|
There could be a way to provide short selling "insurance" that could benefit all parties. The problem is if the price rises too much and you short sell you could lose a ton of money. You could write an insurance "policy" that refocuses payoff targets for every X jump in price that would allow you to short sell Bitcoin indefinitely.
|
|
|
|
I didn't realize VISA is now offering censorship-proof transactions and a store of value which, done correctly, can not be seized.
Oh, that's right, VISA doesn't offer those things and that's why a comparison between VISA and Bitcoin is ridiculous.
Those screaming for on-chain scaling think they need censorship-proof transactions when purchasing a coffee and a doughnut.
Governments around the world continue to implement increasingly strict capital controls and the reason Bitcoin has value is because people can use it to avoid those controls. Confirmation speed and fees are inconsequential in the face of that utility.
Dude, you realize those things were the rallying cry of forum members when we first came here. These people now all want free money, profit, rape and pillage the neighboring town, gamble, sig campaign and sell for drug money, premine altcoins and rape-pillage-profit. That hippie shit is long gone at this point. |
|
|
|
I agree, woof woof.  |
|
|
|
Sure, IF bitcoin was being used as a currency, this might be a valid argument--but it still wouldn't have jumped the shark. But it's not a great currency. It's a great investment and a decent store of value. For those two things it matters a hell of a lot less what the network fees are. If you buy stocks, you end up paying a lot more than $0.40 to buy any amount. That's how I see it anyway.
That's weird but true. If Bitcoin is nothing more than a speculators toy then it's massively successful. You're one of those "glass half full" kind of people, aren't you? LOL |
|
|
|
Bitcoin is here to stay. Many altcoins will die but never Bitcoin. There is too much money behind it now. If anything happens it will be fixed. Simple as that.
Yes, I think it's already too big to die. Too big to fail like PanAm Airlines? Founded in 1927, the airline was a part of world culture for the better part of the 20th century. It led the industry in international flights and luxury travel. It was also the first airline to make widespread use of jumbo jets, and the first to use an air staff of stewardesses as a PR focal point. Little girls grew up wanting to be PanAm stewardesses, and boys grew up wanting to pilot one of the fleet. Heck, the Beatles arrived to America on one. It carried 6.7 million passengers a week by 1970. It's jets flew to 86 countries on every continent except for Antarctica over a scheduled route network of 81,410 unduplicated miles. It's cabin staff were multilingual college graduates, hired from around the world, frequently with nursing training. At its peak the airline made, in today's dollars, $24 billion a year and had nearly 300,000 employees worldwide (more employees than the daily number of Bitcoin transactions worldwide). Their dead and gone. Too big to fail like Washington Mutual? WaMu was America’s largest Savings and Loan association, the sixth largest bank in the U.S., and the largest bank failure in history. Let that sink in for a minute. After a 10-day run on the bank in late September 2008, with total withdrawals in excess of $16 billion USD–almost 10% of the deposits–the FDIC seized WaMu’s assets. In total, they lost $307 billion dollars in assets (30 times larger than the market cap of Bitcoin). If all holders of Bitcoin for some unexpected reason decided to make a "bank run" against Bitcoin it wouldn't take the 10 days it took WaMu to fail, a few hours maybe. The difference is I see bitcoin as an idea. An idea too big to fail. Bitcoin would be the idea of airline businesses rather than any one specific airline business that could fail. If holders were to for some reason sell all of their coins, people like me would just buy them up at a ridiculous discount like we did after the 2013 crash. The idea doesn't need to fail, it just needs to be improved upon or changed to make people leave Bitcoin. If a new revolutionary financial product came along that improved on what Bitcoin is about to people, there would be a run to sell. When the mining reward drops to nearly nothing and the potential to make money "out of thin air" stops, people might run to sell. If speculators and forex traders find a new toy to play with Bitcoin is toast. Nothing is too big to fail. That's true I suppose. If a new revolutionary financial product came along that was better than bitcoin, people wouldn't use bitcoin. Much the same as how airplanes were revolutionary but if some new revolutionary mode of transportation were to arise, people would use that. Exactly, it's dangerous for people to see Bitcoin as something that's too big to fail because it's still experimental and in beta. People should only invest what they are comfortable losing. There's no federal depositors insurance corp (FDIC) to save you with Bitcoin. When your money's gone, it's gone and no one will give it back. |
|
|
|
|
You'll see Satoshi reveal himself when he starts to sell his massive million coin premine.
|
|
|
|
The Argument from Religion - A Transcendental Argument
Morality can’t be found from a scientific examination of nature. So if morality is not in nature it must be beyond nature – the supernatural.
