Their proof is that there is a limit to what can be conceived, and that limit is god? Well, it's not the Christian, Hebrew, or Muslim god. I don't really see how it's god at all, actually. Just a supreme limit that nothing can be conceived beyond...
By the way, scientists have disproven god a long time ago. Einstein said that god doesn't play dice with the universe, meaning that nothing is random and everything is planned and predetermined, and then quantum physics came out and proved that things in the universe are random and not planned out at all (maybe even killing a cat in the process, but we don't know), meaning god wasn't around to guide anything, or is just playing with dice, and thus was unimportant. Anyone can play with dice to make the universe completely random, or the universe can just be completely random on its own.
Ahh, but not all scientists have disproven God and this article shows that doesn't it? Could scientist be wrong? It seems completely illogical to think that the universe is random to me. How could something so complex as our universe happen by chance? This is the fundamental flaw with the idea of God. You cannot explain complexity by invoking prior complexity. Ask yourself if you think God is as least as complex as the universe. If you consider this to be true then you have moved the problem of where did complexity come from - and in fact, made the problem far harder because you now have monolithic complexity to explain. Complexity arising from self-organizing processes acting upon smaller units is seen throughout nature and has been performed experimentally. The real question is "How did the super-compressed ball of energy originate? The alternative is far worse: The complexity formed by itself at random in a vacuum of energy, information, intelligent input, and physical laws. Is a programmer more complex than the program? Yes. And we can explain the program without knowing the life story or identity of the programmer. We assume a complex programmer because its the only possible explanation. If you could show a thing and prove that God could not create it, that would be proof that God is himself created: and therefore, not God. The buck has to stop somewhere. There is no infinite string of prime movers. |
|
|
|
as in topic i have some NMCs and dont knwo what to do with em
PM'd you. I'll buy em. |
|
|
|
Bulls are getting brazen up in here. I just want to see a reversal now so it wipes some of the smugness off these faces.
Considering BTC increases have been at orders of magnitude, I don't think there's anything brazen or smug about expecting 200 to hold up. This is what everyone was saying in the few days prior to April 10th this year. up, uP, UP  I don't think superstition helps to predict price movement (& not everyone was saying we were continuing up). I agree with professor. Also, every day we bounce around $200 solidifies the next move upwards. April 2013 is long gone, this is a new scenario. |
|
|
|
How many users do we currently have?
i really really wish we knew. no way to be sure. best guess is to look at downloaded and active clients. unless anyone has better ideas? Maybe we already have 22M users. No way, not even close. If we're at a million i'd be shocked. Wikipedia reports 39% of the world's people use the internet. That's 2.7B people that have a chance to learn about bitcoin. A million of those is 1 in 2700. |
|
|
|
Who made the money? You!
Feel good😄
Dont worry so much about that what others say. When you get older you give a shit on what they say. Its good to spread the word.
they also started teasing me when I showed them my price chart app on my phone, they were like " do you sit there and watch it all day and cheer when it goes up" Ask them if they sit and cry all day as their fiat wealth is inflated to all hell. |
|
|
|
it's not fair. If someone wants to take profit, then they can just list their bitcoins for sale and earn more money than just dumping them. The only reason people are doing this is to cause panic and grab as much cheaper bitcoins as they can. But people have to grow up.
You know hundreds years ago Mayans was chopping people heads off and they also was thinking that its OK. Now we see it somehow differently. When people will grow up, they will understand that speculating is also wrong because there are winners and losers. Volatile price scares most investors off from bitcoin. If people would not speculate that much everyone would earn more, and everyone who invested would be more happy and calm and could focus on more constructive things to do than watching price for 24h/day.
Only by cooperating we can have all people winning and this humanity should understand and start consider as normal behaviour. The sooner the better for all.
And what pray tell is wrong with having winners and losers? The losers are not innocent victims, they know what game they're playing. This is how markets work, son. |
|
|
|
Real clicks by humans, or bots? Won't this get you banned if youtube finds out?
How would youtube find out? |
|
|
|
I'm reading this book right now. Pretty on topic. In this novel the NSA can decrypt any algorithm except one...  I'm sorry for your loss. That book is total junk. At least with the other formulaic dan brown novels, they touch on something he knows about (religious history). This one does not. I'm reading about 1 novel a year. Much more than that when I was younger. I don't expect everything in this book to be accurate. I'm 50% done and enjoying it. The rest of the years, I'm reading technical books and stuff so this is relaxing for my mind. Even his books on religious history are purely for entertainment and are seriously 'out there' on doctrine. If his cryptography treatment is similar, then accept it with a ten-ton salt boulder. Don't take Dan Brown so seriously. |
|
|
|
The more that bitcoin goes up, the more likely it is that money will spill over into the 'alt-coins', thereby increasing the chances of more of these coins.
All of the coins are just copy and paste versions of bitcoin with some parameters altered or changed, and there are people trying to magnify that one parameter changed makes a coin better than the parameter changes of another coin.
If Bitcoin is being successful, then all of the coins are replicas of bitcoin, and all of them have a chance at being successful as well.
If bitcoin goes to $1000, then I think that more people will look for cheaper alternatives to invest into.
