|
Would be neat seeing a large drone get swarmed by a small flock of quadcopters, like little birds trying to defend their home from a hawk. Though might get messy down below.
|
|
|
|
It only goes to show that most people don't care about anything but existing. They've been conditioned into thinking that working and providing for their family is all there is. And outside of that they just seek entertainment, they're not interested in political stuff. That's difficult - and difficult - people don't like that.
These are the same masses that are duped by huge PR campaigns and political campaigns before elections.
This here is pretty much why I agree with the other thread, that compares Bitcoin to Galt's Gulch from Atlas Shrug, and think that the best, and possibly only, option for us is to just slowly migrate into bitcoin by ourselves, away from the established banking and political system, and leave everyone to their own stupid shit. Easy enough when BTC aren't taxed, aren't restricted, and are easy enough to take with you to other countries and trade for cash there. |
|
|
|
It's worse than that. Psy has a new video out that in my opinion sucks,
Link? |
|
|
|
We are totally transparent, the interest calc is correct, the only issue is that you want to discount the interest rate in case of early payments and we do not do that.
We can implement that feature, some institutions do not allow early payments, others charge a penalty because it lowers the roi of investors and some allow it, it's really a matter of choice. You can submit this feature request at our uservoice feedback widget, perhaps we can make this optional and let the borrower choose, since it will affect investor returns.
You should implement that feature as default, or at least give a big warning that interest is calculated per pay period, as opposed to daily, and thus paying early will not change the interest owed. The reason is because that's not really ROI any more, since the investment part was returned. The idea is that when someone pays early, you can put that money into another loan and maintain your ROI with a new investment, as opposed to getting extra return from someone who pre-paid. |
|
|
|
I'm fluent in Russian. I can vouch for the subtitle translations to be accurate. |
|
|
|
|
Couldn't they have just dumped some boxes of tea into the harbor like proper gentlemen? This is getting ridiculous!
|
|
|
|
It's not the size that matters, it's how you use lose it.
FTFY  |
|
|
|
I personally don't. I'm just hoping to nip that whole, "Waaah, he paid a lower number than I did because the value increased, and that's not fair!" foolishness in the bud before it becomes too widespread.
It's also ironichypocritical to discuss deflation as being very unfair on a forum about a deflationary currency.
Madam, you don't seem to make any sense at all. That's Countess to you, sir. Do explain what it is you find confusing. Milady, we are upon the deep and venerable question, whether 1 bitcoin now equals 1 bitcoin tomorrow. The western legal tradition says it does. Perhaps I do understand what you are saying, but find it humiliating to even consider lowering the price of our Most Prestigious titles, namely the Donator tag. If anything, its price should be increased to reflect the increasing readership, and heap honor upon honor of the early Donators. In which case, your argument has nothing to do with whether the price of a donation should be adjusted due to fluctuation in bitcoin value and should not depend on the exchange of a bitcoin at all. Instead, the price of a donator tag should be based on the actual value of said tag itself. Similarly to how a golf course that used to charge $50 a month for membership when it just started up, may end up charging $30,000 a year fees for prestigious membership once it becomes successful. I can agree with that. Though I am not sure that having a donator tag grants you special access to Bitcoin's wealthy and well connected. I wouldn't know, but perhaps you can fill us in? |
|
|
|
I haven't been able to game since I started mining  |
|
|
|
Well - anyhow.
Please give us the public record of monies that Israelis paid for Arab lands in recent history to back up all of the above political statements.
Thank You, Sir.
Easy enough. Source link: http://lmgtfy.com/?q=jewish+land+purchase+in+palestine&l=1They paid the actual land owners, not any government. And wtf did Obama do in Israel other than visit it? |
|
|
|
So: The Israeli government cannot possibly legitimze itself on territories which were not granted by the United Nations ?
