I'm curious whether you chose Dr Branden because you believe he's the most qualified to treat you or because he was once Ayn Rand's lover.

Rassah, when you've got some time, read up on the Kaycee Nicole troll.

This Wikipedia link provides a summary but it's not as fascinating as reading the Metafilter threads associated with it (you don't need to be a member to access them).  There were so many red flags associated with that particular sympathy troll that it should never have been able to be sustained for so long, but people ignored them because everyone knows somebody who has had some form of cancer.  No-one was willing to ask hard questions until after Kaycee's "death" and even then, those who questioned the story were attacked by the community because people can't conceive of others perpetrating such a big deception over such a long period.

I've seen similar hoaxes happen on other messageboards and they often follow a similar pattern - when they're revealed it turns out that no-one has actually met these people in real life, but because the people who've white-knighted them have often been high profile posters their often conflicting stories are accepted as true.  They rely on credibility through association and they're often quite skilled at getting it by not posting the drama bombs themselves but revealing the latest twist in their stories to established posters who then reveal the information to the community.

People actually looked up where your school had placed.  You mightn't feel like "bothering with it", but it's this kind of attitude which makes it hard to take your business ideas seriously.

Don't overstate your achievements and abilities.  Don't give yourself pretentious titles like founder or CEO.  When you make a mistake admit it, and people might start taking you and your proposed ventures seriously - but right now you're coming across as a junior version of Bruce Wagner.

So is this post.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=44082.msg525846#msg525846

The link to "another particularly disturbing and immoral pornographic photo of a man in a state of...physical distress" is not to goatse as many people might have assumed (and therefore not clicked on it).

So do you really think that the SA Freemasons made her decapitate her one of her ponies, too?  I'm sure that her "dad" could have found Lowtax's email address and made an angry complaint about goons harassing his daughter - and Lowtax would sure as shit have posted it publicly if that had happened.

I wasn't thinking specifically of the furry market.  I was thinking more along the lines of people who want costumes for a single event or which they're only going to wear a couple of times.  I used to sew most of my children's clothes when they were younger and all of their costumes and there were times when I'd have been happy to pay someone else to make the costumes to save myself the time.  There's a market out there for costumes which don't need to be the same quality as those used for ballroom dancing and/or live theatre.  Atlas could tap that market if he's not overstating his ability   - chain store costumes are pretty unoriginal, low quality, and quite expensive for what they are.

I can't believe that I'm posting non-ironically to an Atlas thread, but here goes.

While being able to sew doesn't count as "tailoring", you've nonetheless been given a useful suggestion in this thread.  There really is a niche market which you could fill here.  It's way more realistic and achievable than some of your past proposals and you're dismissing it out of hand.

I think you should at least reconsider the idea of sewing costumes for people and I'm sure that the community would be willing to walk you through the steps involved in setting up a viable, part-time home business.  This is one particular field in which no-one is going to care about your age or your prior business experience provided that you can deliver the product to your customers as ordered and on time.

Doll-fuckers, Zombabies, and poison wombs...

This can't be repeated often enough.  "Scam" gets thrown around here almost as often as "troll" but I think that because there's a limited range of Bitcoin services available and people are desperate for more - and want to be in on the ground floor - people overlook the fact that a very high percentage of these new ventures are going to fail.  It takes a lot more than just a good idea for a business to succeed and a lot of good ideas end up going nowhere.  That's a reality in the real world and people starting Bitcoin ventures aren't immune to all the various factors which can cause a business to fail.

Bruce failed to do any due diligence regarding the Swiss Chalet hoax.  He wanted to be the person who brought it off so much that he overlooked some pretty obvious red flags.  He possibly twisted the facts a little bit too (the goon who perpetrated the hoax claims that Bruce phoned him whereas Bruce claims that it was the other way around).  A small detail, but one which I think indicates that Bruce still wants to be seen as a "somebody" within the Bitcoin community - the bigshot people will approach with big ideas.

I think that the "I want to believe" mentality does get in the way of people's commonsense sometimes and that people who ask legitimate questions about new ventures are too often and too easily dismissed as trolls spreading FUD - yet when those ventures fail, those who dismissed those concerns are quick to cry scam.

People need to keep in mind that any Bitcoin venture could fail literally overnight regardless of the intentions of its founders and limit their financial exposure to what they can genuinely afford to lose.

If you call it "printed material" on the description and then claim it was silver if you need to make a claim, I have a feeling you might have a problem.

I doubt it.  Goons love posting about their Bitcoin related exploits.  Even if you're right, it doesn't explain why Bruce chose to simply remain silent and blueball everyone as the weekend drew closer rather than letting people know it wasn't happening (for whatever reason).

MtGox and TradeHill both started out pretty much arguing that financial services regulations didn't apply to them because Bitcoin's legal status hadn't been legally defined anywhere.  Each of them has encountered issues since then because of adopting that stance and it's likely that they'll be required to become compliant with local laws in more jurisdictions as time passes.  The period of time during which they were able to get away without complying with such laws was a bonus for them and their customers, but it was naive to believe it would continue long-term.

Should both companies have realised at the outset that they would eventually have issues with financial services regulations and AML laws?  Absolutely - and I suspect that they did realise that eventually their compliance would be required but they just didn't know when.  To the extent that they're requiring either account or identity verification in order to comply with the law, users have little legitimate cause for complaint - the risk of the exchange bank accounts containing user deposits being frozen indefinitely if they're non-compliant is very real and always has been.

It's also possible that MtGox has taken this measure in response to attempted fraudulent withdrawals.  God knows there have been enough threads posted here about people's MtGox accounts being the subject of unauthorised withdrawals that it would be irresponsible of them to not have measures in place to address that particular issue.  The bigger the exchanges become and the more they're turning over, the more they're going to have to implement systems which automatically take actions in respect of user accounts and then manually review those actions if necessary.  It's unlikely that MtGox knows what's going on with any particular user account unless it's flagged in some way by their system.

In a few days time he'll announce that the trial was a huge success and that there are going to be bigger and better trials - all without revealing the company concerned.

It must be "this weekend" in the US by now.  Wonder when Bruce is planning on making his big announcement.

It would be very stupid for a franchisee to do something like this without approval from the parent company.

I use Chrome on Win7 and I got an insecure content warning bar which gave me the option of downloading the content.

Sirius wanted to hand the hosting over to someone else.

Thread about emails discussing the change

It takes time to get funds into and out of the exchanges, so if people did withdraw their funds and waited three days to see whether they received them (I think some methods take even longer than this to process), they'd then have to wait for those funds to hit their MtGox account when they redeposited them before they could trade again.  I suspect that many people would find this unacceptable, especially as some forms of deposit and withdrawal cost money.

Audits are a good idea but you need access to the financial records of the company in order for them to establish anything.  

That said, it would be nice to know whether it's one of the exchanges which is currently moving large amounts of coins around from blocks 144916 and 144917. 

All of the exchanges should be audited by an independent third party on a regular basis.  What the OP has proposed could create a false sense of security given the likelihood that many people won't try to withdraw their money/BTC - it's not going to conclusively prove than the exchange has enough on hand in segregated funds to cover 100% of user deposits.

What makes you think that MtGox will waive the withdrawal limits in order for people to do this?  Expecting a business to forego two weeks of revenue is a pretty big ask.