*conspiracy theory*
I live on this planet, nearer to the poles than you likely are. Here, the so-called "arctic amplification" has drastically changed my climate the past few decades. I don't need a study or government to tell me this.
Hell there are tons of things that are contributing to warming...
General population growth is one of them...
Our goal as humans shouldn't be "how can be find out what EXACTLY is the source of this warming", and actually start agreeing on solutions to reduce our footprint in this planet in ANY WAY WE CAN...
I think a better one (because it captures the degree of uncertainty better) is: Someone tells you there is a substance producing fumes which may or may not be poisonous in the room you are in RIGHT NOW! Are you going to leave the room or ask questions? I bet it depends on who is telling you, and what their evidence is. Please don't misattribute quotes to me. About the substance, what if you can smell the fumes? Governments aren't necessary to tell you the Earth is warming - there is plenty of evidence for that. Because we haven't found any planets nearby that can harbor our pathetic species...
Global warming deniers always try to deny the truth by using ambiguous words.
I tried to lead the discussion towards the actual uncertainties involved in understanding global warming, and you keep trying to turn the discussion towards some vague catastrophic endgame I don't disagree with uncertainty, but this still isn't an issue we should delay. |
|
|
|
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenhouse_gasAh I just calculated it from here. About 300 million tons of methane per year. Still, do we agree CO2 is the main issue and that it's effect is supposed to be indirectly increasing water vapor content? Hell there are tons of things that are contributing to warming... General population growth is one of them... Our goal as humans shouldn't be "how can be find out what EXACTLY is the source of this warming", and actually start agreeing on solutions to reduce our footprint in this planet in ANY WAY WE CAN... Why? Hypothetically, you are in an enclosed room with a substance which is producing fumes which may or may not be poisonous. Do you leave the room, or closely examine the substance? |
|
|
|
<issue resolved>
<issue resolved> |
|
|
|
So you really think (based on carbon dating, and past charts) that we are headed for a cooling period?
Is this what you people really believe? That we are in a "natural" cycle, and that all of the stuff that we have been building on this planet for 200+ years, that emit tons of green house gasses (not just CO2), are not the major contributing factor to this rapid warming we have been seeing?
 http://www.skepticalscience.com/climate-sensitivity-advanced.htmFrom the charts it certainly looks like we are due for a cooling period. What other greenhouse gases besides CO2 are we emitting "tons" of? Methane.
I honestly don't care whether or not CO2 is the cause (in fact, I think others are more important), but ones who deny that the Earth is warming are denying that P != not P.
There is plenty of evidence the earth has warmed the last 100 years, I don't think anyone contests that. What is the cause, what does it mean for humanity, and could we do anything about it if we wanted to? Those are the issues. Whether it is CO2 or not partially answers the last question. The future is simple. A clean renewable energy future that does not rely on archaic & dirty fuels to propel us forward. Anyone trying to sell you anything less than that has a hidden agenda... Right, this will happen one way or the other. The question is whether the timing should be decided by regulatory bodies or markets. Markets will never decide to go with green energy. What if we run out of fossil fuels. How will the markets respond? They will switch. This doesn't mean a regulated market won't make them switch faster. |
|
|
|
After careful review I'm beginning to think that BIP 20, is, in fact better. Firstly, a review of BIP 21 shows how it does not accept the X or exponent parameter, nor the hexadecimal bitcoin system. Although I could care less about the hexadecimal system, the X parameter seems like an excellent idea to more consisely represent units of the user's preference. My opinion on this is that a hybrid system may be optimal here. To avoid decimal bias, a base parameter may be employed to increase flexibility. For the size parameter, why not a system like this: ([0-9A-F]+)([.,|'": ]+)?([0-9A-F]*)(X[0-9A-F]+)?(Y[0-9]+)?
And the computation is psuedocode: If not Group 5:
Set Group 5 to 10
If not Group 4:
Set Group 4 to 8
Set significant as to_decimal(Group 1 from base Group 5) *Group 5^Group 4
If Group 2:
Set insignificant as to_decimal((concatenate "0." and Group 3) from base Group 5) *Group 5^Group 4
Set total as significant + insignificant
Else:
Set total as significant
This allows constructs like 50,00 => 5000000000
50 50 => 5050000000
600X0 => 600
500X0Y6 => 180
1Y16 => 4294967296
30 => 3000000000
40:50 => 4050000000
|
|
|
|
I honestly don't care whether or not CO2 is the cause (in fact, I think others are more important), but ones who deny that the Earth is warming are denying that P != not P.
There is plenty of evidence the earth has warmed the last 100 years, I don't think anyone contests that. What is the cause, what does it mean for humanity, and could we do anything about it if we wanted to? Those are the issues. Whether it is CO2 or not partially answers the last question. The title of this thread and the OP imply that the melting of ice was faked. This is not a reason to dispute the warming of the Earth, and that is the extent I dispute on this issue. |
|
|
|
At the very least, the idea that there is "incontrovertible proof" CO2 is the cause is overblown and likely a political move. The correlation is there for sure, causation not so much.
Global warming deniers always try to deny the truth by using ambiguous words. Idiots always believe what they are told without understanding it. I understand global warming pretty well. I understand that CO2 carbon dioxide has been on the rise since the industrial revolution. I understand that CO2 emissions and Temperatures are correlating with each other . No it certainly isnt rocket science, but what you dont seem to understand (and what Al Gore never told you) is that those CO2 level increases you read as some kind of bible come chronologically AFTER the temperature increases ... historically. Go look THAT up, son. I honestly don't care whether or not CO 2 is the cause (in fact, I think others are more important), but ones who deny that the Earth is warming are denying that P != not P. |
|
|
|
Let me pose a question for you: If I take a Montsanto sunflower seed, grow it, harvest the seeds and plant ten of them the next year, am I stealing from Montsanto?
