"Amplification" was your word, not mine.
Sorry for strawmaning. Let me rephrase my question. Can you prove that wearing wired headphones increases the radiation exposure to your head? If anything, I would expect it to decrease the radiation exposure, because the wire is absorbing the radiation. Funny how taking simple precautions about a subject that has no consensus yet (your words) either way is "retarded" (your words). A rational cautious person might call that inconclusive and err on the side of caution, but I guess that is "retarded". Funny how you like this argument when it suits you, but not the other way around.
A rational person wouldn't randomly protect himself from non-existent dangers. There's no plausible mechanism why non ionizing radiation would damage your brain cells and there's no conclusive evidence that cell phone use is tied to increased instances of cancer. Hell, I can probably argue that a "rational cautious person", according to your logic should wear tinfoil hats while on a trans-Atlantic flight to reduce ionizing radiation exposure. Of course, this is all under the assumption that WIRED HEAPHONES INCREASE YOUR RADIATION EXPOSURE, which you have yet to prove. |
|
|
|
if it's searching, type into google:
site:bitcointalk.org your search term
no time restrictions and more relevant results.
There's a better Google search method on the search page. nice addition! |
|
|
|
|
>15 to 55 Years Ahead Of Schedule
>Ahead Of Schedule
>Schedule
>implying there's a "schedule"
|
|
|
|
It looks like he may be talking about searching? If so quite often I'm looking for something the reason I can't find it is because I'm unsure about what I should be searching for, so I'll need to do 2 or more searches in quick succession to find the proper term. This can be annoying, usually I'll go do something else between searches and it takes quite a while to actually get it done.
if it's searching, type into google: site:bitcointalk.org your search term no time restrictions and more relevant results. |
|
|
|
|
whois says "Created on: 05-May-13"
looking for a quick buck?
|
|
|
|
|
uxsms = DWM. see wikipedia for what it does.
|
|
|
|
|
go to advanced system settings. under performance, set visual effects to "adjust best for performance".
then open task manager, under services, stop service "uxsms"
|
|
|
|
|
PSA: if you're mining bitcoins, you can lower your temps significantly by lowering your memory clocks. Your mining speed will not be affected. In some cases, you will actually gain speed.
|
|
|
|
Really? You should warn about this Eclipse devlopers (which uses SWT library), to these guys http://www.jidesoft.com/ and many other companies that build rich UI in Java. I was referencing java's swing toolkit, which is by far the most popular. |
|
|
|
If good desktop UI is critical - choose Java or .NET
java has really shitty UI. does not match up with system style at all. |
|
|
|
But he admits that he holds bitcoins
opposite of pump and dump?  |
|
|
|
Losses. Traditional financial products have strong consumer protections. If someone makes a fraudulent transaction with your credit card or your bank goes belly-up, there are laws in place to limit consumer losses. Bitcoin has no such safety net. If your Bitcoins are lost or stolen, there’s no intermediary with the power to make you whole. there's nothing preventing you from using an escrow. credit card companies act as a built-in escrow, but it's your responsibility to arrange escrow. Regulation. Recently, the federal agency responsible for combatting money laundering announced new guidelines for virtual currencies. At the time, I argued that this was a positive development for Bitcoin because it signalled the feds were planning to take a relatively-hands off approach, regulating Bitcoin exchanges but leaving the rest of the Bitcoin economy alone.
But that could change. Bitcoin is extremely resistent to government regulation, a factor boosters cite as an argument in its favor. For this reason, Bitcoin has gained a loyal following among those who engage in legally dubious activities such as drug dealing and gambling. As the technology matures and becomes more widely known, more and more people who want to avoid government scrutiny are likely to adopt it. At some point, federal law enforcement agencies may conclude that Bitcoin is a giant money-laundering machine and look for ways to shut it down.
