|
What do you guys expect? The average economics forum lurker sees Bitcoin as a scam at first glance. What is left for gamers, an audience that has no experience in economics nor the tech involved in Bitcoin.
|
|
|
|
Einstein's famous equation E=mc2 describes the equivalence between energy and mass. Quantum physics is not involved.
If you push something so that it goes faster, the energy from your push increases the mass of the object by the amount indicated by E=mc2. This is quite a small amount, so we don't notice it in day-to-day life, but it is readily measurable.
In the same way, a battery gets slightly heavier when you charge it up, and slightly lighter when you discharge it. This is due to the extra energy in the charged battery causing chemical changes that result in matter that has a higher energy state (and is therefore more massive according to E=mc2). Freaky, huh?
A common way of defining matter is as anything that has mass and occupies volume How convenient to forget about the second property of matter... |
|
|
|
Hey guys,
I've been mining for a few days now, and I just want to ask a few things.
Right now, I have a HD 6990. I get about 600-630 mhash/s. I've been mining on deepbit's pool for about 5 days now. I wanted to ask if it's better to mine in a pool or solo if you have a decent-very good rig.
From what I understand,
Each block solved is 50BTC. In a pool, the 50BTC is divided by how many shares you solved in the block (for proportional). When you mine solo, I'm pretty sure it's the same right? Is the average number of shares the same? Can the whole block you solve be stale if you do solo?
If I started mining solo today, on average, how many days would it take to solve a block? Should I stick to pool, or should I give solo a shot?
If you have a few very good rigs, you should consider soloing. The difference between soloing and pooling is the variance. While you can be lucky solo and find a block really fast, it will balance out with a very long block eventually. In a pool you'll get your share of each block every time a block is found. So let's say you have the power to mine 10 BTC a day. In a pool, you'll hit those 10 BTC pretty much every day. Some times it'll be 9, sometimes it'll be 11, but overall, it'll have low variance. Solo, you'd be expecting a block every 5 days, but you might very well go 2 weeks without a hit or solve a block in an hour. In the long term, the only difference in reward between solo and pool mining is the fee the pool charges. |
|
|
|
That sucks, dude. At least in America we have Ron Paul, even if there is no one else who believes in liberty. You know, I'm not so sure Louis XIV was wrong when he said "L'etat c'est moi". He meant only himself, but really I am the state and you are the state, everyone is individually sovereign over themselves. Too bad more politicians don't think so...
French political tendencies are modeled around the poeple who beheaded Louis XVI, guys like Jean Jacques Rousseau, who states outright that a proper society cannot be achieved while private property is maintained. |
|
|
|
Lol I confess I am fairly ignorant of French politics, but I believe Markosy is your current president. Is he running for re-election?
As unpopular as he is, Sarkozy is running for re-election indeed. Oops, shit, "Sarkozy". Is he the dwarf or the one of the socialists? He's the dwarf (he's like 5"3 and angry), and his terrible handling of states affair has opened the door wide opened for the socialists to win in 2012. You have to understand, the leftists are the "good guys" in France. |
|
|
|
|
Any plans to offer cards based on euros?
|
|
|
|
Lol I confess I am fairly ignorant of French politics, but I believe Markosy is your current president. Is he running for re-election?
As unpopular as he is, Sarkozy is running for re-election indeed. |
|
|
|
Actually I was asking if others believe resellers are a very inefficient form of agorism.
They are not inefficient in the case of hard to get goods. Think about the benefit face to face resellers of Bitcoins bring to this market. |
|
|
|
The thought of a few slackers not contributing to a good cause seems less harmful than lucky creators using government force to ransom good ideas that are otherwise free to share.
