I am afraid of serial killers and monsters like this school shooter. Them I can't understand, and my ignorance makes them seem extra creepy.
I understand them (at least I think I do) a little, and trust me, knowing their motivations doesn't make them any less scary. No you do not, but its really cute you think you do. Stick to correcting spelling mistakes ok  I remember, in middle school, using my Christmas gift jigsaw kit to cut out mini darts with acid-soaked swab tips, which I carried with me "for protection," and in high school, drawing up detailed plans to fire a high-explosive tipped, string-guided rocket into my school's classroom window completely discreetly from a few blocks away. I would have been out that day, and likely never been caught. Yeah, glad I got help  |
|
|
|
Are you thinking of starting a Silk Road based business, and trying to see if there is a market for your precious little products? Seriously, though, 46 w/ children? Holy wow!  |
|
|
|
Guns are for killing. Nothing else. Unlike cars, trains, planes, knives, axes and lawnmowers.
 Guns are also for hammering, breaking things apart, marking lines and points in a straight line, measuring distances, drilling holes, removing nails and screws, sanding off sharp corners, adding rough wood texture, filing down edges, and holding work pieces in place. They are a very diverse and excellent carpentry tool. I believe even Jesus used one. |
|
|
|
|
Awww, but it's fun to answer hypotheticals with hypotheticals. For instance, iRobot makes Roomba robot vacuum cleaners and Scooba robot floor washers. They also make robots for the military that are used to defuse bombs, and can carry weapons to go in, investigate, and clear out buildings. So, an iKillbot to provide the security, and a Roomba and Scooba to clean up the mess and blood. Security problem solved!
|
|
|
|
just out of curiosity... besides the people who are keeping BTC for investment purposes, what type of items do you think the average person is buying ?
Of the ones I meet, I have no idea. All have been young, and some are tech savy, some are not. If I was to guess, I'd say drugs, BitTorrent/Usenet access, VPNs, or just play money. My friend buys a few from me every couple of months for Usenet access, too. I'm guessing most are just investing (I've had people buy $500 at a time, which is either some really fancy coke, or just stashing money). I don't ask who they are or what they will use it for, since I don't expect they would be honest, and I'd rather know as little as possible. |
|
|
|
...only because sword fights look way more epic. That is all.  Spending too much time in the Men's steam room again huh? No, just missing going to my Kendo/Iado classes. Ah ha! you know something about fighting and swords. Therefore you are not allowed to help make policy about them. We need to call my friends Mom. She knows nothing about these things, but she does have strong opinions. She should decide. Aww, you're right  |
|
|
|
|
At least wait until CES.
EDIT: Crap! Wrong card! I'm waiting for the Bitcoincard, which is supposed to have some news at CES. This is a different card I'm also waiting on. Sorry I confused the two.
|
|
|
|
I'm guessing this is to be split between your five entities, with the entire BTC5 going to this charity? Or just 1 out of 5 going to this, and the other 4 ready to use for the next one? |
|
|
|
Most people i know are too lazy to go through an exchange...  I've sold about $4,000 worth through localbitcoins.com already, much of it to people who were not very familiar with it. The time waiting for a confirmation is usually spent with them asking questions and me explaining how it works. They are typically return customers, since once they find out that it's as easy as stopping by a local fast food joint with some cash, they don't consider Bitcoin to be too much of a hassle for whatever they used it for. And they can go home and use it that same evening. (BTW, the fee I charge means I generally just break even) |
|
|
|
|
By the way, I do enjoy the mental chess of sorts. Most of the crap I'm spewing isn't stuff I read somewhere or already know, but is just my own mental exercises of being given a "but what if...?" question, taking the few things I've learned here and there (business school, politics, other discussions), and trying to logically deduce where they would go if placed in a different situation. Yes, we may be inventing worlds that don't yet exist (and I do love writing fiction), but at least our worlds are logically consistent. Not to say the other sides' is not, theirs is just based on reality they see in front of them (which at times CAN be inconsistent).
