|
This is why it's so difficult. I'm not familiar with any of the accusations or assertions against you. But cross culture laws and customs can get in the way. What is illegal here might not be illegal there. Here you have to be 21 to drink, many other countries laugh at that.
But what I read from your post, you just tried to help a 17 year old model with no sexual intent. 17 is an odd age here, depends on lots of circumstances. Are they emancipated? and many other factors. Not being familiar with all the laws in other countries, I couldn't say in your case. But one might imagine 17 being legal in many other countries. Wonder how our Child Labor Laws compare with China's? Probably won't hear much complaining about that though.
But why even bring it up again, unless it is an issue.
On the Magazine, just publish.
Have you a printer yet? Who is it? Would a print on demand publisher work for you? A POD Publisher would take a cut but you might get a larger subscription base. BTC and other fiat.
Good Luck.
|
|
|
|
I'll be interviewing applicants to fill this troll void.
I'd like to apply. Hey, A55H@T, you don't apply for the position of Troll. You take it. Any respectable Troll, isn't a Troll. And anyone interviewing for the position of a Troll, is a Troll. Trolling trolls troll trolling trolls trying to troll.  J/K I can't be a respectable troll no matter what I do. For example, you obviously don't find me a respectable troll. You sir, have been trolled. Hey you see this ^^ |
|
|
|
I'll be interviewing applicants to fill this troll void.
I'd like to apply. Hey, A55H@T, you don't apply for the position of Troll. You take it. Any respectable Troll, isn't a Troll. And anyone interviewing for the position of a Troll, is a Troll. Trolling trolls troll trolling trolls trying to troll. J/K |
|
|
|
I think the real interesting question is what would happen in the case of a netsplit (used to be common in IRC) -- today one would probably be caused by a totalitarian regime implementing a countrywide firewall (google "great firewall of china"). First question is how well bitcoin could route around it?
The second question comes from the observation that clearly after a few weeks passed we'd then have 2 independent perfectly consistent blockchains. After a few weeks, months, or years, when the great firewall finally goes down, how does the bitcoin network rejoin? In theory it would be possible to rejoin perfectly. In practice, I think that anyone with a communications pathway (possibly even paper) could double-spend their coins on either side of the firewall, causing major chaos. The smaller segment (i.e. china vs rest of world) will have a shorter blockchain. When the network rejoins all the blocks from the smaller subnet will be oprhaned as nodes replace them with blocks from the larger subnet. Any non double spend tx would simply revert to 0-confirm and would be included in the next block (or blocks because blocks will be very full depends on how long the split lasted). All coinbase tx will be orphaned. There is a 120 block limit on spending but a split of >120 blocks would mean any subsequent tx will be invalid. Intentional double spends would be the largest issue. Smart thing to do in a network split like that would be to make a paper backup of your wallet and wait to rejoin the network. The man knows what he is talking about. Now, can you foresee a Financial War (literally), i.e China vs. U.S. |
|
|
|
I think the real interesting question is what would happen in the case of a netsplit (used to be common in IRC) -- today one would probably be caused by a totalitarian regime implementing a countrywide firewall (google "great firewall of china"). First question is how well bitcoin could route around it?
The second question comes from the observation that clearly after a few weeks passed we'd then have 2 independent perfectly consistent blockchains. After a few weeks, months, or years, when the great firewall finally goes down, how does the bitcoin network rejoin? In theory it would be possible to rejoin perfectly. In practice, I think that anyone with a communications pathway (possibly even paper) could double-spend their coins on either side of the firewall, causing major chaos.
