I forgot I removed the default trust as there are untrustworthy people on the list
Really ? I have 4 people in my trust list, with depth=0. And he's red to me.  Then one of those people gave him negative trust. I guess none of Zack's trusted members did. Although the scammer tag should give it away. |
|
|
|
SWC poker pokerbrat123
Hi Joey, you're not really trying very hard anymore. Please leave. Yet he still manages to get people. |
|
|
|
|
From the way you describe it, it seems as though the NAP is just common sense. I guess I follow it anyways. I don't go around picking fights.
Also, I'm pretty sure that you cannot go to prison for not paying taxes. They may take the clothes off your back until you pay it, but if you have nothing to take they can't do anything.
|
|
|
|
I can buy a safe, and keep all my paper money there. Similarly, I can get a bitcoin wallet and put all my bitcoins there.
And lets expand on this thought process a little bit... What can you do with the bitcoins from your own home that you can't do with fiat? Send it? I can drive to someone's house and give them fiat too, and they can put it in their safe. |
|
|
|
We'll I'm not sure on what to expect, but my faucet will be the highest paying bitcoin faucet on the web. Just enter an address and boom, .0001 BTC every 24 hours.
so is newbcoin dead then? doesn't look like a payment has been made in 2 days. It isn't dead, there was an error in the code, keep submitting your address, you will get what you have earned. thanks, good to hear. btw, the glados faucet beats your proposed prize value. it gives out between .0001-.00045 with equal odds. but i'm looking forward to yours since the glados faucet requires an inputs.io wallet, meaning we have to eat the withdrawal fee if we want to transfer outside of the wallet. That doesn't work for me. It keeps saying "You have not entered your email address!" |
|
|
|
The country is in turmoil. Maybe when they're not in a constant state of civil war and unrest they can think about bitcoins.
To say that there is civil war is a stretch. I'd liken their situation with Pakistan or Iraq, they both have somewhat functioning governments but still have militants or rebels trying to control parts of the country. The conflict in Somalia is literally called "The Somalian Civil War". Here is a current map of all of the factions (rather large so I'm just linking): http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/9f/Somalia_map_states_regions_districts.pngAs you can see, Somalia's situation is far worse than Pakistan or Iraq. |
|
|
|
|
Ironic seeing as Anonymous took credit for DDOS Freedom Hosting for the exact same reason...
|
|
|
|
Anyone can run their own bank with fiat, too.
No they can't.. Yes I can. I can buy a safe, and keep all my paper money there. Similarly, I can get a bitcoin wallet and put all my bitcoins there. |
|
|
|
|
The country is in turmoil. Maybe when they're not in a constant state of civil war and unrest they can think about bitcoins.
|
|
|
|
|
While I don't think the value would change solely because of the decimal places I think that it would allow more people to get into bitcoins, which might in turn lead to greater value.
|
|
|
|
Besides, at the rate the world is going, eventually stuff like food and air may need to be bought and sold on the black market.
Yeah, that's why I've been hording air right now. My entire house is filled to the brim with it. I even filled my car with it, and I have a secret compartment within my lungs (don't tell anyone!) I know, I'm so silly. Who in their right mind would pay for air? That would be like paying for water. It just falls from the sky! Oceans, lakes, and streams are filled with it! Like 60% of my body is actually water.  Some people already pay for clean air, you say? Those crazy bastards. http://www.air-purifier-ratings.org/index.htmlCrazy indeed. I'm not going to waste my money on an air purifier. |
|
|
|
How are they going to regulate a million banks all over the world? Anyone with moderate computer skills can run their own bank, thanks to Armory. They can be started up at next to no cost anywhere for any reason in less than day.
So really, I don't know what people are concerned about with "regulation".
All the US government can do is make it harder to integrate their legacy system with Bitcoins, but being as the end goal is to use Bitcoins exclusively, regulation is no more than a road-bump (And a great opportunity for other countries of the world.)
I'm glad the judge had the common sense to call Bitcoins a currency.
Anyone can run their own bank with fiat, too. It doesn't mean that fiat can't be regulated. |
|
|
|
I'm pretty sure there are companies who look for various ways to advertise. Although I doubt they will pay in Bitcoin.  Yeah. I actually found a few in my area. I could even advertise for the Toyota dealership my car originally came from. But they'll pay slave wages for that. |
|
|
|
You people should be mad, that these people are allowed to try again. Why are they given a tag, instead of being IP banned, and lessening the chance that these people will be able to create a new account, and try again?
