P.S. I'm not against the fact of using a gas. In WW1 the gas was used by both sides. There is no difference as long as result is death of enemy. USA and Israel uses banned weapons and tactics all the time. Why everyone could not use the most effective means to kill enemy?
Poison gas is a horrible way to die. Generally, war is pretty horrible, but poison gas is even more painful than most ways to go. Perhaps we should just ban all forms of war and violence? |
|
|
|
I won't develop too much but can tell that the US feel compelled to intervene (officially) because of suspected chemical weapon use. (prohibited since 1997 by the UN)
If it is prohibited by the UN, then it should be the UN who punishes them for using chemical weapons. The US has no jurisdiction there, and we should keep out of the conflict. I don't think we should be helping either side. If some individual wants to go help one side or the other, then they can go to Syria with a rifle and help out, but I do not want to be forced to pay for it. As to answer "why is the US involved, what's in it for them?": The US enjoys a place of power in the world. They maintain that place by getting involved wherever they can to show off their might and power. Leadership of the US thinks they will appear weak if they choose to do nothing, then they might lose their position as Almighty World Superpower. |
|
|
|
|
I have seen several people here making a distinction between cashing out for fiat and using their bitcoins to purchase stuff. How are the two different? Either way you are giving up your bitcoins for something else you value.
|
|
|
|
If we start spending other people's money on anything other than donations, it might be best to register and start acting like a "legitimate" non-profit.
How come? The IRS, my friend. I believe the Internal Revenue Service might insist bitcoins sent to us constitute "taxable income" unless we register as a 501c. I could be wrong, however. I don't have much experience in running non-profits. One issue with that: Bitcoin100 is not an American entity. I donate my time to it, and you, Bruno, and I are US citizens (dunno about edd), none of whom actually get a salary. Other people helping and volunteering are from other countries. So Bitcoin100 is really a web-based entity. One could argue that since I am running it, it is my personal thing, and I should do personal reporting of my own personal hobby project, specifically to make sure I'm not scamming with a fake "charity," but I don't claim to own Bitcoin100, am not in sole possession of the funds (others have the private key as well), and all activities are completely public, so there is nothing for me to scam or hide. This whole thing is one of those new tricky "global entity" things that many other international companies are struggling with...  The problem that you will run into is that you claim not to own those funds, but nobody else claims ownership of them either. The government does not like things to be unowned, so it would make sense to form some sort of organization which would lay claim to those funds (and thus they would not need to be added to your personal income for tax purposes). |
|
|
|
Price is going up! Looks like it's sitting at an all time high of 0.033BTC!
Interesting that the price of RentalStarter is going up despite the BTC rising against the USD, which would tend to push the share price downward. |
|
|
|
More likely it was an irrlevent post - what has Bitcoin got to do with a person who is in Credit Card debt?
Bitcoin has everything to do with the banking system, that is why people are in debt, because of the banks. People are not in debt because of the banks, they are in debt because they spent more money than they had. |
|
|
|
Curious I've heard the same argument from someone before... what if bitcoin price drops, what if someone sends you a fake bitcoin, what if SHA256 gets hacked. "ANYTHING can be cracked" he says. While I believe it's much easier to hack someone's computer than to crack SHA I started wondering if bitcoin is just too hard for the non-tech savvy to understand. Or they'll believe it when it's too late, as it is with ANYTHING when you're ignorant of something. Just another missed opportunity, I guess...
It is never too late to start using bitcoins. The value you gain as the bitcoins you hold rise in price is only part of the reason to use bitcoins. The other part of using bitcoins is actually using them rather than just holding them. Using bitcoins you can easily send money to anybody in the world at a very low or zero cost. This is a step in the direction of economic freedom, and with freedom comes prosperity. People can benefit from using bitcoins even when the price stays steady. |
|
|
|
I think $1000 is the price a lot of people are anticipating. It's high enough that much of the 'old money' in this economy will start to rumble and awaken from their slumber. I'm not sure if the price could reach a sustainable $1000, as it is the sweet spot for a lot of people. Thoughts?
If it goes to $1000, it will hit $10,000 in a matter of hours. Maybe minutes Yup. You never really know. If BTC price is exploding up at the time it reaches 1,000 it could blow right by as easily as it did 50 or 60. You could have said the same thing about 10 or 100. "If it goes to $10, it will hit $100 in a matter of hours, maybe minutes." Price hit 10, then soon thereafter shot up to 32 and slowly crashed back down to 2. "If it goes to $100, it will hit $1000 in a matter of hours, maybe minutes." Price hit 100, then rose to 260 before losing steam and crashing back to 50. |
|
|
|
what are you bitcoin investments?