If I build the exact same car as Ford, spending billions of dollars to manufacture my parts to their specs, did I commit grand theft auto? Cause I am pretty sure that is an implication of your stance... Is it wrong that I do think this is theft? Honda definately has the capability to build a Ford, and I certainly think if they do obtain the blueprints and make one that they have stolen. |
|
|
|
Lost coins are a short-term factor, but long-term they shouldn't be an issue. As hashing power rises, it should become progressively easier to find a particular hash sequence to allow lost coins to be used.
I think you're misinterpreting something here. Some explanations: - Finding a hash (more correctly "solution nonce") does not allow spending of coins. I think you mean "finding of a private key"?
- finding the private key to an address (necessary to recover lost coins or steal coins from someone) is not the same operation as mining. Neither does it somehow happen as a byproduct of mining
- Even if that was the case, it would be like mining at mind-boggling difficulty... just not feasable.
- it would still be magnitudes more profitable to just simply mine for transaction fees (assuming mining subsidy is zero and all bitcoins mined) than to try to find keys to lost (or not-lost) coins. Even with half a million BTC on a single address. Therefore everyone with hardware on his hands will mine, not search the sea-floor for lost coins.
People have a hard time understanding just how big 2^256 is. Say that bitcoin was totally distributed down to the satoshi level. That is, all 21 million coins exist and have been spread around so that each 0.000 000 01 BTC was stored by a different keypair. Got that? 2.1 * 10 15 different key pairs. Your job is to find one of them. On average, how many random numbers do you have to try before you find one? 57896044618658097711785492504343953926634992332820282019728792 You are better off mining. Imagine that every person in the world generates an address every month, which is preety conservative. Because RIPLIB160 offers 160 bits of entropy, a single address has 2^160 possible values at maximum. This means that after 1461501637330902918203684832716283019655932542976 (2^160) addresses are generated, the next address is guarenteed to be a collision. Assume that thus far, 0 addresses have been generated and the world's population is 7 billion. Assume the world's population increases by 1% every year. Therefore, the formula for amount of addresses generated each year is: And the forumla for cumalative addresses, by summation of a power series, is: 8.4*10^10 * (100 * 1.01^year - 100)
It is easy to verify that in 8155 years, a collision will occur even without anyone trying to make one. This post is tounge-in-cheek, please do not try to correct it. There is an assumption in here I would never under normal circumstances make, so it is not necessary to point out the major flaws in this analysis. Let the other people figure it out for themselves. |
|
|
|
I have no idea what BIP16 is? Has it been tested before??
tested for months now. and beware, there might be a bip18, too. i also hope the devs will unite again and push this rather sooner than delaying this again for 6 months. This is such FUD from the Bitcoin developers. "Tested for months now", oh really? What about public support for it, maybe that has gone on for "months now"? I hope the devs push that as late as possible, after the public has had a chance to vocalize about the damage this will do to the decentralization and union of Bitcoin. |
|
|
|
2. Needle  3) expire 4. Engage |
|
|
|
It's simple logic. Why would I spend money today if it'll be worth twice as much tomorrow? I'll hold out and spend money only when absolutely necessary, and so will most other people. This would lead to economic restriction, lack of consumer spending, and ultimately, higher prices on your everyday goods. We'd end up spending the same money on fewer goods, effectively lowering the purchasing power of our currency. You are right this definitely is a simple and also fallacious logic. The Bitcoin economy has so far shown the complete opposite of your simple logic! The Bitcoin economy has thus far been hyperinflationary by a money supply perspective. In game theory, one defines utility as the value of an asset such that two assets worth the same as one have the sum of utility same as the utility of the one. Under this simplified definition, money has current utility equal to the greatest utility that can be purchased with it. If deflationary economies are common, this does encourage postponing postponable spends. It's simple logic. Why would I spend money today if it'll be worth twice as much tomorrow? I'll hold out and spend money only when absolutely necessary, and so will most other people. This would lead to economic restriction, lack of consumer spending, and ultimately, higher prices on your everyday goods. We'd end up spending the same money on fewer goods, effectively lowering the purchasing power of our currency. Economically, a reduced demand leads not to higher prices but to lower ones. This pseudo-deflationary-spiral (or QDS, as I like to refer to it as) increases the purchasing power of currency. |
|
|
|
to go from no fee to their small 0.65% fee when the gox has an even smaller small starting fee of 0.6% on a sliding downward scale of smallness strikes me as loony
To have a 0.0% fee strikes me as loony. |
|
|
|
|
When trying to access any page that doesn't exist, the server returns 500 Internal Server Error. This is not a helpful error! I suggest this be changed to a 404 Not Found, consistant with most of the rest of the web.
|
|
|
|
Why is the Bitcoin value USD/EUR going down. Who is dumping there Bitcoins? Are it the miners, who keep mining without any demand for Bitcoins? Or is it a big invester selling out after the buying a crap load of them in early Jan?
Big investers are not likely to sell out at a lower price, since people who have money are also generally people who can earn money. The currently most popular theory to this is the failure of the Manipulator to continue manipulating the price, so the market will gradually fall without any new demand. Edward50 has performed some analysis of the Manipulator model. Some forum members, including myself, argue that this is merely a scheduled correction to the unsustainable triple top we had recently, and the speculators are adjusting. In this model, the Manipulator plays a smaller or non-existent role. A small but vocal minority, often refered to as "permabulls", continue to argue that this is a perfect oppertunity to buy in and that the single digits are irrational based on fundamentals. Technomage has performed some analysis on this. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
