No one is suggesting microsoft is buying Ether.

Even if they never do ETH price will still continue to rise massively.

Ethereum.

Not Even Once.

I remember a story like this similar with bitcoin when bitcoin was at 30 euro. The guy must have made a fortune... it is very risky though, wouldn't recommend.

As the time goes on, the proportion of the premined coin will reduce, it should be 60% eary next year.

Not even remotely following you.  I dont have any idea what lies you think I am spreading. Kinda looks like we are saying the same thing. You raise some specific points that seem to support what I said.

But thanks for the hair pic.

Weird...I saw that scene myself - it was in the Twilight Zone Movie - and I thought it was eerie. Maybe it's a Canuck thang.  

Has it occurred to anyone on the internet that the big improvement.
That wiping out your Operating System then installing a new one fresh..
Would make it *seem* faster.

When it comes to Noobs there is far more of them on cell phones than on computers..

Imagine this.. You run Windows 7 SP1 on your PC for 4 years every day..
Then i lie to you and hand you a new version, Windows 7 SP2 (which doesn't exist)
You then install it and proclaim WOWOWOW it's sooo much faster OMG!!
Then i tell you it was exactly 100% identical to what they were already running LOL

I coined a phrase for this logic.. i call it "common sense"
..i wonder if it will catch on with the masses? (i doubt it)

Then we have a topic title here (i seen at the top of Google search results)
That says here is "Proof"
Then you say in one of the tests, Marshmallow had a lower score
and then give a disclaimer recanting the Benchmark results LOL
AKA: a contradiction.

Maybe re-post the story with a more appropriate headline and more comprehensive testing?
What you could do is Google search the Antutu problem
which was explained how to fix on the 2nd Google search result..
then proceed to run tests that include a 3rd option..
Re-installing *fresh* Android v5.1.1 for testing.

She is no stranger to causing a stir.

And Miley Cyrus was at it again on Friday, sharing a flashback snap of Fuller House actress Jodie Sweetin in her younger years as she straddled her ex-husband and held a cigarette.

'Current Mood #fullerhouse,' she captioned the image of the actress, who battled substance abuse following her time on the original series Full House.

The photo collage captured Jodie as she wore a pair of flashy bright purple trousers, arched her back and angled her breasts towards the man - her ex-husband Cody Herpin.

In another snap, the man appeared to be admiring her breasts as he clutched a cigarette.  Herpin's face was Photoshopped and replaced with that of Sweetin's current fiance, Justin Hodak

Fans soon rose to Sweetin's defense, accusing Miley of purposely trying 'to humiliate someone.'

'You know this would get headlines and she's a mother. Just want to humiliate someone,' wrote one Instagram user.

'Not really funny... she was a drug addict and in a really bad place. she turned her life around and is well now. No need for you to bring this back...' one fan said. 

'And the Miley Cyrus bar has been lowered again....,' said another follower.

'I used to look up to you Miley. But not so much any more. Think of how you would feel if someone did this to you!,' wrote an Instagram user.

Jodie is now sober after a difficult battle with drug addiction which she documented in her memoir unSweetined.

Jodie played Stephanie Tanner on the original hit show, which went off the air in 1995.

The actress, who battled a meth addiction, spoke to TV Guide in 2009 about when she first started using the drug.

I will be sure to ban theymos

hmm you do know most moderators are in their mid 20's right? Not really sure what age has to do with anything here.
Also I would love to see mpreps shoe collection.

Wow that's horrible, that people are being paid for doing work.

"nothing personal, I hate you" hehe I do appreciate your walls of text though.


hmm..

memespouting gifshaming will no longer be tolerated if I win

And for what it's worth, I'm certainly not discounting your belief that the bottom may well drop out of the alt market.  It very well might happen. From a post I wrote earlier today:


This is a small, relatively illiquid slice of a small market.  Anything can happen.  It's small enough to be subject to manipulation, certainly.  

  Fair enough.

I was referring to the daily trading volume since the OP was talking about value of coins. I wasn't referring to capital investments in projects. Are you saying that it is bullshit to say there is more trading volume then in past years?

Not here to argue with you but while you may be right about some alts, anyone able to click on a chart on coinmarketcap can see that many alts have in fact risen along with bitcoin. Yes, when there are large spikes in bitcoins price many people liquidate their alts to get into Bitcoin but there is usually an upward trend that follows shortly thereafter.

 I see this market as becoming increasingly difficult to predict. We are seeing unprecedented amounts of capital flowing in. I don't think the logic that for alts to rise in value Bitcoin must fall or vice versa really applies to the future of cryptocurrency. I'm not saying that there is unlimited wealth but I do believe that the current market for alts and bitcoin are in their infancy and we are just getting started. The market is minuscule in the grand scheme of things (the global economy). This may cause us to view things myopically.

I do agree that we will likely see a dip leading up to the halving and  shortly thereafter, I just don't think it spells doom for alts.

Maybe in an episode of the Twilight Zone or Outer Limits where things do the opposite of reality.  Maybe a Spoetnik gremlin will be on the wing of the plane screwing with the engine too.

How do you know it?  

Please put something like a simple description as to what is the link about. Not everyone here is willing to click links posted in this forum.

