|
I suspect that it is nothing more than a publicity stunt.
|
|
|
|
^^^ There's atmospheric refraction on top of perspective and convergence, you're just being a fucking idiot.
As I wrote before, your understanding of the effect of refraction is backwards. Atmospheric refraction makes an object appear higher, and not lower as you suggest. A better explanation would be that a mirage obscures the bottom of the object. |
|
|
|
The unaided 20/20 human eye will see the horizon about 3 miles away. This limit is where objects in the distance get too small to see, it's where they put the curve i.e. the drop-off that ships sail up, over and behind.
Clearly it is possible to see things that are farther than 3 miles away with the unaided 20/20 eye -- mountains, buildings, airplanes, trees, very large rocks, etc. That can't be the reason that the horizon is said to be 3 miles away. You need a better argument. |
|
|
|
...
In order to protect against abusing, you need to make at least one minimum deposit of 0.01 BTC or 0.40 ETH. After receiving the 1st confirmation from the blockchain/ethereum networks, your account will be unlocked and you will be available to withdraw your funds.
...
It is a very common scam. |
|
|
|
|
I haven't been keeping up with hash rates, but I wouldn't be surprised if a GPU is 50 - 100 times faster than a CPU. Given that an RPi is pretty wimpy, my guess is that it would take 100 - 200 Rpis to match a GPU.
|
|
|
|
How do explain the fact that you can only see the tops of the buildings? Why can't you see the entire buildings? Could it be that the view is blocked by a curved Earth?
If we were on a ball NONE of the buildings would be visible. All would be obstructed by your imaginary "curve of the earth". Ok fine. Point made. Now can you please answer my question? |
|
|
|
|
A "re-org" simply means switching to a different (though equally valid) version of the block chain. "Roll-back" is another word for "undo". I have never heard the term "re-roll".
In general, there are occasional splits (or "branches") in the block chain. This happens when two miners mine a block at about the same time. The two miners publish their blocks, and because miners generally adopt the first block they receive, some miners adopt one block and other miners adopt the other block.
The rule is that the "longest" chain is the "main" chain. In this case, both versions of the chain are the same length, but a miner will mine a block on one of the branches at some point, making it the longest chain. All of the miners that were mining on the other branch must switch to the longest chain. This switch is called a "re-org".
Re-orgs happen occasionally, and are not a big deal if it only involves one or two blocks. In the Binance case, miners would create a branch of the block chain containing all of the transactions since the hacker's transaction, but excluding the hacker's transaction. If enough miners jumped on board, the new branch would become the longest chain in a day or two. The re-org would be huge (more than 100 blocks) and would be very disruptive.
Normally, a large re-org could never happen because it would cost miners a fortune to re-do that many blocks. However, Binance could pay for the re-org by giving miners the stolen 7000 BTC (70 BTC per block vs. 12.5 BTC per block).
|
|
|
|
Gday all, Some time ago, I read an interesting article that showed how each of the BTC bubbles followed a similar well-known pattern : https://blogs-images.forbes.com/jessecolombo/files/2014/02/stages_bubble.pngThe point was, each BTC peak was way higher than the previous one - like orders of magnitude higher. IIRC: First peak went to a few cents, 2nd peak went to a few dollars, 3rd peak was quite a few dollars, last peak was $20,000. But each followed the same bubble pattern, just at different scales. I cannot seem to find it now, hoping some knowledgeable reader can recall that specific article ? Maybe that's why some posters predict the next peak ? There are many such articles. Many people have noted that bubbles, whether in cryptocurrencies, stocks, or houses, follow a similar pattern. However, keep in mind the circular reasoning: bubbles follow the same pattern because we use the pattern to identify them as bubbles. |
|
|
|
^^^ The horizon line is comprised of objects on the plain converging at your/camera center of vision, this central point called the vanishing point is where objects are too small to be resolved and vanish (spread out into a line for all objects in the field of view). If the viewers perspective is raised then the viewing angle is increased and objects appear taller and thus can be resolved pushing the vanishing point further off into the distance.
