Short at your own risk, I wouldn't even consider it.. More printing is right around the corner.
You're a Keynesian wrapped in Gold Cloth.  Sort of, I bet that way. I think Keynesian Economics are a Ponzi scheme that is horribly destructive in the long run in the name of short term stability.. Then how can you, in good conscious, support it financially? Good conscious?? WTF is that?? I don't make the rules, I just play the game  You don't play the game, you support it with your money. I short sell so when things get bad I can help soften the landing. You just push it higher so it crashes harder. |
|
|
|
What about the sudden implementation of withdrawal limits on savings accounts? Apparently, more than 6 withdrawals from savings per month is some kind of federal reporting trigger, and the bank can and will close your account for exceeding that. I don't recall any such limitation until recently, although I am not sure what law was passed to make that effective. They insist that you use a checking account for frequent transfers instead.
This limitation was there since forever. The root of it is in the costs of insuring and maintaining the account. I'm kinda thinking that "sudden" probably means "first time in my life that I read the account disclosure booklet. I used to simply throw it away." One thing that US banking system has figured out exceedingly well is the default and fraud risk on personal accounts. There are so many flags that signal imminent personal bankruptcy, one of them is lack of normal monthly or biweekly budget planning. It manifests itself by too frequent too small withdrawals. The limits are on the quantity of individual withdrawals, not on the total amount withdrawn. Railing against those limits is akin to railing against higher car insurance rates for unmarried men less than 25 years old. It leads nowhere because it has no wider social support. Well in that case, I've decided to set off all the alarms by never using a savings account again. Mainly because my checking account pays more interest than the savings. Indeed. I have a savings account with $5 in it because it is required to be a member of my credit union. Everything else (USD-wise) goes in checking. Actually, I have a small savings account that I share with my fiance that gets $10/week for each of us, but we may convert it to a checking at some point. We have never had to make more than 2 withdrawals a month, and even checking account interest is crap so it's just not worth the hassle. |
|
|
|
Short at your own risk, I wouldn't even consider it.. More printing is right around the corner.
You're a Keynesian wrapped in Gold Cloth. Sort of, I bet that way. I think Keynesian Economics are a Ponzi scheme that is horribly destructive in the long run in the name of short term stability.. Then how can you, in good conscious, support it financially? |
|
|
|
If you use Bitcoin or other payment method simply email me.
You may be interested in a Bitcoin-based merchant service provider, depending on how much time you want to spend on integrating one with your site. That would allow for more automation. Two examples are http://paysius.com/ and http://bit-pay.com/Thx. I already use bit-pay in Superadaptoid: http://nestorgames.com/superadaptoid_detail.html...but the problem is that I charge a fixed shipping fee (9 Eur) no matter how many games you purchase, but Bit-pay doesn't support this feature (yet). Sure they do, just add a "shipping" item to the cart. Variable shipping would be harder though. Good idea. But it won't be automated  I haven't tested it, but I just hacked this up: http://pastebin.com/3p9YvqL7If you replace the dataForItem and dataForShipping, it should work. However, if your customer adds multiple items like this, they will get duplicate shipping charges and will need to delete one. Kinda messy. Bit-pay really should add at least minimalistic shipping support. |
|
|
|
What about the sudden implementation of withdrawal limits on savings accounts? Apparently, more than 6 withdrawals from savings per month is some kind of federal reporting trigger, and the bank can and will close your account for exceeding that. I don't recall any such limitation until recently, although I am not sure what law was passed to make that effective. They insist that you use a checking account for frequent transfers instead.
I wonder if there is some backdoor law that allows them to snoop on checking accounts but not savings accounts, and so they decided to make savings accounts less useful. It's strange.
You wanted change, you got it! Oh shut up, Reg D has been around long before Obama http://www.bankersonline.com/compliance/guru2010/gurus_comp051710a.html |
|
|
|
What about the sudden implementation of withdrawal limits on savings accounts? Apparently, more than 6 withdrawals from savings per month is some kind of federal reporting trigger, and the bank can and will close your account for exceeding that. I don't recall any such limitation until recently, although I am not sure what law was passed to make that effective. They insist that you use a checking account for frequent transfers instead.
I wonder if there is some backdoor law that allows them to snoop on checking accounts but not savings accounts, and so they decided to make savings accounts less useful. It's strange.
You're referring to Regulation D: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulation_D_(FRB) |
|
|
|
skipping the first [from] transactions
i think this is not correct! If you use: bitcoind listtransactions "*" 1 0 it will not show you the first transaction, it will show you the last transaction made! It count from backward, not forward! For what is the function? I've not used listtransactions like this before, I'm only pulling that from the help. It look like you're right about it being backwards. You're probably better off with listsinceblock. With no parameters, it returns all transactions, and a lastblock value. Save that last block each time, then pass it as the first parameter to the next call of listsinceblock. This should get you any new transactions since your last sync. (And you don't have any magic numbers that leave you vulnerable to someone intentionally overflowing your transaction buffer.) |
|
|
|
> bitcoind help listtransactions
listtransactions [account] [count=10] [from=0]
Returns up to [count] most recent transactions skipping the first [from] transactions for account [account].