Where does value come from? It’s not found in the world reduced to scientific facts. Nonetheless, it’s found in the world as we actually experience it. We find value in all sorts of things. We value our friendships, and hopefully at least some of our family members. We value certain books, films, projects, beautiful days, ‘nature,’ and music. So value exists. We experience it. A transcendental argument asks – what must the world be like for this experience to be possible? There must be more to the world than scientific facts. The value of the world that we discover must have its basis in something else.
...
Morality is invisible to science because science cannot see value. Anything invisible to science must either not exist at all, or it must be nonphysical. Our name for the nonphysical aspects of reality is the spiritual, i.e., the divine, transcendent, God.
...
There is remarkable agreement among those at the higher reaches of many world religions. High level Buddhists, Catholic monks, Kabbalists, Sufis, all describe ultimate reality in similar terms and much of what they say can be summed up in the cliché, ‘all is one.’
If all is one, then my treating you badly is really treating myself badly.
...
I disagree with the argument from religion and its transcendental argument. It is my belief that humans are intrinsically moral whilst they are at the same time completely natural. I reject a transcendental argument with its postulate of a non physical transcendence - this is a mere construct, a superfluous idea - without a direct basis in physical existence, which is what I believe is in fact the only existence that is, and reality and all it implies (see wiki for details) as well. The world is as it is in its natural state and this reality make morality possible. There is no other basis to have this moral value we find in humans. I name the nonphysical aspects of reality the emergent qualities of personhood. No need to interject metaphysical (imaginary) constructs here. We are indeed connected to each other in a network, but its all natural. There are others who would not agree with limited "modern" science in this regard - 15 minutes. The Folly of Machine Consciousness (FULL) - Health Ranger
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FPzNAy84OBYEven one cellular organisms display patterns of learned behavior. You don't need a "spirit" to have moral traits - all you need is an example. The idea of me having (being) a "spirit", a consciousness that will continue after death is a fallacy. My consciousness will die with me. Consciousness in the sense of what it contributes to morality is learned behavior. All humans learn by example as they start life at 0 and take it from there on wards. This is the way of nature. Oh yeah, well my penis didn't "learn" how to get this rock hard and long. It has a consciousness of its own because it keeps chasing slutty women around even though I keep trying to tell it how much trouble that behavior ends up causing. Your penis getting rock hard and long is a natural phenomenon, even if it is the case by chasing slutty women. Don't try and fight it - accept the trouble it will cause. Learn to live with it, and merge your consciousness with that of your penis. LOL god made my cock the way it is so it must be perfect. I gotta go, god wants me to merge my penis with a slutty woman. Yes the Celestial Energy is superb in bringing opposites together in a pull stronger than that of gravitation. The slutty women are readying themselves for merging and the horndog men can barely wait to immerse. In the name of the father, the sunshine, and the glory hole, Amen |
|
|
|
Bitcoin is here to stay. Many altcoins will die but never Bitcoin. There is too much money behind it now. If anything happens it will be fixed. Simple as that.
Yes, I think it's already too big to die. Too big to fail like PanAm Airlines? Founded in 1927, the airline was a part of world culture for the better part of the 20th century. It led the industry in international flights and luxury travel. It was also the first airline to make widespread use of jumbo jets, and the first to use an air staff of stewardesses as a PR focal point. Little girls grew up wanting to be PanAm stewardesses, and boys grew up wanting to pilot one of the fleet. Heck, the Beatles arrived to America on one. It carried 6.7 million passengers a week by 1970. It's jets flew to 86 countries on every continent except for Antarctica over a scheduled route network of 81,410 unduplicated miles. It's cabin staff were multilingual college graduates, hired from around the world, frequently with nursing training. At its peak the airline made, in today's dollars, $24 billion a year and had nearly 300,000 employees worldwide (more employees than the daily number of Bitcoin transactions worldwide). Their dead and gone. Too big to fail like Washington Mutual? WaMu was America’s largest Savings and Loan association, the sixth largest bank in the U.S., and the largest bank failure in history. Let that sink in for a minute. After a 10-day run on the bank in late September 2008, with total withdrawals in excess of $16 billion USD–almost 10% of the deposits–the FDIC seized WaMu’s assets. In total, they lost $307 billion dollars in assets (30 times larger than the market cap of Bitcoin). If all holders of Bitcoin for some unexpected reason decided to make a "bank run" against Bitcoin it wouldn't take the 10 days it took WaMu to fail, a few hours maybe. The difference is I see bitcoin as an idea. An idea too big to fail. Bitcoin would be the idea of airline businesses rather than any one specific airline business that could fail. If holders were to for some reason sell all of their coins, people like me would just buy them up at a ridiculous discount like we did after the 2013 crash. The idea doesn't need to fail, it just needs to be improved upon or changed to make people leave Bitcoin. If a new revolutionary financial product came along that improved on what Bitcoin is about to people, there would be a run to sell. When the mining reward drops to nearly nothing and the potential to make money "out of thin air" stops, people might run to sell. If speculators and forex traders find a new toy to play with Bitcoin is toast. Nothing is too big to fail. |
|
|
|
Bitcoin is here to stay. Many altcoins will die but never Bitcoin. There is too much money behind it now. If anything happens it will be fixed. Simple as that.