Now what's going on in that image is the atmosphere that's full of atomized water droplets forms a compound magnifying lens and the buildings that normally would be too small to resolve are greatly enlarged so that they are visible, however their vertical position remains unchanged and the bottoms get masked off by the much closer vanishing point forming the horizon in front of the greatly enlarged buildings. Everything below the horizon line is physical water/land and forms an opaque barrier.
I still don't understand how the water can block the bottom of the building on a flat earth because the water is below the building and there is nothing between me and the bottom of the building, no matter how far away it is. |
|
|
|
No, I know money is a good invention. I want you to explain why I should trade me work for another mans money supply? Why not trade my own money supply for his money supply?
The basic function of money: You trade your work for someone else's money. Someone else trades their work for your money. It eliminates the costs of bartering. What I am missing here? You feel it does not matter because You don`t care for your species or for future generations, it is only about you I guess? No I don`t did make my own clothes or house, but I traded my food supply for them and built 50 houses.
You haven't even stated the problem of not being able to mine. I feel it doesn't matter because there are other more effective ways of obtaining money. |
|
|
|
Ok let us assume you can also gain it from trading (working,or giving up something you own)
Why am I trading for a another mans supply?
You want me to explain why money is a useful invention? https://www.google.com/search?q=why+is+money+a+useful+inventionWhy did the older generations get to mine it and I did not
-kids in 20 years
I feel that it doesn't matter. You own lots of things that you didn't produce. Do you mine the gold that you own? Did you grow your food or make your clothes or build your house? |
|
|
|
|
Take a look at NameCoin. It was the first altcoin.
|
|
|
|
The simulation assumes the only way to get money is to mine it or to take it from someone else. In reality, there are other ways to get it such as trading. |
|
|
|
Ok, I can accept that. But then what is it about the horizon line that cuts off the bottoms of buildings? Why does your picture not show this effect? At what point are the rails and the poles in the picture "cut off by the horizon". |
|
|
|
^^^ There's water droplets in the air that cause a magnification to occur and the bottoms of the enlarged buildings are cut off by the horizon. https://i.imgur.com/pPbGv12.jpgWhat horizon? There is no horizon on a flat earth. According to FE, you could see the Antarctic Ice Wall from the east and west coasts of the U.S if the air didn't get in the way, though it would appear very low due to perspective. |
|
|
|
There are days when the effect of refraction is minimized maximized and you can see for hundreds of miles with an infrared camera and zoom lens...
FTFY Again, you have the effect of refraction backwards. Atmospheric refraction causes objects to appear higher than they are, regardless of flat earth or globe earth. On a globe earth, refraction can make things that are below the horizon appear above the horizon. Anyway, I don't think refraction would have any effect on the visibility of objects on a flat earth. Why does it? Also as a side note, I think some people misunderstand what a zoom (or more precisely, a telephoto) lens does. It doesn't allow you to see farther. Rather, it just magnifies the image. Even though they are the same distance away, you don't need a telescope to see the moon but you need a telescope to see a small feature on the moon. |
|
|
|
How do explain the fact that you can only see the tops of the buildings? Why can't you see the entire buildings? Could it be that the view is blocked by a curved Earth? |
|
|
|
Nothing should be seen from an old business man who accustomed himself with the outdated analogistic method of business, they are very behind the digitalistic world, so, nothing far from this should be expected from them. Bitcoin is not a gambling device rather is a digital currency with the sole aim of been a payment method as an alternative to fiat to those who need freedom and transparency.
But your signature promotes a cryptocurrency gambling site! |
|
|
|
I first heard about bitcoin from Max Keiser on RT in 2009
I always thought his first mention of Bitcoin was in 2013 when he outed himself as a "Bitcoin millionaire". Do you remember which episode it was in 2009? |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
