Mt Gox charges a small fee (0.x%) for each trade.
yes, but what is a trade? is it the whole trade, or the two sides of the trade, that gets the fee. mtgox is rather unclear about this, but its common knowledge on this forum that its both sides. |
|
|
|
Everybody know this, am I a fool?
yes. look at you usd history. you will see a fee too there, from when you where selling your btc(buying usd...). |
|
|
|
why down?
your use of the word "alert", the sideways(mildly down) action that is happening today. |
|
|
|
Short term alert sent to subscribers.
and down we goes... (right?) |
|
|
|
a) Why there is an API 0 and API 1. Will API 0 soon be deprecated?
i think so. |
|
|
|
- Who decides on who gets writing permits to the source code? Gavin(i think), have admin access to the mainstream repo. - Who decides on who has to hand off writing permits? How is this guaranteed? Gavin, or other developers. if you don't like it: go fork to code - Who has access to the passwords, backups etc. (maybe some other entity, like github, sourceforge admins, googlemail..)? doesn't matter. the developers signs the releases, if an external entity tried to change stuff, it would be notice big time. - What safety procedures are in place to prevent abuse/theft outside manipulation of those writing/viewing permits?
can't be done, see above - Are there rules in place that determine the steps undertaken to review and release an update/change to the source code?
no(i think), fork the code. - Is there some sort of outside review? its opensource, go review it yourself. - How transparent are the decision making processes on who becomes active developer and who has to retire? go read discussions on github - Are there ways to improve the sefaty standards? sure: fork the code. https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin |
|
|
|
It is below me.
i would love to see your reaction when you gets pulled out by the police, because you where driving too fast. it would be priceless. |
|
|
|
I am awesome, I know I am awesome and you resent that.
keep telling yourself that. in real life, when people say something like that, its because they are narcissistic assholes, who have no friends. |
|
|
|
|
btw. starting this thread is a very childish action, and you aks why you are viewed as childish? U STUPID?
|
|
|
|
What don't you prefer about me, heh?
I think I am a pretty stand-up guy. I respect all of you guys.
You're mentally handicapped? see atlas people hate you. i hate you because you apply black-OR-white logic in every thing you say, and you conclusions are stupid, childish and wrong, and you think you are the most popular and knowledgeable person in the world, when you are not. but keep on WINNING! |
|
|
|
I will only stand under myself.
go bomb the white house then. when do you understand that no one wants to listen to all your pathetic crap. YOU ARE WINNING! in making people hate you, even your parents hate you, but YOU ARE WINNING! and thats all that matters |
|
|
|
is this why you turned out this way?
Three years of bootcamp, verbal abuse and in-school suspension for not doing homework can do a number on you. However, fortunately, I had a stay-at-home portion for a good portion of my early life. She read with me often. She gave me countless opportunities to try new things. She gave me a great foundation. I never saw my father though. He worked far too often. Anyways, I would prefer every child to have the care and dedication of a true nurturing mother/father and not some random social worker. then im all for "creating severely institutionalized individuals", if the alternative is someone like you. |
|
|
|
|
is this why you turned out this way?
|
|
|
|
|
the real awesomeness of bitcoin is that 1000BTC takes the amount of space to store, as 0,00000001BTC.
thats the real deal.
|
|
|
|
but you must admit that it sounds rather inefficient, that we have to fight about every little breadcrumb, right? Having some central group decide who gets what sounds more inefficient. It is relative. sure it is, but in some situations it could be useful, in a moment of crisis its way better to have a dictator, then a democracy, but right not im not suggesting that we should centralize control. im only suggesting that we should share and be nice to each other, that's all. |
|
|
|
The default for private property rights is very similar to what exits, collectivist ideals of property rights require enforcement structures. Therefore, it's impossible for communism to function in the absence of central control of economic systems.
no, collectivist ideals does not require enforcement structures. Its not impossible for communism to function with out central control, all it requires is that people are not narcissistic assholes, and begins care about other persons well being. There is no need for central control. For any society larger than Dumbar's Number ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunbar%27s_number) that is dependent upon members of that society treating each other with the kind of mutual respect that is required for a truly voluntary commune to exist, some form of social hiearchy with the capacity to impose it's will upon individuals is required. Otherwise it's unstable. This pretty much describes any group larger than a (relatively small) church business meeting. No town, city, county, state or nation can function otherwise; regardless of whether or not they are communist, libertarian or other. Even libertarian ideals require a common social order that can be enforced upon individual members; but ideally that common social order is minimalist in nature. Communism cannot be minimalist in this fashion. It's literally impossible. : Dunbar's number is a suggested cognitive limit to the number of people with whom one can maintain stable social relationships. Yes, because it's an educated guess on the average. You see, people vary and it's difficult to nail down such a number because we kinda can't do social experiements on human beings in order to refine the guess. I reject your argument, because its based on a guess. your worldview says, that people are egoistic assholes. In a world full of egoistic assholes, its true that a free market/liberalism would work best, as everyone would pull equally hard to get their share. but you must admit that it sounds rather inefficient, that we have to fight about every little breadcrumb, right? |
|
|
|
The default for private property rights is very similar to what exits, collectivist ideals of property rights require enforcement structures. Therefore, it's impossible for communism to function in the absence of central control of economic systems.
no, collectivist ideals does not require enforcement structures. Its not impossible for communism to function with out central control, all it requires is that people are not narcissistic assholes, and begins care about other persons well being. There is no need for central control. For any society larger than Dumbar's Number ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunbar%27s_number) that is dependent upon members of that society treating each other with the kind of mutual respect that is required for a truly voluntary commune to exist, some form of social hiearchy with the capacity to impose it's will upon individuals is required. Otherwise it's unstable. This pretty much describes any group larger than a (relatively small) church business meeting. No town, city, county, state or nation can function otherwise; regardless of whether or not they are communist, libertarian or other. Even libertarian ideals require a common social order that can be enforced upon individual members; but ideally that common social order is minimalist in nature. Communism cannot be minimalist in this fashion. It's literally impossible. : Dunbar's number is a suggested cognitive limit to the number of people with whom one can maintain stable social relationships. |
|
|
|
The default for private property rights is very similar to what exits, collectivist ideals of property rights require enforcement structures. Therefore, it's impossible for communism to function in the absence of central control of economic systems.
no, collectivist ideals does not require enforcement structures. Its not impossible for communism to function with out central control, all it requires is that people are not narcissistic assholes, and begins care about other persons well being. There is no need for central control. |
|
|
|
Marxism has to do mostly with economics and property. Libertarianism is more about personal freedom. They don't have to be mutually exclusive.
Personal freedom is about economics & property. No matter how many times you say it, a collectivist cannot be a libertarian. The two worldviews are mutually exclusive by nature. no its not. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
