You would have to pay something to somebody for defending you, even impenitent anarchists admit it. Why would they want to defend you for free actually? If you have never thought about this, think about it now, it doesn't require much effort to understand such things...
To hope for something out of nothing is most popular form of hope
By this logic rape is the same as consensual sex because they both involve the transfer of semen for the purpose of procreation... Often you don't have choice at all. At other times you have to choose between two or even more evils. And only sometimes you are free to refuse from making your choice altogether... In short, stop trolling with the state you have no choice, you either pay the state or you get locked in a rape dungeon to be sexually tortured for years. in a free society you can chose to purchase defense from anyone in the world who is providing that service. saying these are the same thing is like saying the ADT home security is just another mafia protection racket. Im going to give you the benefit of the doubt and say that you are are the troll because the alternative of you being legitimately unable to understand the difference between these two arrangements has even less pleasant implications. |
|
|
|
Government is interested in defending its citizens, otherwise they won't be able to collect taxes Wow thats a mind fucking paradox right there. How can it defend you AND tax you? Isn't protecting you from people who would take your property away from you against your will part of defending you? You would have to pay something to somebody for defending you, even impenitent anarchists admit it. Why would they want to defend you for free actually? If you have never thought about this, think about it now, it doesn't require much effort to understand such things... To hope for something out of nothing is most popular form of hope By this logic rape is the same as consensual sex because they both involve the transfer of semen for the purpose of procreation... you have to pick someone to provide you with defense but it can be anyone in the whole world != you have to pay organization X or else organization X is the one you will need to be defended from. |
|
|
|
Lots of media coverage on BTC and Alts the last couple of weeks has brought a lot of speculators and inexperienced investors (myself included). This was like the day trader boom in the late 90's/early 00's. Lot's of hype machines and doom and gloomers all over, but mostly people losing their shirts while the smart ones bought slowly and steadily.
very glad that you learned the right lesson from this and were not scared away by it. welcome to bitcoin. |
|
|
|
|
This seems like the most bullish news I've ever seen for bitcoin. The biggest problem that faces ordinary people who would dabble in bitcoin is acquisition. If there was just an ordinary corner store that sold them than many people who wouldnt be willing to research exchanges or localbitcoins would be willing to buy them. Strange that there is no uproar.
|
|
|
|
Government is interested in defending its citizens, otherwise they won't be able to collect taxes Wow thats a mind fucking paradox right there. How can it defend you AND tax you? Isn't protecting you from people who would take your property away from you against your will part of defending you? |
|
|
|
wow stupid gold comparison. gold is on a whole different level. its like comparing a scion to a lamborghini. at least with gold i have the physical value to back it up
i hate it when people do this. its becoming my new pet peeve. this is COMPLETELY irrelevant to his argument. he was talking about how people have no problem buying 0.1troyounce coins of gold. whether bitcoin is better than gold or vice verca has NOTHING to do with his argument about how fractional denomination doenst prevent people from investing in gold. as an aside does anyone know if there is a label for this specific form of logical fallacy or rhetorical trick or w/e it is? |
|
|
|
Oh noes! I can't possibly imagine living in a world with no government where certain bad people would no doubt try to steal from me and hurt me to help themselves! So therefore, it's necessary to submit to certain bad people who are the government who steal from me and hurt me to help themselves!
Statism = Logical failure
It's you who logically failed here. You pay some bad guys and they defend you from other bad guys out there. Because of the economy of scale, you actually end up paying much less than you would have to pay without a state behind you. So your imagination wasn't actually deceiving you... David Friedman makes a pretty good argument against this. If you look at the police in big cities where they have many more officers and much larger budgets you actually see less satisfactory service than police in smaller cities. According to what emperical evidence is available on this subject, it would appear to have INVERSE economies of scale, i.e. smaller police forces provide more satisfactory service than larger police forces. |
|
|
|
I wonder how far it will fall???
Dont expect it to stay much lower than 700 for any length of time. you might just be surprised. this rally is over. a bear market may be in!  yea i wouldn't be surprised if i was surprised. wait what. |
|
|
|
|
Considering we are already 99% of the way there (no one uses a gun to force you to brush your teeth or post on this forum ect...) it should be easier than one might suspect to bridge the gap on that final measly 1%.
|
|
|
|
|
lol new guy. No its not the end. Most of us have seen this a half a dozen times now and we are all still here.
|
|
|
|
I wonder how far it will fall???