Yes, I think it's already too big to die. Too big to fail like PanAm Airlines? Founded in 1927, the airline was a part of world culture for the better part of the 20th century. It led the industry in international flights and luxury travel. It was also the first airline to make widespread use of jumbo jets, and the first to use an air staff of stewardesses as a PR focal point. Little girls grew up wanting to be PanAm stewardesses, and boys grew up wanting to pilot one of the fleet. Heck, the Beatles arrived to America on one. It carried 6.7 million passengers a week by 1970. It's jets flew to 86 countries on every continent except for Antarctica over a scheduled route network of 81,410 unduplicated miles. It's cabin staff were multilingual college graduates, hired from around the world, frequently with nursing training. At its peak the airline made, in today's dollars, $24 billion a year and had nearly 300,000 employees worldwide (more employees than the daily number of Bitcoin transactions worldwide). Their dead and gone. Too big to fail like Washington Mutual? WaMu was America’s largest Savings and Loan association, the sixth largest bank in the U.S., and the largest bank failure in history. Let that sink in for a minute. After a 10-day run on the bank in late September 2008, with total withdrawals in excess of $16 billion USD–almost 10% of the deposits–the FDIC seized WaMu’s assets. In total, they lost $307 billion dollars in assets (30 times larger than the market cap of Bitcoin). If all holders of Bitcoin for some unexpected reason decided to make a "bank run" against Bitcoin it wouldn't take the 10 days it took WaMu to fail, a few hours maybe. |
|
|
|
|
A giant 10 foot tall Chinese rooster is going to peck on your nads until you squirt out a Bitcoin.
|
|
|
|
The Argument from Religion - A Transcendental Argument
Morality can’t be found from a scientific examination of nature. So if morality is not in nature it must be beyond nature – the supernatural.
Where does value come from? It’s not found in the world reduced to scientific facts. Nonetheless, it’s found in the world as we actually experience it. We find value in all sorts of things. We value our friendships, and hopefully at least some of our family members. We value certain books, films, projects, beautiful days, ‘nature,’ and music. So value exists. We experience it. A transcendental argument asks – what must the world be like for this experience to be possible? There must be more to the world than scientific facts. The value of the world that we discover must have its basis in something else.
...
Morality is invisible to science because science cannot see value. Anything invisible to science must either not exist at all, or it must be nonphysical. Our name for the nonphysical aspects of reality is the spiritual, i.e., the divine, transcendent, God.
...
There is remarkable agreement among those at the higher reaches of many world religions. High level Buddhists, Catholic monks, Kabbalists, Sufis, all describe ultimate reality in similar terms and much of what they say can be summed up in the cliché, ‘all is one.’
If all is one, then my treating you badly is really treating myself badly.
...