Mostly buying and selling stocks on btct and bitfunder, but I do a bit of BTC/USD trades as well. |
|
|
|
This means that Brazil is ripening for bitcoin adoption? |
|
|
|
|
How about a travel service that takes bitcoins and sets up airfares, hotels, cruises, etc.
|
|
|
|
Erik Voorhees gave a talk at Bitcoin 2013 in San Jose back in May in which he spoke about the market cap of Bitcoin in the context of global fiat usage. While there were a lot of numbers thrown around, this is the fact I typically use in discussions: If just 0.1% of USD (not counting Euro, Pound, Yuan, etc... ONLY USD) was invested into Bitcoin, the price would be nearly $1000. I don't know exactly how he came up with those numbers, but it goes to show that we've got a LONG road ahead of us. but 0,1% still is a lot: think that even most of the users here in this forum (=early adaptors) don't have invested 0,1% of their savings, or am i wrong? maybe i should give a good example and invest some more..  A year ago less than 10% of my savings was in bitcoins. Without investing any more, actually taking out of bitcoins more than I originally invested, now I have just over 50% of my savings in bitcoins. This has been possible thanks to bitcoins rising rapidly and also some smart bitcoin investments, my bitcoin investments do better in an average week than my USD investments do in a year. |
|
|
|
I think bitcoin makes on sense at all.
A decentralized money means every client holds a central bank -- it's feasible only for a very small scale. The block chain is 10G today. It can grow up to 100...0GB if it wants to get the same position as usd or euro or cny -- obviously it's impossible.
It's no better than an idiot comapring to current finacial system. It does not support transaction, rollback, tracing, etc.
When more people get involved, it will be a nightmare.
When SHA is hacked, everything is gone.
The rule for wealth is so ridiculous -- btc mining likes lottery. Is this better than rules in today's real world? No, it's just ridiculous.
It's just a new kind of Ponzi scheme. Everyone hope his btc will become more and more expensive so he can get rich without doing anything. I do not think they will succeed.
Am I wrong?
Look into "chain pruning" for reducing the size of the blockchain. Not having transaction rollbacks is considered a positive attribute. When SHA is hacked, then we can upgrade to a different algorithm. It is not a ponzi scheme, you might want to do more research into what a ponzi scheme is. Bitcoin does not pay any interest. Yes, you are wrong. |
|
|
|
|
1 bitcoin is worth 1 gun. I was at a gunshop the other day and I noticed you can buy a gun* at the price equivalent of one bitcoin**.
* It was a little Phoenix arms 22lr pistol, not anything huge but still a gun.
** Using the MtGox price, which I know is questionable but it make the parity nice and even.
A bitcoin now is about the same price as I saw an SKS listed a couple years ago. The prices on guns has gone up dramatically the past couple years, not quite as much as bitcoins but definitely one of the highest increases in any one item class. That is mainly due to the political climate, and the fear that more guns were going to be banned. [Tinfoil hat] I suspect some of this political pressure came from the gun makers themselves, they certainly get a much bigger profit now selling the same thing.
|
|
|
|
|
I guess you could say that the Bitcoin100 is at least 100 people committing to donate bitcoin.
|
|
|
|
A long long time ago
I can still remember
I didn't what haiku were
And I knew if I had a poem
It needs to be big as a tome
And maybe even rhyme a little there.
But people yelled five seven five
I answered "Please just get a live,
You wheeaboos are crazy
Your rhyming is just lazy"
I can't remember who the bloke
Who told me "It's a buddhist joke"
But something touched me deep and broke
The day the haiku woke.
And I'm rhyming:
Hai, Hai, Japanesian guy,
I'm like a Shogun with my Bōkun
I am the West Samurai
And good old boys were drinking sake from rice,
singing "This'll be the day that I hai-
This'll be the day that I hai-
-kuuuuuuuuuuuuuu.
Awesome, you could be the next Weird Al  |
|
|
|
You can read more in the Bitcoin100 thread: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=52543.0(I do not speak for the Bitcoin100, you might want to contact forum user Rassah for more information) Having it registered as a charity would be a good idea. To receive funds from the bitcoin100 you must add a bitcoin donation option to your website. |
|
|
|
I'd have to agree... I'd like the "Embassy" part dropped. I don't quite like it.
Call me a cynic but having the word "Embassy" in the title makes it seem like this is being run by a bunch of egotistical morons with delusions of grandeur.
The name was taught in french first, then translated into english. It's relatively common in french to qualify somebody as an ambassador when that person is a representative of a specific domain, like sports, music, arts, etc. It seems it's not necessarily the case in english. Your feedback is considered though. Even if you don't like the name, we are working hard to promote Bitcoin. We share the same objectives, and we would appreciate if you could refrain from using personal attacks. Thanks and have a nice day. In English it is fine to describe somebody as an ambassador of something, like you say, but it is always an informal description of the person, not an officially stated title. So a newspaper might describe a businessman as "an ambassador from such and such coalition" or whatever, but the man himself would never introduce himself "I am ambassador Jones", that would just sound pretentious. But the main point is that even though people may be described as ambassadors, nobody ever refers to their office as an "embassy". I am sure there is a different English word you could use. "Bitcoin Outreach Center", or something like that. |
|
|
|
Because of the seized funds, Mtgox is now essentially running a pyramid business. New money coming in is used for paying customers waiting to withdraw.
They are not paying interest out of deposits, so I think it is just Fractional Reserve, not a pyramid or ponzi scheme (although you could argue that they overlap). |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