Please be clear in your answer. Thank you, Sir.[/b][/color]
I was under the impression that the Israelies bought and paid for the land they currently reside on |
|
|
|
|
It's only illegal in the same way a king coming over, taking over your property, claiming it's his, and setting up rules is illegal. They just decided to make the king be electable by a representable body, and put term limits on him. So, really, by your definition, almost no government would be legal.
|
|
|
|
Ok... |
|
|
|
I personally don't. I'm just hoping to nip that whole, "Waaah, he paid a lower number than I did because the value increased, and that's not fair!" foolishness in the bud before it becomes too widespread.
It's also ironichypocritical to discuss deflation as being very unfair on a forum about a deflationary currency.
Madam, you don't seem to make any sense at all. That's Countess to you, sir. Do explain what it is you find confusing. |
|
|
|
So why is it that people who buy iPhones for $500 don't demand a refund when the price drops in a month or two and everyone else buys it for $450? And should they?
(Also, what contract?)
The real question is why do you want donator status so badly? I personally don't. I'm just hoping to nip that whole, "Waaah, he paid a lower number than I did because the value increased, and that's not fair!" foolishness in the bud before it becomes too widespread. It's also ironichypocritical to discuss deflation as being very unfair on a forum about a deflationary currency. |
|
|
|
|
In Soviet Russia, communism = state property, and all property = state property.
From my experience (including personal), it's just altruism gone bad. People with a socialist inclination think that people in general don't have time or resources to do things like maintain roads, check to make sure drugs and food are not contaminated, pay for school education, etc. So they think it's better to have some benevolent agency run by bureaucrats who can take care of these dump, helpless people. And, of course, that directly translated to capitalists being heartless bastards, because they just want to let the dumb helpless people starve and die on the streets.
For me, what helped change my opinion on the matter was being shown just how ineffective, and even counter-productive, those bureaucratic agencies were, combined with the realization that the simple retort of "The solution is not to get rid of government problems, but to fix them" is pointless, because thanks to the way government is organized, there IS no solution that can fix the problems.
|
|
|
|
|
So why is it that people who buy iPhones for $500 don't demand a refund when the price drops in a month or two and everyone else buys it for $450? And should they?
(Also, what contract?)
|
|
|
|
I vote for energy, too. When 3D printing and physics technology progresses to the point where you can convert matter to energy, and then energy back to matter, energy will be the only thing anyone will need and will have to trade for.
Though I may be missing an intermediate step between Bitcoin and that, since we're still quite a bit away from the whole matter<>energy thing.
When energy will be everything that I need, what should I trade for energy then? What most people trade for money how: thinking/ideas. |
|
|
|
The main block chain is not suited to this. "let's spam my messages to the world and burden them forever" is not an acceptable solution. Maybe you should have read the thread before commenting. I did read the thread. And I never said adding messages to the blockchain is a good thing. The OP asked why this hasn't been done before, but it has. No one else mentioned that, and I was curious why. (I know it's a bad idea, but regardless blockchain.info is doing it) I think blockchain.info messages are local only to blockchain.info, and are not stored in the actual blockchain. |
|
|
|
|
I think rating may be difficult. Someone could create a ton of trading accounts and trade with a single other account if there is a lull in the market (i.e place an order for a price with little risk that someone else will take it before their own sockpuppets take in in small batches). Other than that, the rating should be a fairly simple deal. Have both the seller and the buyer sign their ratings with the privkey of their trading address, maybe hashed against the transaction. Good ratings will be kept by people whoa re trying to build up rep, bad by people who got screwed, and a few main nodes can keep them all. Would be nice to be able to integrate the thing into the WOT we use now, or even replace it.
Regarding this whole discussion, btw, is looks as if the focus is just on taking the orderbook off the exchange's hands, and letting exchanges only stick to receiving and sending local currency. That seems like the only possible solution, but still leaved a few weak attack points against bitcoin. If an exchange is taken down, whatever digital tokens being used by all these exchanges to represent the cash in their accounts won't be honored, since the cash will be seized along with the exchange.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