You can use '*' for the account to get all transactions, so I'd keep track of the how many transactions you've recorded (T) and do this:
bitcoind listtransactions 10000 T
If you expect to ever have more than 10000 transactions per 5 minute period (or however often you check), bump that number up.
What dose T mean? What dose from mean? The time? I think it looks good wo work with it when I know what "from" is  Edit: I dont understand, why the transactions will not get an id on my own server. So the "from" value will be get more interesting! keep track of the how many transactions you've recorded (T)
skipping the first [from] transactions
|
|
|
|
When a person or a group of person are in control of the value, IT IS CENTRALIZE. And no matter how you will call it, the problem still remain.
Let's assume for a second that your definition of centralization is correct. How would you create a decentralized currency? I could see something like limiting the amount any one address can hold, but people will just open multiple "accounts". We could tie accounts to identity, but then we need an organization to verify identities. |
|
|
|
Interesting. I'm pretty close to the minimum wage end (I make decent hourly rates, but I work less paid hours. I do a lot of other work I don't get paid for, and like to spend time with family and friends). I don't use any welfare programs. I was wondering why I wasn't eligible for the EITC since an extra $5000 (likely less since I'm unmarried with no children) sounds pretty nice, but I looked it up and I'm just now 25, which is the cutoff (ages 25-65 are eligible), so I will be eligible this year. Anyway the only problem I have with that article (other than its obvious bias that detracts from credibility in places) is the use of the term "disposable income". The minimum wage example doesn't have $37,777 in disposable income. The $5k EITC could arguably be disposable income, but the rest of it is benefits, not cash. |
|
|
|
If you use Bitcoin or other payment method simply email me.
You may be interested in a Bitcoin-based merchant service provider, depending on how much time you want to spend on integrating one with your site. That would allow for more automation. Two examples are http://paysius.com/ and http://bit-pay.com/Thx. I already use bit-pay in Superadaptoid: http://nestorgames.com/superadaptoid_detail.html...but the problem is that I charge a fixed shipping fee (9 Eur) no matter how many games you purchase, but Bit-pay doesn't support this feature (yet). Sure they do, just add a "shipping" item to the cart. Variable shipping would be harder though. |
|
|
|
NOBODY BUYS A GAME FOR 250 USD!!! (49BTC)
IF U CAN GET DIABLO 3 FOR 50USD (~10BTC)
Don't forget the extra 157 BTC you'll need to spend on your computer to be able to enjoyably play a game like Diablo. |
|
|
|
What's going on is both of you are stupid for banking at small banks when they are the prey of bigger banks. and I'm not saying this to be rude, I'm actually answering your question believe it or not. Interesting story none the less.. almost sounded unreal or like it was staged in Hollywood in some parts. (for example the perfect timing with the other client, and miscounting to give "Ed" $2000).. lol.. and did she really ask to suck your dicks? It was believable at that point in the story. but again, as sad as it is for the small banks, they are going to go bankrupt and if you and Ed are smart... you will take your money out and go to something with ties to billionaire Jews. This is the way the world is. You're safe with the strong fish, but vote for the weak if you get the chance.. Right now you have no chance to support the weak. The strong have the best hand right now and I don't think that will ever change, whether through revolution, Bitcoin or otherwise. The world is spiraling into chaos and there is no solution. Live while you can.. there is not much "life" left on earth. Everything is indeed going to shit. You are at the mercy of the strong fish in the meantime and Bitcoin is no different of a story in that respect. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=89771.0;topicseenPNC is not a small bank. Chase is not a small bank. In fact, many small banks are doing just fine. If they aren't they are doing something stupid, or are quietly owned by a large bank who siphons off funds. This "branding" issue is the only truth to your statement, but it's not hard to figure out if your bank is truly independent. Your advice for people to take their money out and give it to the big banks is propaganda. You may believe it's the safest way to hold money, but that's exactly what they want you to think. These are tough times, but don't just roll over and take it in the ass because you're scared. The only advantage big banks have over small, independent banks is that people like you think "bigger is safer". The truth is, many of the large banks (especially the investment banks) are already bankrupt. They merely have assets on the book "marked to maturity" instead of "marked to market". This is basically an assumption that by the time they cash in the asset it will be worth more than it is now. Unless they pull some profits out of their asses in the next few months to a year they are royally screwed. Some will figure it out, but some will bankrupt. Either way, the first $250,000 of your deposits should be safe (unless the politicians decide to drop it back to $100,000 right before the crisis, which wouldn't be too surprising) via the FDIC. Actually, if a big bank goes down, the FDIC will have a much harder time backing the deposits than if a small bank fails. They will likely figure out a way to pay out (otherwise we will see bankruns that usher in the greatest depression), but with a large bank failure, you will be waiting on your money much longer. |
|
|
|
I have told a lot of my friends about Bitcoin, some liked the idea some didn't. But the true problem IMO is that we (we=Greeks) don't trust others easily. And to start with Bitcoin you have to relay on trust.