Completely shuttering Bitcoin would be a challenge, but determined federal regulators could at least push it underground. That would greatly diminish its value for legitimate commerce, and so the currency’s value would likely plunge the day the feds announced new regulatory restrictions. FUD. illegal activities isn't specifically limited to bitcoins. drug cartels use bank wires and cash exchanges all the time, but there's no push to ban those. Scaling. The Bitcoin protocol requires that every node in the network download a copy of every Bitcoin transaction that has ever occurred. As Bitcoin has grown more popular, running the “full” Bitcoin client has become more and more resource-intensive. The last time I started up my Bitcoin client, it took several hours to download all the transactions that had occurred in the few weeks since the last time I ran it. false, you can run a lite client. multibit, electrum, and blockchain.info are all options
Lack of applications. Finally, there’s a real question about how useful Bitcoin actually is. We know Bitcoin is popular for drugs and gambling, but does it have uses for more conventional forms of commerce? Bitcoin boosters point to sites like BitcoinStore, which says it did half a million dollars in sales last month. But it’s hard to see how that kind of modest turnover can justify the current value of outstanding Bitcoins, which is now well north of $1 billion.
that's the only legitimate concern. |
|
|
|
|
is it because of this:
10 posts are required to use links
|
|
|
|
So our Avalon #2s won't get shipped until Jul.
batch #2 already started shipping. in fact, people got their rigs 1 or 2 weeks ago. |
|
|
|
Unless you have issues with reading comprehension you will find the only claim I made is that earphones will channel radiation towards your skull. The rest were questions. So yes, you did reaffirm my statement.
HOW DOES THAT EVEN WORK? You know what focuses radiation into a small area? SATELLITE DISHES! I have yet seen a wire that can amplify radio signals. And rightfully so, BECAUSE ANTENNAS DO NOT WORK THAT WAY. YES, antennas can absorb radiation and convert it to electrical energy and vice versa. But that does not mean a random piece of can absorb EM energy from your cell phone, convert it to electrical waves, then magically redirect all the energy to a specific place (your head). According to this logic, your precious faraday cages wouldn't work either, because they would just absorb the radiation, and reboardcast it back. Of course, this is all under the assumption that cell phone radiation is even dangerous. The metal is not just near your head, it is directly connected to a transmitter. I don't know if you are aware but metal will channel EM radiation, yes in all directions, even into your skull because it is in your ear.
no, the 3.5mm jack isn't connected to a transmitter. why the hell would you think that? Hey, if you want to quote studies, I can do that too. In 2006 a large Danish group studied about the connection between mobile phone use and cancer incidence was published. It followed over 420,000 Danish citizens for 20 years and showed no increased risk of cancerThe 13 nation INTERPHONE project – the largest study of its kind ever undertaken – has now been published and did not find a solid link between mobile phones and brain tumours.[21]As you can see, there is no consensus on the dangers of EM radiation. But they, these studies don't matter because the only studies that matter to you are the ones that support your point. You do realize that iarc =/= WHO, right? http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs193/en/A large number of studies have been performed over the last two decades to assess whether mobile phones pose a potential health risk. To date, no adverse health effects have been established as being caused by mobile phone use. |
|
|
|
You claim I say people should use colloidal silver because there are no RCTs, rather my point has always been you are exactly as ignorant as you claim I am for making a conclusion without RCTs. Who is using a strawman? Also please stop using these fallacy arguments until you learn the definitions of them. Your lack of understanding of what they mean is blaring and getting pretty annoying. By the way the fact that he wasn't actually using colloidal silver, but silver salts is not a straw man. I didn't reply because your posts are the same refractory drivel as before.
I can say the same for you. Blah blah blah big phrama... ramble ramble RCTs. |
|
|
|
For medical use? really u can get a script?
even a prescription (script) wouldn't be enough. you need a specific license to import the plant leaf. go to amazon.com Go to amazon.com, It says its legal IDK how
then again, wikipedia mentions that the company had a license to import coca leaves. this implies that a license is needed in the US for importing coca leaves. |
|
|
|
|
to mass send: use the sendmany RPC command, or simply add more recipients in the send dialog.
if i'm still eligible, send it to the address in my signature.
|
|
|
|
For medical use? really u can get a script?
even a prescription (script) wouldn't be enough. you need a specific license to import the plant leaf. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