Dont expect it to stay much lower than 700 for any length of time. |
|
|
|
china put out the warning because there intel office just told them that BOA and all the other banks just got their accounts loaded on mtgox and the rest of the exchanges and just hooked up their black boxes (super trading bots) and were about to run bitcoin to the ground so they could come in a buy it. Then re pump it after the new year. China was like no china banks you are not going to be doing this type of shit to are citizens. After this bull shit crash look for prices to go even higher!!!!!
O yeah, also btcchina is requiring you be from china to trade on that exchange!
im interested to hear more. do you have a source? is this just speculation? do you have some good anecdotal evidence? |
|
|
|
|
are you trying to repair your broken drive?
|
|
|
|
I just found an old drive with some backups on it! I did not backup the "Applications" folder but nearly did everything else....would the backup file be a .dat file? Most likely located somewhere....?
my backup says type unknown. |
|
|
|
spoilt bastard!
Go fucking die spoiled bastard! FTFY lol this i'm so jealous...  It's only a million and it Isn't even a gift, its a loan, he has to pay it back. Not that lucky. Lots of people inherit a lot more than that with no strings attached. this is just false most poeple have about 600$ in their bank account and work over 40 hours a week as they spend all of their extra money on booze and lottery tickets instead of saving it  . I don't feel sorry for those people. I don't have a lot of income either, according to the government im "poor", but i chose to live below my already modest means, im thrifty, i save every extra penny and im definitely on track to having well over a million someday before i die. *edit* this mostly only applies to people in the west. you could say that op is more lucky to have been born in the west than anything else. |
|
|
|
|
you probably could have recovered them even though your computer crashed if you hadnt thrown it in the trash.
|
|
|
|
spoilt bastard!
Go fucking die spoiled bastard! FTFY lol this i'm so jealous... It's only a million and it Isn't even a gift, its a loan, he has to pay it back. Not that lucky. Lots of people inherit a lot more than that with no strings attached. |
|
|
|
1 Seems like instead of people spending electricity on mining, they would be spending it on making as many transactions as possible to mine the coins. If there is a 1% chance of earning a block reward by making 100 transactions, and the block reward is more than the cost of 100 transactions, then the users will make those transactions to earn money.
In the end, the sum of the transaction fees will be close to the price of a transaction block.
If a transaction block reward is $50, and you look back at the past day, someone could pay for the majority of the days transactions and 51% attack. Much more feasible than paying for 51% of the hardware used to mine.
People who author transaction blocks would be compensated with transaction fees only. But as it says in the title, this idea is broken for other reasons. Yes, I was speaking of a $50 average transaction block reward. ah ok well thats actually really simple to account for. In a market when people are bidding for a scarce resource the person who wins the bid is the person who values it most. A person who wanted to buy up transaction space just for the sake of increasing his chances of authoring a block in the future would not value that space as highly as someone who wanted to use it for a legitimate transaction in addition to increasing his chances of authoring a block in the future. Reversing transactions can gain you much more than the sum of the transaction fees spent. even if you had all of the keys, the process of reversing transactions at that point would become the same as bitcoin, so it still wouldn't be easy by any stretch of the imagination. still there might be reason for the authors of transaction blocks to only include their own keys in their blocks which would definite be a problem. |
|
|
|
It is just a simple split with the increase of the complexity that brings and I can't see many benefits.  if it could work it would have huge benefits. with bitcoin someone with sufficient hashing power can save up a longer chain and then publish it thus reversing the transaction. with the split in responsibilities this would become highly unlikely since the miner would have to be in collusion with the winner of the transaction. I see. Thanks. ... Except collusion would be easier in that case you mentioned before, of people creating hundreds of addresses to increase the odds they are both miners at the same time? yes but even if the miner owned 100% of all of the addresses it would still only be the same as bitcoin at that point  |
|
|
|
Seems like instead of people spending electricity on mining, they would be spending it on making as many transactions as possible to mine the coins. If there is a 1% chance of earning a block reward by making 100 transactions, and the block reward is more than the cost of 100 transactions, then the users will make those transactions to earn money.
In the end, the sum of the transaction fees will be close to the price of a transaction block.
If a transaction block reward is $50, and you look back at the past day, someone could pay for the majority of the days transactions and 51% attack. Much more feasible than paying for 51% of the hardware used to mine.
People who author transaction blocks would be compensated with transaction fees only. But as it says in the title, this idea is broken for other reasons. Yes, I was speaking of a $50 average transaction block reward. ah ok well thats actually really simple to account for. In a market when people are bidding for a scarce resource the person who wins the bid is the person who values it most. A person who wanted to buy up transaction space just for the sake of increasing his chances of authoring a block in the future would not value that space as highly as someone who wanted to use it for a legitimate transaction in addition to increasing his chances of authoring a block in the future. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
