And this is supposed to be the so-called president.

Just curious; if a payment had just one confirmation, what are the odds that it isn't legitimate?

I don't understand; if the project is successful, shouldn't the funds go to the project head?

Joke's on her; she still can't pee standing up!

I disagree.  The problem with funding education and SS is that it requires tax.  If state-offered education was voluntary, and funded voluntarily, why would we need state-education?  In this case, it would make more sense for all schools to simply be private.  On SS, same issue; it's not voluntary.  If both those things were privately run and completely up to the individual to participate in, I would be perfectly a-okay with them.

The anarchism commonly referred to here is anarchism of government, not anarchism of economy.  AFAIK (someone point me in the right direction if I'm wrong), there are many forms of economy when paired to anarchism, but the only one which seems to work without government intervention is capitalism, 100% free market.  I know there's anarcho-communism, but I don't see how that could ever possibly work.  Communism requires a strong tie to the nation and an unnatural willingness to work for the good of all mankind, essentially, being a cog in a machine, but this seems to be the seedling which begets a large national government.  In other words, communism = sheeple, and sheeple love big government to make all decisions while they toil away.  The smallest government will always become the largest.  There's no way to store one's wealth; you could work a lot, or you could work a little, but the work you put in isn't always shown.  Plus, having to distribute your work is a pain to part with, knowing the people it will go to may or may not be working.  It works great if everyone's on board, but there's no backlash if you're not.  Capitalism, OTOH, allows you to store your work and save it for later; if you stop working, it's because you did the work required to do so.  If somebody says they don't want to chip in, they shouldn't be rewarded with socialism; instead, they'd rely on family, and it then becomes a private problem, AS IT SHOULD BE A PRIVATE PROBLEM.  Nothing against those who legitimately can't work, but the individual should not be a public matter.  Capitalism in itself has no room for socialism; the moment such a system was introduced, capitalism ceased to exist in its natural form.

However, the big but:  Neither of these systems know what to do when work becomes automated.  Curious; if corporatism wasn't a thing, and big government was gone, where does that leave machinery?  To some extent, it makes our jobs easier.  To the greatest extent, it eliminates the need for us to work.  I think of slave labor back in the 1800's; except now, the slave is hyper-efficient, runs on electricity, can't rebel, and has no emotion.

I never really had one, until I found this site.  I believe the correct term is libertarian.  But hopefully, in the future, people won't consider a political role to have an effect on an entire populace.  Much like religion is nothing like a person's name, a political standing should be nothing like a person's gender.  They're abstractions; rules you have to play with in a statist society who values such things as division of the masses.  Maybe one day we'll all just be people; not libertarian, or American, or rich or poor, but people.

I sold all my Bitcoin at $120 and set a buy order at $0.03

See you in a year, suckers

Is your shift key busted or what's the problem?

Good point.  Not to mention, the Coke machine would have to be connected to the Internet.  However, if we get to a point where cheap WiFi can be located everywhere, I wouldn't complain.

The older folk may buy into this drivel, but anyone born around computers knows an "anonymous algorithm" translates into "computers are making our lives easier."  Instead of having a human make poor decisions, we now have computers making hard decisions set by humans, which can't be changed because one single human up and changed his mind.  Your computer isn't going to load software against your will because it's bored; we understand this.  Trusting a computer to be fair in the creation of money should come as a pro when compared to Bernanke who, despite most of us displeased with all this money he's printing off, will not stop doing it.  Perhaps this is why the article writer decided not to use America as the counter (because it would've worked marvelously for a currency which comes out of a banker's ass,) and opted for the yen instead; most of us don't know what's going on in Japan and what's going on with the yen, thereby comparing Bitcoin to something foreign that you're not supposed to understand--mark my words, this was not an oversight.

If those same elites made changes to the Bitcoin protocol, you have every option to not use those changes (which would undoubtedly create a hard-fork.)  Their only option is to make these changes, without ever telling you about them, and somehow keeping our current BTC devs quiet (either through unlawful imprisonment or lots of money, the latter of which may not work.)

IF the elites attempted to force a "tax-enabling" client, just don't use it.  You will be a-okay.

So Bitcoin can't be used to make pseudo-anonymous payments over the Internet in a timely manner, and it can't act as a store of wealth, either?  Can a service (that literally nothing else offers as well and in one package) not be valuable?  When you call a maid over to clean your house, do you not pay her because you can never own her, nor short her?

The idea that "someone else will make one, so it might as well be us" doesn't fly.  A central bank is not required, and if someone attempts to create one, I will not consider it a legitimate construct.  There is no "decentralized central bank".  It would be a non-entity.  We need to make a point that these institutions, the channeling of all power through a few heads, is what got us into this mess in the first place.  The Feds fucked up.  Let's not clone their shit plan so we can fuck up all over again.

No.

MAI WHY U KEEP NECROING ALL THESE OLD THREADS?

Will the NWO have pizza?

What is this, 2001?

The only hacks are the talking heads.

Good call   Fixed it