Why? Why will people look for cheaper alternatives? Bitcoin is divisible to 8 decimal places meaning people can still invest even if they've only got $50. There's no need to go to altcoins. If 1 bitcoin costs $1000 and Bob wants to invest $50, he just buys 0.05 bitcoins. When the bitcoin price doubles to $2000 four years later, Bob's bitcoin are now (theoretically) worth $100. The more people see bitcoin success story, the less they will want altcoins. yeah btc fanbois keep telling this to themselves, but the rest of the world doesn't really want to deal in fractions of btc, and higher btc gets the more dangerous it is to use as a currency (huge swings create too much currency risk, and lets not goto oh but xyz 3rd party site etc solves this). bitcion success story to most people is purely as a trade tool and the higher it is vs USD the greater its percieved success, yet its next to useless for its original intended purpose. guess alot of the anti alts crowd haven't actually used alts, cause after using a few alts, btc feels like a painful dinosaur to use. Are you being funny? Alt coins have the biggest swings of all! That's about the only reason they get any attention, because of manipulating traders like fontas. Also, the more bitcoins become pervasive and valuable, the SMALLER the swings will be as percent of a bitcoin's value. Its economics 101. What feels painful about bitcoin? The longer confirms? That is the only observable difference, and its a security feature. But who's got time for security. |
|
|
|
The more that bitcoin goes up, the more likely it is that money will spill over into the 'alt-coins', thereby increasing the chances of more of these coins.
All of the coins are just copy and paste versions of bitcoin with some parameters altered or changed, and there are people trying to magnify that one parameter changed makes a coin better than the parameter changes of another coin.
If Bitcoin is being successful, then all of the coins are replicas of bitcoin, and all of them have a chance at being successful as well.
If bitcoin goes to $1000, then I think that more people will look for cheaper alternatives to invest into.
Why? Why will people look for cheaper alternatives? Bitcoin is divisible to 8 decimal places meaning people can still invest even if they've only got $50. There's no need to go to altcoins. If 1 bitcoin costs $1000 and Bob wants to invest $50, he just buys 0.05 bitcoins. When the bitcoin price doubles to $2000 four years later, Bob's bitcoin are now (theoretically) worth $100. The more people see bitcoin success story, the less they will want altcoins. |
|
|
|
I like how now when we "tank" it means we went back to the price we reached just yesterday.
This mimics attitude from the bubble so perfectly. Like 1 week after people started saying that, collapse. Superstition is not useful for pricing bitcoin. |
|
|
|
The current block chain is about 12.5GB and it zips down to 8.74GB (a 30% savings).
There are 7B people (1-5 transactions/day buying cigarettes, dinner .. ) ... 1 transaction is about 0.5 kB ... = looks like when bitcoin will worth $200k/BTC then we will need 20 TB/day Toddlers buy cigarettes with their dinner. 'We' will not all have the blockchain stored locally. 20TB hard drives will cost $199 in 5 years. There is no reason we can't have secondary systems on top of bitcoin, kind of like credit cards. Doing away with 99% of those 7B transaction. It doesn't make any sense to buy cigarettes with bitcoins when we could have a bitcoin credit system process small transactions with little to no risk and much faster throughput. |
|
|
|
As always, the subject is artificially misleading...
It's not the Baidu itself. Shame on you!
mean its just rumors and nothing official from the company Someone said there was a press release. |
|
|
|
Perhaps China don't consider Bitcoin a virtual currency. I agree. Bitcoin is not a VIRTUAL currency, it IS money. |
|
|
|
Planning for a sub 1% possibility is a waste of time and money. People have been calling for the end of the world forever.
Insurance policies are such a waste of time and money. |
|
|
|
Are you aware of for whom this test was initially designed?
The IQ test was originally designed for school-aged children. At that time, many women did not attend school. Thus, it primarily measures the mental aptitudes of men, and that is the population that it differentiates best. If I decided to measure intelligence with height, for which there is definitely a correlation, it may work well initially with men. When I then apply this test to women, the scale is not useful for comparing across genders because of physiological differences.
Many of the "standards" were designed long ago for a primarily male population. It is unfair to claim that these tests are appropriate for all people when they were designed for only a subset of people.
Were these standards never updated / modernized? I find that hard to believe. Agreed. I'm not saying women aren't intelligent, just suggesting that these intelligence tests have an actual purpose beyond superficial equality issues. |
|
|
|
IQ tests were designed by males and initially applied to test differences between males, who were the primary school population at the time. It is no surprise that the test accentuates the intelligence variability in males. This does not prove that males are more "variable" than females, only that a test designed to measure male variability shows greater male variability than females. Those are the standards for intelligence that exist. Sure, if we slanted the test for females, then they would 'win'. If women do match up as well as men, then they should have no problem with a standard human intelligence test. Its not a popularity contest. |
|
|
|
peter schiff is an idiot who has been pumping precious metals and is heavily invested in them. I knew about him before bitcoin and I would have told you the exact same thing, because it's obvious. end of discussion.
Worthless troll is worthless. His mortgage bankers speech will forever be one of my favorite financial speeches. Agreed. I respect what Peter Schiff says about precious metals and bitcoin. If you don't understand bitcoin, DO NOT buy it as an investment. |
|
|
|
I finally convinced an Austrian friend to dump some of his silver and buy bitcoin with it. He found out that EuroPacific capital charges 3% to cash out of his silver position. Yes, that's right. Peter Schiff's company charges THREE PERCENT to get out of a position. Of course he is never going to promote bitcoin when he can rape people that hard by plugging metals.
Why dump silver now, its only going up. It has to. Bad advice, especially with that 3% haircut. I'd try my best to find other assets to unload. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