|
|
|
|
Fair points. However, without real-world examples, simulations or such-like, we're both speculating about what it "would" be like. ;-)
I hate to bring that place up, because of the inevitable "Why don't you move there you think it's so great?" stupid comments, but we do have real world examples of private security in Somalia. Those "roving bands of warlord mercenaries" have settled down and set up territories they protect. If you live on their territory, you pay them protection money, and they keep the peace within the territory, and keep bandits and others at bay. If you want to own a weapon to protect yourself, you can do that too. And if you don't like their service, you are free to move; they won't stop you. The "war lords" have long since become professional businessmen rather that bandits and looters, who have not only realized that they can do better by providing others with a service rather than stealing from others, but now actually take pride in protecting their territory and their people. As for the arbitration thing, that's how it works already. Especially now, with globalization creating multinational companies that don't operate under a single country. There is currently a special set of international laws being worked out, based on general consensus among large businesses rather than some country's legal precedent, which has to rely on arbitration, and businesses forming contract agreements decide which arbiter they wish to be involved with. Also, don't confuse criminal law with contract law. If you're dealing with a business, and they screw you somehow, you deal with contract law and arbitration (or civil court). If they use their power to screw your property or steal your money, that's a crime, and you deal with that using criminal courts and force, which may include people with guns. It really is no different from how it works now. Here's a thought experiment:
What if one such person decided that the road to riches and power is to become the greatest, most popular arbitrator in the land? S/He could set up a court that works differently from the others. They've recognised that justice behind closed doors and where money mysteriously changes hands is always going to be a bit iffy. So they've found a way to make it fairer by making it free. The contestants don't have to pay anything (outside of the actual judgement), it's the audience that has to pay to watch -- a real spectacle! Much like a talk show host, the arbitrator is "in charge" but only has his oratorical skills (and nominal security guards) to influence his voluntary audience who cheers with approval, or boos with disgust.
A master of suspense and manipulating large crowds, the arbitrator levers his audience to give his judgements more oomph. After all, what is a judgement worth if a) nobody's there to witness it, and b) nobody knows they should help enforce the findings? This way, under the threat of an angry mob, even powerful, "reputable" companies must graciously compensate the little guy who has been wronged.
I think you misunderstand the purpose of such legal disputes. The value of arbitration, i.e. the legal dispute, is not in how much you pay the lawyers. What businesses look for is someone who can fairly decide for, and protect, both parties. They are looking for someone who can provide a just resolution for both people involved, or at least not screw them too much if they fail somehow. So this Super Arbitrator providing his services for free won't matter, and they won't be interested in shams and showmanship. Also, the amount of witnesses doesn't matter in these. A decision will be closely watched by any other business involved with those who had the dispute, and depending on how the two parties act after the decision, they'll make their own informed opinions on whether to continue to deal with them. If a business that went through arbitration screwed someone else, or failed to compensate someone fairly, there's a good chance they will be dropped by other businesses, and the business will die. Very few businesses nowadays work all by themselves (you almost always have to buy materials and labor, and sell it to someone else). You're also forgetting that the angry mobs already exist. They're called consumers, who avoid buying products from companies they don't like. So, again, there won't be much change compared to what we have now. Just to give you an arbitration example: Let's say company A bought 10,000 widgets for $1 each from company B, and 5,000 of those widgets turned out not to work, possibly damaged during unloading. Company A demands 5,000 replacements or $5,000, and company B claims the widgets were damaged by company B, and thus they don't owe anything. A crappy arbitrator would listen to both sides, and decide that Company A needs to pay $5,000, or that company B is at fault. A great arbitrator would decide that company A needs to sell 5,000 more widgets to company B for $0.25 to $0.50 each, and company B MUST buy 10,000 more widgets from company B at full price their next round. Both companies come out on top in the end. Thus, the An-Cap revolution turns full-circle. In the absence of old, organised power, newer immature kinds pop up that are more easily corruptible, dictatorial, and make use of a simple "majority rules" system.
You can't have a majority rule or dictatorial system without a government deciding on laws, and enforcing them through forcefully collected money. If no one pays for what the dictator is offering, he won't be a dictator for long. PS: you can't say that it's unrealistic, as there are plenty of real-world talk shows, etc., that follow this basic format. The only thing stopping them from growing out of control are government laws and the competitive presence of "official channels" for justice.
That, and viewers, ratings, customers, companies wishing to associate themselves through advertising... |
|
|
|
to transfer from cash to BTC is predominantly done using bank transfers or moneygram/ukash and other methods which have fees. unless your cash > btc > cash is done using localbitcoins with someone face to face. which is usually costing you fuel to meet them and their inflated prices to be in their benefit to sell/buy with you.
For US users, Dwolla > MtGox is 25¢, and ING > Bitfloor is free. For European users there are free SEPA transfers. I'll grant that there are fees for other services, and some countries may be restricted to fee-only methods (anyone know what it's like in China?). And yes, hopefully it will expand and improve. |
|
|
|
|
Lowest bank transfer fee found for large money transfers: 2.5%. Most average 3% and up. No mention of how fair the exchange rates are, or if they ding you on that too.
