About TPTB control:
No they dont control me but am i a trump donator?
Even if there are 5 million "trump donators" (which is not true see above) that is less then 2% of the US population and less then 0.1% of the world population.
Whoever gets out of line could get easily dealt with.
Just look at the cold war for examples.
Lol. What a (math probability) retard. Why can't the omnipotent elite keep the damn flies off of Shitlary's face at debates? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-JtvNP_YmVEYou math retard. Ever heard of Chaos Theory and the Butterfly effect?  |
|
|
|
I'm not even sure Putin has to do anything, we've been destroying our American values ourselves. I think what Putin really wants is an end to the petrodollar, and I think that's what Syria represents. from "deception was my job" Yuri Bezmenov, a warning: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=bX3EZCVj2XA&feature=youtu.be |
|
|
|
|
I think the old Clinton chief of staff Podestra was a UFO guy and mixed in with fellow UFO enthusiasts, hence the email
|
|
|
|
I've never been in Russia but how many can remember always heard that is the biggest enemy of America. It's amazing that someone thinks of another.
Just ask people educated in the US if they think the atomic bombings in Japan were necessary versus someone outside the US. Most in the US will say we saved countless lives by dropping those bombs. |
|
|
|
The fundamental goal is maximizing degrees-of-freedom.
Question, does an object standing still, for all practical purposes, have greater degrees of freedom than an object in motion? I am venturing into a realm I know extremely little of, if any. I am no phys·i·cist. But let me join the fun and say that my sense informs me that an object standing still, for all practical purposes, does have greater degrees of freedom than an object in motion.  Arguing CoinCube's and BADecker's way: The force to slow down an object in motion is symmetrical to the force needed to move an object standing still, keeping the degrees of freedom equal, supposedly. I guess one way to look at it is, in a vacuum universe with one particle, relatively, how do we tell that one particle moving? Can we? Arguing your way: Does an object moving at the speed of light not have a bit more inertia than an object at rest? Does motion in one direction not decrease the degrees of freedom of every other direction? |
|
|
|
Looking at how trump got the votes, it seems to me that the Americans have gone mad ! Hillary is also not very General but trump is an idiot !
You do not seem to be an American citizen, and a majority of your posts here are in Russian. Let the Americans make their choice. It will be best if the outsiders stay away from this. It is quite evident that you don't know much about Hillary. If you had known a fair bit about her, then you'll be praying for a Donald Trump victory. I agree with this advice, but would note that Trump and Putain may wind up best friends. PARTY!!!! http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-08-15/ivanka-trump-vacationing-croatia-putins-girlfriend |
|
|
|
Are any of you guys worried that governments might try and succeed to do something to monero or even bitcoin that can hurt their value?
Bitcoin is much easier to control. And make no mistake, "regulators" do not want to regulate; they want control. CN or US can establish BTC control if they choose, but I doubt that any other nation can establish control - although RU or IL or a few others could destroy it if they were motivated to do so. So far, they have not overtly asserted control. I don't know of a reason to expect that to change soon. Monero is small enough yet to be easy to destroy for most developed nations, but also too small to bother. By the time it is a target, it will be much more difficult to destroy because of the fullnode jurisdictional diversity, and Kovri tech. More difficult to destroy than bitcoin, but effectively impossible to control, unless the core team is co-opted - in which case, the community will fork it. Great post, I agree. Bitcoin, Satoshi's Trojan Horse |
|
|
|
Than tell us excatly how to make infinity returns.
Use other people's money (banker) in investing and put the tenant to pay all the costs + ammortization. Use 100 % financing. if a lack of tenants that are able to pay this rate occurs in the market, as well as a lack of buyers willing to buy real estate at at least par values, what happens? |
|
|
|
My opinion is that Colorado will go Trump. Look at it's history of voting. It has never been a "blue state." I wonder what states won't vote Trump  For sure, the state of freedom.  I'm choosing to party |
|
|
|
My opinion is that Colorado will go Trump. Look at it's history of voting. It has never been a "blue state." I wonder what states won't vote Trump |
|
|
|
The fundamental goal is maximizing degrees-of-freedom.
Question, does an object standing still, for all practical purposes, have greater degrees of freedom than an object in motion? |
|
|
|
Cash isn't a "credit paradigm", not more than "a piece of gold" would be a credit paradigm. I wasn't calling cash a credit paradigm. I was saying that obscured blockchains use bank accounts as their primary archetype rather than an anonymous commodity like gold by virtue of the fact that they ascribe blockchain addresses to people in the way a bank account does and gold doesn't. That is folly because you then have to live with a whole load of conflicting priorities. For example, have you ever tried verifying a transaction in Monero ? You can't, because [...] ...you weren't given permission, unless you are the sender or recipient of the funds, or a recipient of the viewkey of the transaction. |
|
|
|
 Please post your thoughts and reactions. looks like a joint |
|
|
|
I have been following the recent block size debates through the mailing list. I had hoped the debate would resolve and that a fork proposal would achieve widespread consensus. However with the formal release of Bitcoin XT 0.11A, this looks unlikely to happen, and so I am forced to share my concerns about this very dangerous fork.
The developers of this pretender-Bitcoin claim to be following my original vision, but nothing could be further from the truth. When I designed Bitcoin, I designed it in such a way as to make future modifications to the consensus rules difficult without near unanimous agreement. Bitcoin was designed to be protected from the influence of charismatic leaders, even if their name is Gavin Andresen, Barack Obama, or Satoshi Nakamoto. Nearly everyone has to agree on a change, and they have to do it without being forced or pressured into it. By doing a fork in this way, these developers are violating the "original vision" they claim to honour.
They use my old writings to make claims about what Bitcoin was supposed to be. However I acknowledge that a lot has changed since that time, and new knowledge has been gained that contradicts some of my early opinions. For example I didn't anticipate pooled mining and its effects on the security of the network. Making Bitcoin a competitive monetary system while also preserving its security properties is not a trivial problem, and we should take more time to come up with a robust solution. I suspect we need a better incentive for users to run nodes instead of relying solely on altruism.
If two developers can fork Bitcoin and succeed in redefining what "Bitcoin" is, in the face of widespread technical criticism and through the use of populist tactics, then I will have no choice but to declare Bitcoin a failed project. Bitcoin was meant to be both technically and socially robust. This present situation has been very disappointing to watch unfold.
Satoshi Nakamoto
PS well done Team Monero, pretty smooth hard fork from what I can tell Is this for real? Is this signed with a reliable public key that we know for sure belongs to satoshi? I think it's been months but to my present awareness I don't think anyone's proven that it's not real addition: Does anyone have anything at all signed by Satoshi's PGP key? |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