Because even if he got IP banned he can just come back with a new IP. And there are more scammers than just Joey. In fact, Joey's one of the most obvious ones. Of course, if people refused to do transactions with untrusted members except through escrow, there would be no problems. Instead it's people desperate for a few extra bucks and some rep that allow scams to continue. Yes man, its all my fault. If they stopped getting money, they would stop trying. Because, obviously, they have much more important things going on in life, then trying to scam people out of $10. I made a mistake, I learned. Move on, and stop being such a dick about it. You ban one IP, they come back, you ban another, and another. Even HidemyIP, does not have unlimited number of IP's, it has a list of proxy servers. Infact, since 99% of these scammer, probably use HideMyIP, once all the proxies are banned, your killing most of them off I wasn't even going to say anything more but you double posted and it went to the top of my unread. And couldn't they use TorBrower? |
|
|
|
As we noted in another thread, we are in the process of opening a physical Bitcoin acquiring / redemption centre. You will be able to walk in and sell your coins for cash or trade them for precious metals. Alternatively, you can purchase or trade for Bitcoins. We are doing this because we believe that no system that relies upon traditional banking is sustainable.
Having started many online banking companies in the late 90's and early 00's that focused on mass payments in the online gaming field, we quickly learned that banks are not your friends when it comes to quasi-banking services. Once you became too successful, it was game over. At one point in 2003 we were clearing 10,000 checks daily through an HSBC branch. After a couple of months and several bank audits, we received the dreaded "We are sorry to inform you" letter. The same occurred at all of the major Canadian banks, credit unions and trusts. That was more than 8 years ago when banks were not as sophisticated as they are today to monitor irregular activity.
As for US banks, forget about them. Just try receiving wire or cash deposit payments into your account from multiple sources. We had over 5000 individuals holding deposit slips to our accounts at Chase and BofA. Individuals would walk into a branch with a completed deposit slip and make a deposit. Within weeks all accounts were shut down. Especially personal accounts which receive several deposits (3 or more) from unrelated sources are flagged for audit. The primary goal of the bank is to avoid personal accounts being operated as business accounts.
What other thread? |
|
|
|
You people should be mad, that these people are allowed to try again. Why are they given a tag, instead of being IP banned, and lessening the chance that these people will be able to create a new account, and try again?
Because even if he got IP banned he can just come back with a new IP. And there are more scammers than just Joey. In fact, Joey's one of the most obvious ones. Of course, if people refused to do transactions with untrusted members except through escrow, there would be no problems. Instead it's people desperate for a few extra bucks and some rep that allow scams to continue. |
|
|
|
You were confusing non-aggression principle (basically, "I will not be the first to initiate force") with nonviolence (basically, "I will not be violent, no matter what, period). NAP doesn't mean that no violence will ever happen.
Well, quite frankly I don't see the point of it then. Whenever someone threatens your person or property. Who decides when your person or property is "threatened"? It seems as though it would be very subjective. And what decides the limit of your retaliation. If someone stabs me, can I follow the NAP and shoot them? Or is that initiating greater aggression? If I shoot at the person, do they now have the right to kill me? Is their earlier violence justified because I encouraged greater violence? It's not so much self defense v.s. aggression, it's who initiated the aggression. As long as someone continues to threaten your life, they are continuing to initiate aggression. You can shoot them in defense, but you can also defend yourself by shooting their gun hand, by sabotaging their weapons, by hiring security to keep them away from you, or even asking why they believe you owe them your life and attempting to resolve the conflict without violence. So if it's all about who initiated the aggression, what is "initiation" defined as? If someone insults me, is that an "initiation"? If someone threatens to kill me, but doesn't actually go through with it, can I kill them in "self defense"? Same as above, it's not nonviolence, it's who initiated force. If the defender killed the attacker, he is still only responding to the initiation of force, and is still following the NAP. The only question is whether such extreme defense was justified, or if the situation could have been resolved more amicably (e.g. if the attacker was just drunk and waving a gun around, but was not serious about wanting to kill someone) Well that question about whether or not it's justified is what bugs me. It seems as though there's really no set definition for the NAP. It basically says don't attack people, but it's fine to kill as many people as you want as long as they threatened you in some way. You can't start a fight, but you sure can finish it. Rabid dogs, and anyone who believe they have a right to your property and life, and are willing to use force to obtain it. Forcing you to pay taxes or fees for things you don't need or wasn't, at the threat of being arrested, imprisoned, or shot, is considered initiation of force in NAP. There's no debtors prisons anymore. If you don't pay taxes, then you don't get the benefits of paying them. You won't be shot... But if the simple "threat" of imprisonment is enough to warrant retaliation, does that mean that I can steal from someone and then when the police come, I can kill them because they threatened to imprison me? And if paying taxes is a threat under the NAP, does that mean I can go around killing government workers? For a "non-aggression" philosophy it seems rather harsh... |
|
|
|
The US exported $8,760,000,000 worth of military equipment last year. This is compared to the $10+ billion worth of military-grade soybeans exported to China alone. The US truly is an exporter of death and destruction, but mostly soybeans.