$1,000,000 * 2.5% = $25,000
Buy/Sell BTC is about 0.5% to 0.6%, so 0.6% * 2 = 1.2%
$1,000,000 * 1.2% = $12,000
True, the volume may be low, which means you would have to buy and sell over a few days. Hopefully, the huge purchase at one end will drive the price up, and the arbitrage bots will ramp the prices on other exchanges up as well, just in time for you to sell back down to the same price.
Yes, there are still exchange rate risks, but it's getting way better.
|
|
|
|
Sorry, I feel I need to explain this statement a bit better Also, just remember that those cool kids at school usually end up with really shitty lives. SA is no exception (crappy, dead-end jobs, living in the middle of nowhere, REALLY boring lives, and generally poor, with completely ignorant misunderstanding on business or finance. A bunch of them are Occupy types)
I don't mean that they are bad or have less worth because they are poor. I don't think someone's current net worth necessarily says much about them. My own net worth only finally went from negative to positive this September. There are plenty of examples of Mr. Douche Moneybags out there, especially from people who simply inherited their money. And there are a TON of examples of poor people busting their asses dawn to dusk to support their families and strive to get to something better. Especially in the much maligned illegal alien community. I admire those people. Specifically those with the drive to move forward, the curiosity to learn, explore, and improve their lives. The types of poor that I don't like, and that I see among a lot of SA's ranks, are the complacent kind of poor, who are poor in money, motivation, curiosity, and culture, and are comfortable where they are. They are the types who live in Small Town, Middle America, working hard, dead-end jobs, living in the middle of nowhere, and have no interest in doing anything more, or traveling outside of their town, because they "have everything they need right here." Or the types that are like that, who also are often complaining about having too little money, crappy families, and not enough to do where they're at, but yet don't bother to do anything about it. All they do is moan, but are too comfortable where they are, and too afraid to attempt to change. Maybe I'm just biased by the few people in SA I know personally, who do actually live in those poor, uninteresting situations, but considering one of the main points of SA's ridicule is that Bitcoiners are flailing around, trying to be "Randian supermen," whom they make fun of at every opportunity whenever someone tries to throw out wild ideas for starting a business, or invests in mining equipment, while their status quo is to just be a good little 9-to-5, tax-paying, obedient citizen, it makes me think that my bias is warranted. I'm also now fairly convinced that SA works on their own self-feeding bias. Their whole point is to laugh at other's expense, so the only links that end up on their forums are ones some members track down about someone failing miserably. And sure, we have people like logansryche and others who may not be all right in the head, had a few people who did blow a ton of money on mining equipment at precisely the wrong time because they didn't bother doing their finance homework, and had idiots investing tons of money in things that were obviously too good to be true. If that's all you ever read when on that forum (and it usually is, since that's the point of it), then you would obviously have a pretty bad view of Bitcoin and bitcoiners, while completely missing that a majority here does have good business ideas (or are at least willing to risk and learn from mistakes), did run the math and are making actual profits on mining, and don't invest in stupid scams. Most just stay quiet, some ridicule the same people SA does. One quote I remember best from one of my teachers - "If you get cut off by people in traffic, you will just assume "bad driver" and carry on. If you are told that Asians are bad drivers, and then you get cut off by people in traffic, you will actually look to see if the person is Asian, and validate your own prejudice that "Asians are indeed bad drivers, or ignore it if they aren't. That's how racism works - it's a self-feeding loop" We're all likely guilty of that at some level. /rant TL;DR "I don't hate poors; I just hate the bad kind of poors." |
|
|
|
I guess that's a good thing to ask yourself when you're trying to promote Bitcoin. If you sound like an Amway evangelist then you might want to revise your strategy.
"Hey guys. I need this Bitcoin shit moved out of my wallet this weekend. Any big manly dudes free to help me out with that? There's pizza and beer in it for you (or whatever those bitcoins can fetch nowadays. Let me know!" |
|
|
|
OK, I'll bite No. Says who??
You are correct, there won't be anyone to declare them as doing something illegal. What will happen is they will either be breaking contracts they have signed with their customers, which would damage their credibility and make it harder to get new contracts, or they get any new customers, and thus money. Private security firms survive by receiving payments from customers, not by roaming the lands, looting and pillaging. And customers can chose not to send them money. Re: Arbitration - same thing. The arbitrators, which are meant to somehow provide "paid justice" are another corruptible focal point of power. They could similarly join forces and form an authoritarian bureaucracy.
