That's all wrong. The typical American definition of Socialism.  Socialism originally and first and foremost meant one thing: Workers are to be in control of the means of production.(as opposed to exploitative bosses and capitalists.) It doesn't say anything about a state, about welfare, about equal redistribution of wealth, or the like. The European tradition of Anarchism is in fact socialist, anti-state, anti-capitalist. |
|
|
|
and also talks about how their underground bases have been destroyed.
All in all, it is very good news. The Illuminati has been nearly defeated
by the Pleiadian Satoshi Squad?  |
|
|
|
ich hatte doch da mal eine großtante...  |
|
|
|
interessant, will dann videos sehen.  |
|
|
|
Mittlerweile habe ich die bitcoins auf meinen Ripple-Account bekommen.
Hä? Du kannst keine "bitcoins auf meinem Ripple-Account" haben. Ripple speichert keine Bitcoins. Ripple speichert die Information über IOUs von Bitcoins oder was auch immer. Die Bitcoins liegen immer noch bei Bitstamp. Bei denen ist das nur ein Flag in der Datenbank, dass sie in deinem Ripple-Account verfügbar sind. |
|
|
|
Worth a discussion or two.  http://arxiv.org/abs/1002.2284v2I prove that if markets are weak-form efficient, meaning current prices fully reflect all information available in past prices, then P = NP, meaning every computational problem whose solution can be verified in polynomial time can also be solved in polynomial time. I also prove the converse by showing how we can "program" the market to solve NP-complete problems. Since P probably does not equal NP, markets are probably not efficient. Specifically, markets become increasingly inefficient as the time series lengthens or becomes more frequent. An illustration by way of partitioning the excess returns to momentum strategies based on data availability confirms this prediction.
|
|
|
|
den ganzen abend gleich  |
|
|
|
+3 BeeCoin dann wohl ebenso schätz ich mal, damit die Bilanz stimmt.
|
|
|
|
[....] I used to think it isn't but now I think it indeed is. BITCOIN is the Apocalypse!!! But look up what Apocalypse actually means: "disclosure of knowledge, hidden from humanity in an era dominated by falsehood and misconception". Bitcoin will force all the hidden players to come out and show their true faces. Makes perfect sense to me. |
|
|
|
Gibt's da auch offenes WLAN? Oder eine Möglichkeit, ohne Internet-Verbindung zu zahlen? Ich würde die Möglichkeit sehr gerne nutzen, mal ein paar Bitcoins auszugeben, aber da München für mich "Ausland" ist, möchte ich lieber keine 3G-Roaming-Gebühren zahlen.
joa haben WLAN (Passwort muss man aber fragen soweit ich mich erinnere) |
|
|
|
is that a silver platter he's holding? |
|
|
|
Ja, die Arrgumentation geht in etwa in die Richtung: wir müssen Mord und Totschlag legalisieren damit Freiheitskämpfer nach Artikel 20 Abs. 4 im Falle eines Falles nicht zu kriminalisieren.
löl, was für ein kolossales Strohmannargument. dass man über Falkvinges (gute!) Punkte diskutieren kann, bestreitet ja auch niemand. Aber du hast ihn ja sensationalistisch an den Pranger gestellt (er hat Jehova gesagt!). |
|
|
|
kinda like preaching to the choir presentation |
|
|
|
That would mean you need to perform the same magic as Satoshi did with the blockchain
Ripple or colored coins. |
|
|
|
[ ] Du hast Falkvinges Artikel auch gelesen und sein Argument verstanden und fällst nicht auf welt.de-Populismus rein. @herzmeister:
Ganz so einfach ist es nicht - der Bedarf für Arbeitskraft hat nämlich tatsächlich abgenommen, nur nicht so stark, wie es Ludditen vorausgesehen haben. Warum, denkst du, konnte zunächst die 48-Stunden-Woche und später die 40-Stunden-Woche durchgesetzt werden?
Das bedeutet, dass die Leute aussuchen könnten, ob sie in der gleichen Zeit real mehr verdienen, oder für den gleichen Reallohn weniger Arbeitsstunden absolvieren möchten.
Allerdings gilt das in einem geringeren Maße, als man meinen mag.
|
|
|
|
what's their name on this forum anyway? |
|
|
|
|
I recently wrote this up. Some ideas are similar, but I want to enable real daytrading with real depth rather than OTC only. BTC escrow also may not be necessary.
1. There is a fiat ledger database. It can be a distributed. It only contains internal bookkeeping information. Much like Ripple.
2. Any exchange website can use this database. Such a website can also run in Tor.
3. I'm new, I want to buy bitcoins, I register and log on to one of those exchange websites.
4. It looks and works like any other exchange. First, I have to deposit some fiat.
5. This website does not manage its own bank account however.
6. Instead, it tells me to wire-transfer the money to one or more random guy bank accounts.
7. After a while, the random guys confirm that they received the fiat funds.
8. I now have my fiat displayed in my exchange account.
9. Everything looks and feels just like MtGox and other exchanges. No OTC crap. I can instantly buy and sell BTC for fiat. It's just local bookkeeping and number juggling for the website after all at this point.
10. I've made some gains (or not) and want to cash out some or all of my fiat.
11. The network picks one or more appropriate candidates who want to deposit fiat to buy bitcoins.
12. From their point of view, the random guy of point 6 is now me.
13. I have to send a confirmation to the network, probably manually, that I've received my funds.
14. Mission accomplished.
Remarks:
A) The fiat ledger database contains all the necessary bookkeeping, but should keep private information like bank accounts secret.
B) However, cheaters could be blacklisted and their bank account details could be published.
C) Deposits and withdrawals may take quite a long while depending on current market parameters as there'd essentially be internal waiting lists that would have to be matched. Spectacular price crashes and bubble bursts can have dramatic effects in this regard.
Note: There's no one here who receives money to "not return it". Those who receive fiat are those who want to cash out anyway.
The only problem here is that there would have to be some confirmation mechanism about that fact. There's no public API for wire transfer data AFAIK to automate that. The receiver could complain they didn't receive any money. If they make that believable to the network, they could theoretically receive money twice.
Another problem rather is that those who put money into the system could revoke the transaction later, if their bank allows chargebacks. Here the blacklisting and publishing of their identity could be applied. The network could offer a bounty here, which could be funded by trading fees.
|
|
|
|
ich meine nicht in die DDR-Wikipedia |
|
|
|
auctioning the house again
11 |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