The way the government handles IP doesn't make IP bad, only the government. The same could be said about regular property. I claim that if you abandon property, it becomes unowned and I can claim it. Leaving your bike on my lawn overnight probably isn't abandoning it but leaving it there for year definitely is. I can't draw an exact time distinction between the two but there certainly is a difference. Without knowledge of my intent, you are simply being violent. As I said, the only thing you can rightfully do, is to remove my property from yours. Or else, what if the cumulated time I left my bike on the curb amounts to a year, can you just pick it up and call it yours? Nevertheless, this has drifted from the original point, on which I simply give up trying to prove my point. Good night to you, sir. |
|
|
|
Vote for Ron Paul.  In 2012, I only get to choose between a bunch of socialists and an angry dwarf. gj France. |
|
|
|
You own the energy, not the pattern. Also, once you release energy back into the environment it becomes unowned abandoned property.
You come up with these as we go, don't you? And still, according to your rules, I can own that environment. Do you think you can leave your bike on my property forever and I shouldn't be able to claim it? Who said I'd leave it in your property? And even if it was, your only right is to remove my property from yours, not to bestow it upon yourself. Or else, are you going to claim what is mine simply because you touched it? |
|
|
|
If you don't know that electromagnetism is one of the four fundamental physical forces found in nature then...  That is not what I asked of you. I asked you to document me on how the application of an electric field with a magnetic field producing a electromagnetic force normal to the plane of those two fields consists in matter. There is a clear difference between fundamental and quantum physics. |
|
|
|
People will contribute to the best of their ability. Plenty of researchers use funds that come from voluntary, non-refundable contributions already.
Yet, if every member of the group helped instead of hoping to get the cure for free, the research would go faster. |
|
|
|
cannot do with my own brain.
First of all, I'm not trying to control anything. Your stance that IP defenders will resort to force is oblivious to the concept that IP and non aggression are perfectly compatible. If you don't respect IP, I simply stop considering such endeavor as profitable and will naturally reduce my output of such content to strict necessary levels. Also, in this argument, I am not trying to control what you can do or not do with your brain, since you couldn't do it without my brain coming up with it first. The point about the chair is that modification of shape does not nullify property. The design is an energy pattern in my head. Since energy is matter, then I own this energy. The fact that it is out in the public doesn't mean you can just take it. If I leave my bike next to a wall, would you take it? According to your very own point, that matter and energy are but the same, then an original energy pattern, where ever it stands, belongs to the designer. |
|
|
|
Yes. Don't take my word for it. Look it up.
It is your part to provide documentation on that... |
|
|
|
Right, so radio waves are physical? Yes. Don't take my word for it. Look it up. How do you argue against IP if you stand by that point anyways? If all forms are of either energy, matter, or both, and that energy and matter are equivalent, then intellect is as much of a property as anything else. Am I sucking energy from your brain like some sort of psychic vampire? No. I get energy from the food I eat. I'm not sure what you're driving at. Simple. You own a piece of wood. You shape it into a chair and it stills belongs to you. The only thing you applied upon it is work. I own my brain. I formulate a design with it. By your standards, it belongs to me. |
|
|
|
How do you argue against IP if you stand by that point anyways? If all forms are of either energy, matter, or both, and that energy and matter are equivalent, then intellect is as much of a property as anything else.
Perhaps you have to reject or at least redefine property then in order to reconcile the issue. Something of that magnitude at least, indeed. |
|
|
|
I should add that the author suggests government subsidy (instead of patent rights which are another type of subsidy) as a model for pharmaceutic research, which I now disagree with. I still think patents are bad though.
Naturally, if a group of people is affected by some illness and there is no cure, it is possible they'll pool their resources to fund the research of such a cure. The question is, how many of these people will participate in the funding, knowing that they could get the cure for free once it is discovered. |
|
|
|
Energy is physical. Basic science isn't serious enough for you?
Right, so radio waves are physical? How do you argue against IP if you stand by that point anyways? If all forms are of either energy, matter, or both, and that energy and matter are equivalent, then intellect is as much of a property as anything else. |
|
|
|
I produce electricity, which is immaterial, at the cost of my resources. Electrons are physical. Matter and energy are equivalent. Your argument fails. You're going after the energy that is loaded in those electrons... Matter and energy are equivalent. Keep this serious please. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
