capable of reasoning logically. hitting ignore button.
Tsk... Weren't you paying attention? Utilitarianism can be used -- in fact, it was used -- to justify Hitler's Holocaust, Tsarist Russia pogroms, Lenin's "cut their heads and hang them high so everyone can see them", Mao's mass starvation (the biggest mass death in history), et cetera. Utilitarianism is, indeed, the "moral system" (ugh) that underpins all forms of statism.
So what they do -- which they excel at -- is they lie. They lie real good. One of the lies they use is this commonly held utilitarian belief of "the common good" or "maximizing global happiness" or whatever (all utilitarian ideas). They insist and insist that their promises of action will "bring the common good". By force of repetition and propaganda, these stick. They gain power. I think that these politicians I spoke of, are both rational egoists of the social dominant variety, and also utilitarians at the same time. They are one thing inwardly, and the other outwardly. My reasoning is pretty clear about this.
Liars are one thing inwardly, and another outwardly. yes but egoism and utilitarianism is mutually exclusive, they can perform the same actions, but the difference lies in there reasoning. |
|
|
|
in capable of reasoning logically. hitting ignore button.
Tehehe. I love how some people allege that their interlocutors are "in capable (sic) of reasoning logically", but they don't even bother pointing out what the logical error is (which should be pretty trivial, if I have indeed made a logical error). To be fair, a person like kokjo is better off not reading what I have to say. Let me try to explain. One person cannot be an honest man and a lire at the same time. Yes, he can act like an honest man, but he what he acts like does not change his true nature. If they use love to bring them power over others, they are acting on their ego, for self gain. If they are using love to bring power to others, they are acting out of love. It can't be both, even if people live in false realities, at the end of the day, they know the truth. but from a utalitarian standpoint it would be perfectly good to lie IF it maximises happiness. eg. scared person to you and you see which way he runs. murder comes asking "which way did he run?". do you lie and save the persons life, or tell the truth and let the person die? a utilitarian would lie, a Kantian(deontolog?) would panic and be incapable of performing any action(must not lie, must save lifes), and a rational egoist would not care. |
|
|
|
This is why I conclude that they all are utilitarians, even if only outwardly so.
Then they are not. your logic is faulty. (go read the link in your sig!) I think that these politicians I spoke of, are both rational egoists of the social dominant variety, and also utilitarians at the same time. They are one thing inwardly, and the other outwardly. My reasoning is pretty clear about this. in capable of reasoning logically. hitting ignore button. |
|
|
|
This is why I conclude that they all are utilitarians, even if only outwardly so.
Then they are not. your logic is faulty. (go read the link in your sig!) |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
