Ouch, gentlemen.  |
|
|
|
...interest in Bitcoin increases.
The phrase you're looking for is "morbid fascination." Same shit as rubbernecking at a train wreck. |
|
|
|
...And you've known Mr. Lambchop for ages even though your account is brand new? Not likely.
 |
|
|
|
I got another Bitcoin game:
Guess which exchange promised to reopen in 48hrs and didn't.
You have three guesses, Bitcoiners!
I bet only you can solve this...   Not an acceptable answer, you got two more guesses. |
|
|
|
... betting when your down isnt always the worst thing to do  It is tho. Just because you won the lottery that time, doesn't make buying lottery tickets with your rent money any smarter. |
|
|
|
|
I got another Bitcoin game:
Guess which exchange promised to reopen in 48hrs and didn't.
You have three guesses, Bitcoiners!
|
|
|
|
Whatever, I'll be fine ... What could possibly go wrong? |
|
|
|
How is it you still claim that state "the state's the violence monopolist (by definition)"?
Read "the defining characteristic of the modern state" in Britannica ? Yes. Did you read that if you break into my house, I can take my gun and legally cap your ass? Do you not consider that violence?rse Of course. It is delegated. Because you can do that in the USA because thet violence monopolist there allows you to do so. You got that backwards. The people granted the the state the right to use violence. Lrn 2 history, lrn 2 civilized society, lrn 2 civilization  ... Further, you have once again given me a link to "monopoly on violence. That's the definition of Monopoly On Violence, not the definition of "state" What part of "the defining characteristic" don't you understand ? ... "Defining characteristic" means just that--a characteristic that defines the term. I live in a state which does not have a monopoly on violence, allowing me to defend my person (and, in many states, property) with violence. The people have given their states similar rights. When you try to steal from the state, as you admitted to doing by taking the taxpayer's money and wasting it, the state defends itself by putting your ass in jail. If, at the time the party van arrives at your door to take you to jail, you chose to use violence against the jackbooted thugs, the jackbooted thugs have been granted the right to use violence on you. Fair's fair What is it that you still don't understand? |
|
|
|
How is it you still claim that state "the state's the violence monopolist (by definition)"?
Read "the defining characteristic of the modern state" in Britannica ? Yes. Did you read that if you break into my house, I can take my gun and legally cap your ass? Do you not consider that violence? Further, you have once again given me a link to "monopoly on violence. That's the definition of Monopoly On Violence, not the definition of "state" |
|
|
|
Bitstamp to reopen "soonish". Hang in their guys! They're currently working with their lawyers in San Francisco to figure out how best to deflect the blame!
You really are posting with great vigour and frequency lambchop. Yes inca, I have become all. Now I am become Death, the destroyer of worlds.  |
|
|
|
Gah! I have given you the disambiguation link to "state," here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/StateNot a single instance of the word "violence." Here is the definition of what I think you mean when you say "state," "sovereign state," here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereign_stateAgain, not a single instance of the word "violence." Those are the definitions of "state." It is further conceivable to have a state which does not have a monopoly on violence. Such as a sovereign state where one could protect his person and/or property by violent means. Or where one could get bitchslapped by persons other than a member of teh ruling elite. How is it you still claim that state "the state's the violence monopolist (by definition)"? |
|
|
|
Name that song!
Down we go, down we go, down we go
Down we go, down we go, down we go
Down we go, down we go, down we go
may i ask what are you doing here? long time now i read among others your posts and i decided just to ask what are you doing here? if you can honestly reply i will read your post I'm trading gambling with Bitcoin. And, won't lie, laughing at Bitcoin cultists. Is that so wrong? If you're asking about that post in particular, I offered up a "what's that song" game--a way to while away the time as you watch your slick investment crumble around you |
|
|
|
...
So although you are right that JUST the existence of a wiki page on a concept doesn't prove that that concept is the actually accepted standard, it certainly doesn't prove the opposite (which is your claim: namely that that definition is INSANE by any standard). Moreover, giving you OTHER sources (such as a university study from 2009) where the same view taken as the standard view is challenged, is rather a proof that that view is NOT generally considered insane...
Lol, so you think more sources & modern examples=not insane? Here, buddy: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern_flat_Earth_societiesElaborately annotated  Batshit crazy is batshit crazy You still fail in your logic. No matter how much analogy you can find with flat earth, that is no proof that Weber's ideas are as insane as flat earth, which is YOUR statement... No. You tried to establish that state=violence, "by definition." You quoted Weber's page on wikip to validate them lulz. I pointed out that the wikip page you have linked is not the definition of "state," but Max Weber's definition of "Monopoly on violence." I further pointed out that wikip psge does not validate, but merely delineates Max Weber's view on the subject. I'm not trying to prove that Weber's a nut, merely that having a page on wikip doesn't preclude his being a nutter. Why is this so difficult 4u to grasp? |
|
|
|
Imagine the riches that await.
Buy brothers buy.
Hookers & blow.
Penthouse apartments in NYC, don't miss the train my friends.
You sound desperate. I just closed a small long and wanted to open a short, but I wasn't fast enough, ~300 got dumped before I could act. Don't hesitate my friend, please open a big short. You buy my bitcoin now?  |
|
|
|
|
Name that song!
Down we go, down we go, down we go
Down we go, down we go, down we go
Down we go, down we go, down we go
|
|
|
|
I feel like we could be a week or two away from a huge bull run & epic price rise.
People you need to buy whilst coins are still affordable.
Don't miss dat train.
Yeah, my point exactly! Come on bulls, show some enthusiasm, lookie what's waiting for you!1!  |
|
|
|
...
So although you are right that JUST the existence of a wiki page on a concept doesn't prove that that concept is the actually accepted standard, it certainly doesn't prove the opposite (which is your claim: namely that that definition is INSANE by any standard). Moreover, giving you OTHER sources (such as a university study from 2009) where the same view taken as the standard view is challenged, is rather a proof that that view is NOT generally considered insane...
Lol, so you think more sources & modern examples=not insane? Here, buddy: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern_flat_Earth_societiesElaborately annotated Batshit crazy is batshit crazy |
|
|
|
...
Yes, because I fellate men when I agree with them.
Goddamnit dood, I need to take you out...
Sorry brah, you're a nice boy and all, but you'll have to find another man to "agree with."  |
|
|
|
.@BitChick: Is your reptilian friend still holding your hand re. Bitcoin, or is that pretty much over?
I am still a fan of Risto. I just haven't diverged into the Monero kick he is on though. Who knows, I might be stupid not to play around with it, or other alt coins. Why does it bother you so much that I am part of Risto's fan club? He really helped me when I was a newbie and panicking like crazy after the first price drop. I owe most of my Bitcoin holdings and profits to him. It doesn't bother me, just find cultist hilarious.  |
|
|
|
Brah, not angry, just explaining to you why the goof won't be let into the country after his wacky antics.
And won't lie--chuckling at you a little.
You wish you had Roger Ver's life...but you don't, and you never will. Why? Because you spend your time here being a Debbie Downer-Douchebag. He's a fuck of a lot more interesting of a person than you will ever be. That much I am certain. It's ok buddy, no need to get upset. Get back to sucking Roger's girthy D. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