Does that include military equipment that explodes on delivery? No, it doesn't. Those soybeans however are deadly. |
|
|
|
Your ability to press a single button on a calculator neither impresses me nor convinces me that you know what that button does.
Standard deviation is calculated by the square root of the average of the squared differences of the mean. And I've been using my iphone, which doesnt have a standard deviation button as far as I know. Your ability to press the correct button on your calculator doesn't impress me either. The standard deviation of this population is actually 78.71. Actually, I did do the standard deviation. 78.71 is the population standard deviation. But that number is what should be used, so thank you for correcting my mistake, even if you did it in a condescending way. That is not a sample. A sample is a subset of the population. That means that every member of the sample must also be a member of the population. Let's start by taking the superset of your group and the original population: 1, 2, 80, 90, 100, 110, 120, 130, 299, 300. The standard deviation is 97.74. Ok, my mistake. I should not have added numbers. Now, my point, in case your reading skills are as bad as your math skills, was that the forum contains fewer near-average members. Of course the standard deviation is going to be lower if you remove the extremes but don't remove the near-average values. So let's try that: 2, 80, 90, 120, 130, 299. We've removed the minimum and maximum, and also a couple near the average. The standard deviation of this sample is 98.56, higher than the population. It is higher than the population despite having a smaller range because it has fewer near-average members. If you can't understand that, then there's no hope for you. Why do you choose which numbers are removed? Say the entire population of Earth is 10 people: 1, 2, 80, 90, 100, 110, 120, 130, 299, 300. Population Standard Deviation is 97.74, like you said. The Standard Deviation is 103.02. 8 people use bitcoin talk. The genius and idiot don't. 2, 80, 90, 100, 110, 120, 130, 299. Population Standard Deviation (even though it should be disregarded) is 78.23 . Standard Deviation is 83.63 . Both are lower, which is to be expected. Why would you remove the average members? It's cool that you think that bitcointalk has "fewer near-average members", but that's unrealistic. There will be people on bitcointalk with average IQs, and they will make up the majority of the population. There will not be people with IQs of 1 or 300. In fact, if anything, it makes sense to remove the 2 and 299 as well. Of course, even if you don't agree with that don't call me an idiot because I am doing the exact same thing that you are doing- removing numbers to suit our arguments. But the numbers I remove actually make sense. There are average members on bitcointalk. There are not people with IQs of 1 or 300, so those should be removed. Just out of curiosity, where did you get this idea that a smaller range necessarily implies a lower standard deviation? Are schools in the U.S. really that bad? The old "US schools suck".Too I actually took a IB course in high school because my school didn't offer American courses at higher levels. Blame Europe. Here's the thing. If I have 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 as my population numbers I have a range of 4, and a population standard deviation of 1.41 . If I want to change the range, I have to remove the outliers. If I remove the middle numbers like you did that does jack shit to the range. So if I remove 1, so that my range is 3, I have a new standard deviation (not population) of 1.29. You're right, a smaller range does not necessarily imply a smaller standard deviation. But if the only numbers you remove are outliers so that you can change the range (which would make sense in bitcointalk) then the standard deviation will go down. Also, stop being so condescending. Really? Your first set of numbers were pulled out of your ass. You picked easy to calculate numbers that were irrelevant just to make a point. I used numbers that make some sense, and you called me out for simple mistakes. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