I disagree with the argument from religion and its transcendental argument. It is my belief that humans are intrinsically moral whilst they are at the same time completely natural. I reject a transcendental argument with its postulate of a non physical transcendence - this is a mere construct, a superfluous idea - without a direct basis in physical existence, which is what I believe is in fact the only existence that is, and reality and all it implies (see wiki for details) as well. The world is as it is in its natural state and this reality make morality possible. There is no other basis to have this moral value we find in humans. I name the nonphysical aspects of reality the emergent qualities of personhood. No need to interject metaphysical (imaginary) constructs here. We are indeed connected to each other in a network, but its all natural. There are others who would not agree with limited "modern" science in this regard - 15 minutes. The Folly of Machine Consciousness (FULL) - Health Ranger
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FPzNAy84OBYEven one cellular organisms display patterns of learned behavior. You don't need a "spirit" to have moral traits - all you need is an example. The idea of me having (being) a "spirit", a consciousness that will continue after death is a fallacy. My consciousness will die with me. Consciousness in the sense of what it contributes to morality is learned behavior. All humans learn by example as they start life at 0 and take it from there on wards. This is the way of nature. Oh yeah, well my penis didn't "learn" how to get this rock hard and long. It has a consciousness of its own because it keeps chasing slutty women around even though I keep trying to tell it how much trouble that behavior ends up causing. Your penis getting rock hard and long is a natural phenomenon, even if it is the case by chasing slutty women. Don't try and fight it - accept the trouble it will cause. Learn to live with it, and merge your consciousness with that of your penis. LOL god made my cock the way it is so it must be perfect. I gotta go, god wants me to merge my penis with a slutty woman. |
|
|
|
Nope I definitely don't, the number is probably very small. I know it was a big deal when Overstock started accepting bitcoin and they did a bunch of sales, but apparently they held onto the coins and didn't exchange them instantly so they lost a lot of money, lol. I know a lot of other big companies accept it, and some small local places all over the world do. Obviously on a grand scale the number of people using it will be insignificant, but for bitcoin itself I think the numbers wouldn't be awful so long as more and more people are using it every year.
You're right, if we can convince more people to use Bitcoin everyday like currency then the speculators will get what they want - a continuously rising price that's stable. If Bitcoin had any kind of large daily user economy that was constantly growing it would be almost impossible for the exchange rate to not continuously rise and these $2-3-4 hundred dollar "corrections" to the exchange rate would disappear. It would be devastating to the world economy if the value of the dollar could lose or gain 40-70% overnight. No business in the world would be willing to sell anything for dollars This is an impossible thing Unless Bitcoin gets widely adopted first (but that seems to be even less possible). The price may rise but it can't possibly rise in a steady stable manner. And what's even more nasty in this lie of the land is that volatility will increase faster than the price growth. I was telling that many times, but the recent magnificent rally and no less magnificent crash that followed (and we are likely not done yet, i.e. expect more to come) seem to be proving my point. People are mainly using Bitcoin for hoarding so we are basically stuck between the nether and upper millstone in the case price is set to rise Doesn't volatility decrease over time with bitcoin? Usually smaller holdings with fewer participants are more volatile than larger ones with more participants. With large economies it simply takes more people with more of a stake to move the price by a great deal. Bitcoin is tiny, its exchange rate can be moved a great deal by a few people. When huge amounts of people are buying Bitcoin because it's truly being used as a currency, has a thriving economy and more people are adopting it every day it will increase in stability and stabilize growth. That's basic high school economics. |
|
|
|
75-80% of worlds bitcoin is mined in China! it would be naive saying they can not control the price. Miners are well orgenized and have meetings. What do you think they talk about in this meetins , about Justin Beevers latest hit? no , they talk about how to make best profit.To make best profit they need to control the price and so the market . they dump some of the coins they mined to start panic and then buy them back lower to bring up the price high then selling their bought coins + the mined coins.