Very Good, This is testable and it doesn't need to be a country wide isolation. Have 3 Bitcoin clients and 2 miner bitcoind exposed to the internet. Then disconnect the internet but continue transactions between the clients and allow the miners to continue to find blocks. The difficulty will drop and you will quickly start finding blocks. After 2 months, expose the network back to the internet and see what happens. |
|
|
|
If miners are screwed then so is everbody
Beg to differ. Miners would not fail. Difficulty would fall due to lack of latency and profitability. Pools would become less important than solo mining. I don't think this is bad. The tendency is to mine at full capacity and bet the other guys. If everybody mines a little with reduced difficulty, it still works. PPS wouldn't be really effective but solo would do fine but it would be more of a lottery. Maybe you win, maybe you don't. If a new block takes more than 10 minutes to propagate across the ENTIRE Bitcoin network, then yes, everybody is screwed. And I can't imagine a network of VHF radios being able to propagate transactions very quickly. Yes, a slow mesh network would take time if done like the old BBS communication system. VHF, UHF, HF, etc... Well, that wouldn't take a lot of time at all. You realize voice, video, and text are currently being transmitted around the world at the speed of light. An NFC Mesh Network would be a little slower but still pretty damn fast. |
|
|
|
If miners are screwed then so is everbody
Beg to differ. Miners would not fail. Difficulty would fall due to lack of latency and profitability. Pools would become less important than solo mining. I don't think this is bad. The tendency is to mine at full capacity and bet the other guys. If everybody mines a little with reduced difficulty, it still works. PPS wouldn't be really effective but solo would do fine but it would be more of a lottery. Maybe you win, maybe you don't. |
|
|
|
Consider the attempt last year for the government of Egypt to block cross-border Internet traffic. Sites like gmail, Youtube and CNN even were not accessible by those within Egypt. But the traffic within the country was still functional. Eventually the bitcoin client would find peers within the country (or helped a bit by manually specifying which peers to connect to) so all that needs to happen is for one of those nodes to connect to the rest of the internet for the blockchain to be kept current. That could occur over dialup if nothing else. There are other ways the Internet could survive if disruptions to massive subcomponents were to occur (e.g., if consumer access providers were to block all traffic, for instance). Metro-wide networks built using mesh networking technologies with inter-city peering links could some day make reliance on the existing Internet infrastructure. You wouldn't get Facebook but you could still route e-mail, transfer data files and transact using bitcoin. Here's one approach for a quick-deploy emergency internet: - http://wiki.hacdc.org/index.php/Byzantium#Project_Goalswhat if all major interchange points were shut down like http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MAE-East and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MAE-West the result would be an overload of traffic on the rest of the system making the internet essentially worthless. Think cascading failure, it would be like a denial of service on the network Yes, you make a good point. I would propose though that 'efficiency' shouldn't be the sole model for durability. Imagine someone ddos'ing FIDO Mail. It would be a futile exercise. Decentralized meshed networks, might not be efficient, but they are durable. Also, by just slowing down the information a little, it deters attacks on a system. Remember all those BBS's that would call each other once a day or so and pass on information? Hard to stop that especially when there are so many lines of transfer of information between them. |
|
|
|
The Internet can't be shut down. However, it can be greatly slowed down. The electronic communication between computers is what is assumed to be the 'internet'. Anyone with the correct ham radio and software can have the internet, although don't expect to be watching youtube videos.  But Bitcoin could still work over the airwaves via a mesh network internet. Ideally, NFC (Near Field Communications) could be employed within devices to further enhance the ability. 2-Meter Radio, I believe can be bought on sight without tested licensing. |
|
|
|
Don't waste your time explaining. It is like speaking to a troop of monkeys. Your just going to get pissed on and hooted at. Best approach is to piss on them instead. It will help prevent the know nothings from falling into error.