To start with Bitcoin, you only have to trust the mathematics laid out here: http://www.bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdfOf course, you would also have to trust your mathematics abilities, so that's not really an option for everyone. What about when you want to buy bitcoins? You need to trus MtGox, or Intersango or any other service or person, don't you? Sorry guys but Greece rushing to the BTC is nothing but wet dreams of you hoarders. The Greece can withdraw their cash and put it under their mattress. It's EUR after all. That will not devaluate tomorrow even if they turn to the XGD. As an expert I would never ever suggest on a national news outlet to save money in BTC as what would happen would be you getting all excited about the article buying the BTC to 20$ faster than any any Greek can type bitcoin.org, Greeks would buy it to 250$ and then you would get wet feet and sell high leaving the "saved Greeks" in the rain. In order to allow new people buy bitcoin, the same amount of BTC has to be sold. Criminality has risen considerably, there are far more break-ins nowadays (both with guns/injuries/death and without) because people started keeping bank notes at home. Keeping money at home is a big NO-NO for me as it is no solution just as converting money to bitcoins isn't a solution either (just as you mention). Bruno, something like that is happening here as well. You can't get much money out of the bank without a notice. I don't know the exact limit though. Well, back when I started, I only needed to trust newegg.com do deliver my GPU order. Those days are past unless they start carrying custom ASICs in the future. Even then, it would take a big investment in hardware. So, yes, you would have to trust another service or person, but that person could be a Greek. If one person took the risk in say Athens, then others could buy from him and be more comfortable since they know where he lives and who his family is. He would be up shit creek without a paddle if he ran into trouble, but there is a lot of money to be made on exchange fees, so eventually someone will be diligent enough to do it without screwing themselves. |
|
|
|
Jk everyone, chill out. I'm American, so I'm no better . Likely a worse combination of criminal, racist, and genocide perpetrator. Well all have out history and very little of it is pretty. Really, I'm sorry if I offended anyone. I was just trying to demonstrate the common ancestry between Aussies and Brits, but I did it in a very unsavory way. Please forgive my indiscretion. You'd have to try a bit harder if you want to offend any aussies mate.  I doubt anybodies worried. Is that a challenge? |
|
|
|
|
Wow Phinnaeus.... What banks were they? I haven't had any issues with mine, but I haven't asked for non electronic withdrawals that large in a while.
|
|
|
|
In Bitcoin's current state, yes, it absolutely is. Give it 10-20 years. BTW, if you think that the current publicity on quantum computing is 'up-to-date,' you're kidding yourself. How do I know this? Simple. If I (or you) was in a position of ultimate authority, would I restrict the amount of information that actually reaches the public regarding technological advances? Fuck yes I would. tl;dr Quantum computing is far more advanced than any publication will lead you to believe. Ok, care to share your source?  |
|
|
|
I am requesting a 1 week, 1 day loan of 120 BTC. I will repay 130 BTC (8.333% interest) within 192 hours from receipt of the bitcoins. The bitcoins will be invested with BTCST and there will be no insurance/reserves in case of BTCST defaulting. I have had several large withdrawals lately and this loan will boost my total balance back up to the 7% tier. The loan will be accepted from the first person to PM me a repayment address. I will respond with a deposit address for you to send the coins.
Filled. |
|
|
|
If you're talking about php (assumed from the title), look at https://github.com/mikegogulski/bitcoin-phpAlso, > bitcoind help listtransactions listtransactions [account] [count=10] [from=0] Returns up to [count] most recent transactions skipping the first [from] transactions for account [account]. You can use '*' for the account to get all transactions, so I'd keep track of the how many transactions you've recorded (T) and do this: bitcoind listtransactions 10000 T If you expect to ever have more than 10000 transactions per 5 minute period (or however often you check), bump that number up. |
|
|
|
Exactly my thoughts.
Automobiles should never have been allowed, because their success caused the demise of livery stables, horse whip manufacturers and horse buggy manufacturers.
Or maybe automobiles should have be allowed after all, but the ordinance that a man with a warning bell walks in front of them should never have been rescinded.
I would say we should ask a different question that accurately describes what some of the ASIC detractor's more serious claims. I would propose the question would be: "How many cars would be on the road and in service if to have Cars (read: ASIC) on the road meant we had to shoot 98% of the horses" I say it in this extreme manner because the effect of the ASIC technology is effectively doing that. Sure, just like with the horses analogy, we still have horses around that are used for transportation. But all in all, cars or some variant of them is used for ground transportation that doesn't involve walking. I consider this the credible and serious question being asked of this transition. This is a point that I believe we are not fully evaluating. I am not dismissive to this question. Thoughts? Dalkore When cars came out, horses were re-purposed for other activities, because they could still do things cars couldn't. Ride on the beach, ride up a mountain, etc. Nowadays, most people who ride horses do so for fun, not transportation. Point: People didn't have to shoot the horses just to drive the cars. People don't have to shoot their GPUs, just because (at some point) they will no longer be profitable for mining. GPUs will always have other purposes (anyone here ever play a game?!). Wait, GPUs can do more than calculate SHA256 sums? |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