Want to avoid dealing with corrupt arbitrators? Then just don't deal with them. If you are setting up a contract, make sure you and the person you are dealing with pick an arbitrator or a private court you can both agree on. In our current system, a corrupt judge still gets a government paycheck. A private arbitrator, or a private law firm, will need to survive based on their reputation, and doing shady things will mean a quick death for their business. Why is it so hard for An-Cap supporters to understand that a power vacuum will always draw power-hungry people into it? It's always better to already have a government because then at least you know what you're dealing with. Whereas these 'lack-of-government' ideologies all sound a lot like unexploded nitroglycerine -- a harmless liquid, I'm sure!
The difference is that in government's case, power-hungry people get power through popularity, and make their money through forcibly collected revenue. They get power and get paid even if they are scummy fucks. In the market, power-hungry people get power through business competition, and make their money by giving people products and services the people want to pay for. They can only be scummy fucks as long as the good they are doing for people outweighs their scummyness. For example, who is a bigger asshole? Rick Santorum (or your flavor of idiot politician you don't like)? Or Mark Zuckenberg? Hell, even Sheldon Addelson, the scummy fuck who gave tens of millions to the Romney campaign, didn't get what he paid for, and made his money by building an absolutely BEAUTIFUL replica of Venice, complete with canals and plazas, next to his casino in Vegas. It's sad that An-Cap (and Libertarian) supporters appear unable to feel sovereign without tying themselves down to familiar concepts such as 'property' and 'ownership'. Ordinary people apply those concepts to material things, yet it's incredibly ironic how An-Cap supporters take this to an extreme, and thus become enslaved by their own mindset. Remember: slavery is the opposite of freedom. Both concepts are two sides of the same coin, and they are rooted in the concept of ownership. If you belittle yourself by applying 'ownership' to yourself, quit acting surprised when other people try to take those ownership rights.
What in the actual hell? Slavery and freedom are two sides of the same coin? If you value property rights, you shouldn't be surprised when other people try to take away your rights? The hell are you on about? |
|
|
|
To me, the biggest reason is simply because it's a powerful hedge against inflation.
From my short-but-few years as a personal financial adviser, and the years I've deal with that on the sidelines since, I would say that the average Joe doesn't even know about inflation, let alone understand it or want to hedge against it. Most people out there just get a paycheck direct-deposited into their account, use their debit card until their bank balance runs out, and wait until the next paycheck comes in. That's about the extent of their financial knowledge, and not only do they not know anything more, they don't care to know. That's why we keep having statistics with depressing results, such as: the average 54 year old has $30,000 in savings, 60% or so of those reaching retirement age have less than $100k in savings, and of all retirees, only 5% retire with enough to maintain their standard of living, and a full 25% to 30% end up needing to work after retirement to make ends meet. People just don't care until it's too late, and warning them about it or offering to help only makes them more guarded and defensive. But that's a discussion for another topic. |
|
|
|
-> I want to rape girl.
-> Would I want them to do this to me?
-> Yup.
k.
(Just for the sake of argument).
If you want it done to you, then it's not rape. That there is wishing to force yourself on someone without their consent, and wishing they would force themselves on you with your consent. Please think things through before hitting Save. |
|
|
|
|
Phewh! My weekend went poof, but I finally transfered ALL the money movements from my Excel sheet to GNUCash, and reconciled to the blockchain. Here's where we stand:
Donated to BUND so far:
Vendor Report: BUND Berlin e.V.
Date Range: 11/22/2011 - 12/16/2012
Date Due Date Reference Type Description Amount
12/14/2012 12/14/2012 000011 Bill XXX 66.881893
12/14/2012 12/14/2012 000012 Bill XXX 17.659752
Total Paid XXX 84.541645
Total Assets
Assets XXX 0.000000
Current Assets XXX 0.000000
Available for Charity XXX 10.000010
BTC100 Pledge Contributions XXX 322.266360
gsan's Pledge Contributions XXX 7.000000
MemDealer's Pledge Contributions XXX 70.000000
teukon's Pledge Contributions XXX 43.000000
Total Assets XXX 452.266370
That 10.000010 BTC is what has been contributed since I sent the 17BTC of Phinn's extra coins, and is what we have collected for BUND shortage so far. Looks like we just need BTC5.458345 more on top of that BTC10.000010 to get them to the full 100.
|
|
|
|
|
The sprite of christmas?
Mary Christmas?
Better hit the edit button fast!
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