This is one of the biggest flaws with bitcoin , POW besides the fact that it can handle 2-3 transactions per second. I love bticoin but it has not the future many think it will have. It did open doors and did open our eyes, it will be replaced as horses were replaced by cars
Is there any data anywhere that breaks down in which country miners are located? Remember, just because Chinese pools represent most of the hashing power in the world, doesn't mean they're all Chinese miners. I live in the USA and I can easily contribute to that number by pointing to a Chinese pool. That is true. You can mine at a pool located anywhere but the pool operator controls the rules you mine under. If you mine at AntPool, F2Pool, BTCChina, BW Mining, and Huobi then you agree to mine 8 mb blocks. Even if you prefer to mine 20 mb blocks you aren't in control of anything, the pool operator is. True indeed, but is it not fair to then say that if you have the ability to mine at any pool, then the miners really are the ones in control as they could just as easily point themselves to different pools than those? That's right but I think that's why most people believe the Chinese are controlling mining. Westerners believe in the decentralization of Bitcoin. If we had the power to do it we would, as you say, point our machines to non Chinese pools. So reasonable deduction would lead us to believe most of the individuals mining for the Chinese pools must live in China and trust the Chinese pools. If we had the power to do so, would we really though at this point in time? I only say that miners could easily point to different pools if need be, as in if these big pools were to collude in some way and it were very obvious to the community what was going on and bitcoin was in grave danger. In that scenario, then I think even miners in China would point to different pools as it's not good for anyone in bitcoin for bitcoin to be destroyed, including all of those big scary Chinese miners, no? Hell, even for pool operators at that point. Oh yeah, we would. I watched it happen with a pool that's no longer around called Deepbit. In fact, I was mining for Deepbit when they neared 50% and watched as people (myself included) moved to Slushes pool, eligius and others to even out mining power. That's the way it's supposed to work. There are several attack vectors that become possible when one group has majority control over Bitcoin mining. Satoshi believed anyone able to gain 51% of the network's computing power would make more money using it to mine legitimately than blocking transactions or double spending so such an attack is unlikely. I believe he couldn't have foreseen the current situation or all possible reasons for an attack. National governments and competing payment processors are likely to care more about protecting themselves than the amount of money they could make mining. What if the Chinese government confiscated the mining pools? Is the Chinese national government the one you would choose to trust if you had to trust a government? |
|
|
|
75-80% of worlds bitcoin is mined in China! it would be naive saying they can not control the price. Miners are well orgenized and have meetings. What do you think they talk about in this meetins , about Justin Beevers latest hit? no , they talk about how to make best profit.To make best profit they need to control the price and so the market . they dump some of the coins they mined to start panic and then buy them back lower to bring up the price high then selling their bought coins + the mined coins.
This is one of the biggest flaws with bitcoin , POW besides the fact that it can handle 2-3 transactions per second. I love bticoin but it has not the future many think it will have. It did open doors and did open our eyes, it will be replaced as horses were replaced by cars
Is there any data anywhere that breaks down in which country miners are located? Remember, just because Chinese pools represent most of the hashing power in the world, doesn't mean they're all Chinese miners. I live in the USA and I can easily contribute to that number by pointing to a Chinese pool. That is true. You can mine at a pool located anywhere but the pool operator controls the rules you mine under. If you mine at AntPool, F2Pool, BTCChina, BW Mining, and Huobi then you agree to mine 8 mb blocks. Even if you prefer to mine 20 mb blocks you aren't in control of anything, the pool operator is. True indeed, but is it not fair to then say that if you have the ability to mine at any pool, then the miners really are the ones in control as they could just as easily point themselves to different pools than those? That's right but I think that's why most people believe the Chinese are controlling mining. Westerners believe in the decentralization of Bitcoin. If we had the power to do it we would, as you say, point our machines to non Chinese pools. So reasonable deduction would lead us to believe most of the individuals mining for the Chinese pools must live in China and trust the Chinese pools. |
|
|
|
No one is "using" Bitcoin. Using implies someone at a store making a purchase. Like this:  I don't think it's fair to say that "no one" is. There are plenty of places that accept bitcoin, just not enough, and certainly not enough people using it. I think there is a number when counting the quantity of anything that becomes so insignificant that it's safe to say zero. That's where I believe daily Bitcoin user spending falls. I see no evidence that a significant number of consumers are spending Bitcoin daily, if you have some please share. Nope I definitely don't, the number is probably very small. I know it was a big deal when Overstock started accepting bitcoin and they did a bunch of sales, but apparently they held onto the coins and didn't exchange them instantly so they lost a lot of money, lol. I know a lot of other big companies accept it, and some small local places all over the world do. Obviously on a grand scale the number of people using it will be insignificant, but for bitcoin itself I think the numbers wouldn't be awful so long as more and more people are using it every year. You're right, if we can convince more people to use Bitcoin everyday like currency then the speculators will get what they want - a continuously rising price that's stable. If Bitcoin had any kind of large daily user economy that was constantly growing it would be almost impossible for the exchange rate to not continuously rise and these $2-3-4 hundred dollar "corrections" to the exchange rate would disappear. It would be devastating to the world economy if the value of the dollar could lose or gain 40-70% overnight. No business in the world would be willing to sell anything for dollars. |
|
|
|
75-80% of worlds bitcoin is mined in China! it would be naive saying they can not control the price. Miners are well orgenized and have meetings. What do you think they talk about in this meetins , about Justin Beevers latest hit? no , they talk about how to make best profit.To make best profit they need to control the price and so the market . they dump some of the coins they mined to start panic and then buy them back lower to bring up the price high then selling their bought coins + the mined coins.