The discussion is carrying on with civility and consideration, until cunicula shows up, and calls everyone monkeys who should be pissed on. I think the irony is perhaps lost on him? Cunicula - though your economic reasoning is fallacious, and your demeanor is inappropriate at best and obnoxious at worst, I still refrain from calling you names and have never advocated urination as fitting punishment for you. If you'd like to debate the economics with us "libertarian austrian asshats" whom you loathe so mightily, please do. But stop the immaturity. Your untenable positions can be considered if dressed for the event, but if you're unable or unwilling to engage in proper discourse please go elsewhere. Inflation, properly defined, is the degree by which the money supply increases. It is a useful metric unto itself irregardless of economic activity or other metrics. To claim that "GDP" and "prices" must be considered when strictly measuring inflation is to pervert the term beyond its useful definition. If you take umbrage with this statement, then please explain. I understand many contemporary economists use "inflation" to describe what is more accurately referred to as CPI figures, but many contemporary economists also think spending and consumption is productive behavior, so I'm skeptical of their prescience and take issue with their distortion of terminology. I know you're not a monkey, so stand up for yourself and address the issue like a man or bow politely and find your way to the door. Idiot, one does not 'debate' definitions. If you were not an idiot, then this would be clear to you already. Definitions are meant to make communication convenient. The rest of the world, including 99.9% of academic economists like me, and 99.9% of regular Joe's too, defines inflation as changes in the price level. If you prefer to use the asshat definition, so be it. What can I do if you decide that chocolate means cheese and are very obstinate about it? I certainly can't argue with you. Again, what an idiot you are. You certainly didn't learn this asshattery in school, which I suggest you go back to. What term do academic economists like you use to discuss what his definition is? If you don't have such a term, why is it ignored? Mainstream economists call what asshats call inflation the growth rate of the money supply. I suggest you consult wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Money_supplyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/InflationI'm more interested in talking about cryptocurrency and not interested in teaching economics for free. Teaching economics is not leisure for me. I am well-paid to do that in my day job and have plenty of opportunity to respond to student emails about stuff like this. Students are usually quite polite and reasonably intelligent, whereas the readership here is uneducated, insolent, and dull. If forum members start paying me US$2xx/hour, then it would be like executive education. The current forum situation is like exec ed without the fat paycheck. If the execs didn't pay big, then academics would piss on them, they wouldn't teach them. That is why I piss on the asshats here. If you would like to change that, then pay me like an executive would. I'll respond by politely educating the asshats instead. 18pzKT6PzJZKZ6RtBa1D9LZQxb5z1Dbwm7 For your question, I'll give you a reasonably thorough answer for 50 BTC upfront. I have sent you 1 BTC for your time and educational prowess. But meh... what do I know about making money. I'll leave it to you experts. |
|
|
|
|
Ok. Inflation experts. Correct me if wrong.
Inflation is the rise in prices of products. This occurs two ways. The scarcity of the resource wanted increases with the demand for said resource. And/Or increase the money supply. (i.e. print more money)
Inflation can be one, either, or a combination of both.
Just how I see it. I maybe wrong though.
|
|
|
|
|
Depends on what 'is' is. ~ Bill Clinton (Idiot?)
Define: "Planet" it took since Galileo Galilei to Hershel to the IAU in 2006 argued of the definition of Planet.
Pedantic I guess. But meh...
|
|
|
|
You might be a Scammer If... ...you say I am trolling you. what about if you are trolling them? marked I would be trolling them, wouldn't I? Please take this in the humor in which it is intended. Not implying anything here. You sell a BitCoin Magazine that keeps missing dead lines. |
|
|
|
I want the gift card!!!!!!!!!!!!!
-EP
I'll sell you the GC for $250 worth of BTC if I win. I bid BTC equiv. of $300. If I win, selling for $350 equiv. Accepted, until next higher bid. $351! $370 Accepted. Gotta love BTC btw: we should predetermine the method used for 'newdude' generating a 'random pick'. Maybe a gribble random generation on IRC #bitcoin-otc for all to see. Or a trusted third party like theymos random generating. |
|
|
|
|
There has been some debate on that. It seemed to be the case, but then it seems to have changed.
|
|
|
|
I want the gift card!!!!!!!!!!!!!
-EP
I'll sell you the GC for $250 worth of BTC if I win. I bid BTC equiv. of $300. If I win, selling for $350 equiv. Accepted, until next higher bid. $351! Accepted |
|
|
|
I want the gift card!!!!!!!!!!!!!
-EP
I'll sell you the GC for $250 worth of BTC if I win. I bid BTC equiv. of $300. If I win, selling for $350 equiv. Accepted, until next higher bid. |
|
|
|
I want the gift card!!!!!!!!!!!!!
-EP
I'll sell you the GC for $250 worth of BTC if I win. |
|
|
|
The corrections system is the largest employer in the country after Wallmart (I mean the industry as a whole not an individual company). That is not even counting the law enforcement side, or all of the asset seizures. Putting people in prison is big money, and we have over 2 million people in prison right now. Decent related article explaining some of the profit motives: http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=852Funny how that is being thought of recently. There have been people being released from Prison because the 'State' doesn't want to take care of their medical needs. Last case I remember is a woman in Mississippi that needed a Kidney Transplant. When enough people become poor, hungry, and/or need medical care, prison will be the support system. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
