Very good.

Sure -- but with Bitcoin being non-inflationary and such, establishing interest rate-based loans is a bit difficult. It would be nice if this bond concept was applied to lending Bitcoins overall.

You may want to reverse the order of the latest articles on your home page.

Faith? I don't believe in such a concept. I rather just say it's up to the individual will of its users. I will go as far as to argue that probability of success cannot be reasonably determined.

I wonder if this will become the standard for Bitcoin loans. This seems a lot simpler than establishing some obscure interest rate.

Nihilism in many forms is just the rejection of what is assumed or considered customary.

Not in the eyes of Richard Stallman. Only GNU forces you to be free.

All it means is that it is profitable for the initiator.

Well, the licenses aren't very free then, eh? Haha.

Hm, as far as I'm concerned, all the MIT license requires is some reference of the said license, which should be possible for the iOS platform. Correct me if I am wrong.

Meh, sounds like a load of pedantry to me. Heh heh. I guess it's good to know specific labels every now and then but in the end it's best to just take the message for what is if you understand it.

It's easy to verify gold. Gold is very soft so drilling a small hole will do the trick. If it goes all the way through with only gold filing produced, it's legitimate. If the drill bit stops in the center, you have a dud.

Truecrypt.

It's the standard in commerical and personal encryption.

  As long as people continue to think that controlling and managing systems is always the best way to achieve an end result, nihilistic philosophies such as libertarianism, anarchism, etc will continue to be treated as anti-intellectual or idiotic.

  I just tried arguing with people that driving higher than the speed limit or eliminating the speed limit altogether would lead to safer travel. If you were to drive faster -- not recklessly -- in your daily commutes you would statistically be subject to less accidents. 1) you would be forced to be aware of your surroundings and 2) people would be more aware of your movement.

  All I received was cognitive dissonance. It was treated as if it were an axiom -- that speed limits were necessary for safety, so I was quickly rebutted. Nearly exiled as the village idiot when my theory has been proven.

  This is how these philosophies are treated. It's going to take some evolution or large enlightenment before people can open up to these sort of things: negating what currently exists for better alternatives.

It seems it is only instinct to build up upon garbage and somehow turn it into a structure that doesn't collapse on itself.

Heh. So, your solution is man should be reduced to nothing but only live to serve the whims and desires of his fellow man and somehow have faith that others will do the same?

In summary, it's voluntary communism that no self-respecting man will submit to. I certainly won't.

It's arbitrary morality. There's no real basis for why man cannot own property.

Not completely true. Your software will be subject to the restrictions of the App Store but nothing is preventing from you licensing it as public domain and free for modification to the highest extent possible.

Sure, it doesn't meet the anal restrictions of the GPLs and GNU but let's be practical. Software can be just as free without them.

Define "Benefit". Is somebody giving you an unsolicited drink freely and then sending you a tab for it at the end of the night really considered a "benefit"?

I have a monopoly over the cells that make my body. What are you going to do about it? I'm coercing you. I'm denying you my body.

Cry some more.

Anarchy has already been tried. Obviously it didn't last long. I don't know why we need any further examples unless there has really been a change.

Satoshi, Gavin, Kiba, etc. guide the direction of the content of this forum and the Bitcoin forum.

They are leaders but what they implement is voluntarily accepted.