For those of you who have been following the news, you’re likely familiar with the heated discussion surrounding T-Mobile's Binge On program, which came under scrutiny for the way it downgrades the video quality on streaming services such as Netflix in order to save bandwidth. AT&T and Verizon became new targets for such criticism last week.

While T-Mobile has since repaired some of the commotion it created, with new partnerships and a revised policy, AT&T and Verizon are still under fire for downgrading Netflix video quality.

However, mobile carriers may not always be the ones to blame, as Netflix told the Wall Street Journal on Thursday that it has been lowering the quality of its streaming videos for more than five years now. They said that this happens across a number of wireless carriers across the globe, including AT&T and Verizon.

The company explained that it imposes a cap of 600 kilobits -- or around 75 kilobytes -- per second on its streams because it doesn’t want its customers to end up with inflated bills, which “may discourage future viewing”. The problem is that the company has only now disclosed this practice, and data caps like these are not easy to justify in the context of ubiquitous access to much faster wireless networks. WSJ received statements from both Verizon and AT&T, and they’re not pretty:


Netflix offered an example of how watching just two hours of HD video on its service would eat some six gigabytes of data, which is the maximum allowed on a $80 Verizon plan. However, the company also said that it doesn’t apply the same cap on T-Mobile and Sprint, which have a “consumer-friendly policy” of slowing the speed instead of charging additional overage fees.

It’s important to note that this news has the potential to damage the image that Netflix has been creating for itself over the years, which is one of a championing supporter of net neutrality.

Oh boy Netflix. Just do what other streaming services do - let users pick the quality of streams - like a low/medium/HD option.
Rippleman Mar 25 2016, 4:16am

they do...
lkernan Mar 25 2016, 8:08am

@rippleman The whole point of the story is that the lock it onto low.
naxal Mar 25 2016, 6:52pm

Good, even the web content providers are too unhappy with carriers !!

These carriers, always manipulating books and shouting loses !! They have made this unlimited word a joke..
farmeunit Mar 25 2016, 2:20am

The carriers are still to blame.  Mainly for having ridiculously small caps.  That's the only reason I moved to Sprint.  I travel so much, I am always streaming.  Typically 8-10GB a month.  Sometimes a little more.

 

The problem with letting users pick, is that most of them don't know what the hell they are doing.  There should be some type of opt-in/out for this.

 
Edited by farmeunit, Mar 25 2016, 2:22am :
+warwagon Mar 25 2016, 2:31am

ya, half the people, when I ask what their data cap is, have no idea what i'm talking about. Then I rephrased it asking how much data they get per month. They still have no idea what i'm talking about.
SpeedyTheSnail Mar 25 2016, 2:04am

Good thing I have WiFi nearly everywhere I go!
Figure 8 Dash Mar 25 2016, 2:16am

Wanna be mad at Netflix but it's kind of hard to because they made a logical response to unreasonable data caps. I understand that cell towers have finite capacity, so data caps play a role in keeping towers from being overloaded. But data limits of 1GB? 2GB?

G-T-F-O!!!!

That's greed. Netflix is just trying to exist within that greed and retain users. The real blame is of course with the carriers... and partially with the FCC. I think the FCC is too easily left off the hook. Remember, the FCC licenses the spectrum to the carriers. With Verizon and AT&T having such a fierce monopoly on certain bands, they're not forced to compete on service. So instead we get uncompetitive data caps and high prices.

How nice it would be if carriers didn't have a monopoly on spectrum. If the phone you bought could be used on any carrier without fear of being locked in. Where carriers had to compete on service and not spectrum. How nice it would be...
+warwagon Mar 25 2016, 3:50am

I can't ever imagine watching Netflix over my Cellular Data.
greenwizard88 Mar 25 2016, 3:26am

I fail to see how this will harm Netflix's image. The complaints were about Comcast et al artificially slowing Netflix on wired connections.

This, this is Netflix being responsible for people who have no need for 100kb/second video streams on 5" screens.

CJ33 Mar 25 2016, 3:17am

AT&T's response is full of irony
macmax Mar 25 2016, 3:09am

Why not show - You will be using X/Y/Z MB of data for watching the stream on Low/Medium/High.

This helps the user choose depending on their current usage and monthly cap.
+T3X4S Mar 25 2016, 4:31am

I must be weird - there is nothing on netflix I want to see so bad that I cant wait till I get infront of a large tv
Watching a movie on an 8" screen ?  why ?
Hellcat_M Mar 25 2016, 4:48am

"“We’re outraged to learn that Netflix is apparently throttling video for their AT&T customers without their knowledge or consent.”"

Let me try and rephrase to tell you what AT&T really wanted to say "FU*( you AT&T for cutting into our profits. We're going to make it sound like its on you, when its actually on our greed"
n_K Mar 25 2016, 9:19am

Where's all the people that commented on t-mobiles breach of net neutrality supporting it? Surely they should be here commenting how great it is to not bother with it, or have they worked out how daft ignoring net neutrality really is?
NPGMBR Mar 25 2016, 10:54am

I get 6g monthly with rollover on ATT. Granted I don't watch much video on my phone but when I do, I can easily and quickly eat up just 1g streaming video on my 30 minute trip home.

The Ethereum price is still over $10. When it becomes $1 again, you may declare it is a dead coin.