This is one of the biggest flaws with bitcoin , POW besides the fact that it can handle 2-3 transactions per second. I love bticoin but it has not the future many think it will have. It did open doors and did open our eyes, it will be replaced as horses were replaced by cars
Is there any data anywhere that breaks down in which country miners are located? Remember, just because Chinese pools represent most of the hashing power in the world, doesn't mean they're all Chinese miners. I live in the USA and I can easily contribute to that number by pointing to a Chinese pool. That is true. You can mine at a pool located anywhere but the pool operator controls the rules you mine under. If you mine at AntPool, F2Pool, BTCChina, BW Mining, and Huobi then you agree to mine 8 mb blocks. Even if you prefer to mine 20 mb blocks you aren't in control of anything, the pool operator is. |
|
|
|
No one is "using" Bitcoin. Using implies someone at a store making a purchase. Like this: I don't think it's fair to say that "no one" is. There are plenty of places that accept bitcoin, just not enough, and certainly not enough people using it. I think there is a number when counting the quantity of anything that becomes so insignificant that it's safe to say zero. That's where I believe daily Bitcoin user spending falls. I see no evidence that a significant number of consumers are spending Bitcoin daily, if you have some please share. |
|
|
|
Bitcoin has not taxes implemented. Bitcoin has fees for the transactions and those go to the miner, that mind the block your transaction is in. Using bit you will still have to pay taxes, but they are not implemented in and never will be.
yes that is a fact tat still there is no tax on bitcoin, actually mostly taxes are collected by the government and government applement tax on those items which are legalize, as still bitcoin is not a legalize currency therefore there is no rax on bitcoin and when it will become a legal currency then government will be thinking to put tax on it, What in the hell is a fact tat or a government applement tax and how can you be sure there's no rax on bitcoin? Drugs can kill you dude. Be careful. |
|
|
|
The Argument from Religion - A Transcendental Argument
Morality can’t be found from a scientific examination of nature. So if morality is not in nature it must be beyond nature – the supernatural.
Where does value come from? It’s not found in the world reduced to scientific facts. Nonetheless, it’s found in the world as we actually experience it. We find value in all sorts of things. We value our friendships, and hopefully at least some of our family members. We value certain books, films, projects, beautiful days, ‘nature,’ and music. So value exists. We experience it. A transcendental argument asks – what must the world be like for this experience to be possible? There must be more to the world than scientific facts. The value of the world that we discover must have its basis in something else.
...
Morality is invisible to science because science cannot see value. Anything invisible to science must either not exist at all, or it must be nonphysical. Our name for the nonphysical aspects of reality is the spiritual, i.e., the divine, transcendent, God.
...
There is remarkable agreement among those at the higher reaches of many world religions. High level Buddhists, Catholic monks, Kabbalists, Sufis, all describe ultimate reality in similar terms and much of what they say can be summed up in the cliché, ‘all is one.’
If all is one, then my treating you badly is really treating myself badly.
...
I disagree with the argument from religion and its transcendental argument. It is my belief that humans are intrinsically moral whilst they are at the same time completely natural. I reject a transcendental argument with its postulate of a non physical transcendence - this is a mere construct, a superfluous idea - without a direct basis in physical existence, which is what I believe is in fact the only existence that is, and reality and all it implies (see wiki for details) as well. The world is as it is in its natural state and this reality make morality possible. There is no other basis to have this moral value we find in humans. I name the nonphysical aspects of reality the emergent qualities of personhood. No need to interject metaphysical (imaginary) constructs here. We are indeed connected to each other in a network, but its all natural. There are others who would not agree with limited "modern" science in this regard - 15 minutes. The Folly of Machine Consciousness (FULL) - Health Ranger
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FPzNAy84OBYEven one cellular organisms display patterns of learned behavior. You don't need a "spirit" to have moral traits - all you need is an example. The idea of me having (being) a "spirit", a consciousness that will continue after death is a fallacy. My consciousness will die with me. Consciousness in the sense of what it contributes to morality is learned behavior. All humans learn by example as they start life at 0 and take it from there on wards. This is the way of nature. Oh yeah, well my penis didn't "learn" how to get this rock hard and long. It has a consciousness of its own because it keeps chasing slutty women around even though I keep trying to tell it how much trouble that behavior ends up causing. |
|
|
|
No one is "using" Bitcoin. Using implies someone at a store making a purchase. Like this: The daily transactions you find are from exchanges shifting money around:  Money hungry miners getting paid:  And the largest group, speculators buying and selling and miners selling their coin for spendable cash:  And a very few from people buying something on-line:  |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
