Wait, push left or right?

Right, which you start paying in 30 days or so.

Sure, at that point. But that's the non-chargeback case. That's not what happens if you reverse the charge.

No, one is not "just like" the other. When you buy a house, the seller has *no* agreement with the mortgage company. The mortgage company just pays them. When you buy something with a credit card, there is a contractual arrangement between the merchant and the credit card issuer. These two situations are simply not comparable at all.

I don't understand what you mean by "with my logic". These are two different factual situations. With a home mortgage, the mortgage company only pays the seller. With a credit card, the merchant has a contract with the bank that sets out a different relationship. This is a factual difference, it's not something you can logic out. You have to read the contracts to understand the relationship. (The contracts are not really freely negotiated though. The credit card issuer tells the merchant to take it or leave it, and Federal law sets out many of the requirements.)

To mitigate long-term risk, but not short-term risk. And to avoid having to do credit inquiries and avoid having to meet other requirements. Nevertheless, the bank's agreement with the merchant permits them to refuse to collect from the consumer on behalf of the merchant. A merchant cannot use a credit card issuer to protect themselves from the risks associated with their own non-performance and the consumer need not sue the merchant if they have not yet made payment. That's what the contracts between the merchant and the credit card issuer say.

No, the bank is extending credit to the merchant in the case of a credit card. Why do you think credit card companies bother to investigate merchants or closing down merchant accounts for fraud? The credit card company is collecting the principle on behalf of the merchant and if you do not owe the merchant the principle, you do not owe it to the credit card company. That is the way credit cards work, at least in the United States.

By the way, in the vast majority of cases, this really does benefit the merchants. Very few people would buy a camera from an online store if they had to investigate the camera and the store the way you have to investigate a real estate purchase. And, of course, the credit card issuers don't make much money if consumers are afraid to use their credit cards.

You realize that is 25 cents a week?  If it causes ANY problems at all with your paid customers you blew it. 

I do a lot of internet marketing, and am a bit of a webmaster on the side. As a result, I have a couple of dozen Amazon t1.micro instances with very low CPU utilization that other people are paying me to keep running.

Since I'm already paying for the servers and CPU utilization is not metered, I'm looking for a linux cpuminer that I can use to more fully utilize the processing power at my disposal. It is important that this not overtax the CPU to the detriment of the webserver, though - are there any tools out there that will help me constrain resource utilization to under, say, 80% total across all processes?

I looked through the stickies, and it doesn't look like it will be an issue setting up the miners, I just need to be pointed in the right direction to learn how to keep it out of the way of the actual "work" being done on the systems.

yes, it is just like every other distributed, decentralized, pseudonymous, peer-to-peer, secure, irreversible accounting system.

even my grandmother knows what one of those is.

You're not giving them away, you're selling raffles for them in a pyramid scheme.

It is mildly depressing that the majority of the bitcoin community:

• Jumps on this idea with wild excitement, with apparently no consideration of why it might be a bad idea to buy into this.
  
• Discusses stuff like this in a forum where the "im in LETS DO THIS LOL!" posts can't be downvoted so that the "um guys, this is a pyramid/gambling scheme" comments get buried. (I'm looking forward to new forum software.)

Anybody want to make a javascript page to do the ticket-picker math I specify above? I'll try it if no genius can whip one up in minutes, I'd like to make sure many/any method can arrive at same answer for winner.

Input 1: Last 10 of hash (10 digits hexidecimal)
Input 2: Number of entries (base10 decimal)
Input 3: Do ticket numbers start at 0? (yes = 0, no = 1)
Output 1: Input 1 % Input 2 + Input 3

Right?? I was ready to hit send and buy that 0.5BTC BFL single!

Use me as your referral, draco49@tormail.net, and if I win I'll pay everyone who used my referral their 0.50BTC back.

The issue I see is that the bonus program you laid out issues fractions of entries. Are only full entries counted towards the draw? (ie 1.05=1, 1.85=1, 2.05=0, etc)

This method cannot be independently verified.

• There can be false unpaid entries (even with payment verified on blockchain, they can be paid in by the organizer to himself).
• The winning ticket selection method cannot be seen or verified by all outside parties.

I can at least solve the second part. The bitcoin blockchain contains lots of completely random hashes that are NSA-recommended as unreversible, not predetermined, outside control of any one party, and published publicly.

Here is my recommended method to declare winning ticket numbers of any forum lottery:

1. Publish block# to determine winner. For this lottery's timeline, block 171420 (~8 days from now) after 120 confirmations could be the one to determine the winner (block 170267 used in example below),
2. Disclose ticket numbers (spreadsheet) beforehand (start at 0, list forum IDs, etc), allow all entrants to see they are present in list and that there are no mystery entries nobody can account for.
3. Determine total number of tickets at entrance cutoff time (lets say 711 in this example),
4. The random data to be used from the block will be the last 10 digits of the hash,
5. The winning ticket number will be determined by the modulo (remainder) function [python = math.fmod(int(hash_last_10, 16), num_of_entries)]. Winning number as output by Win7 x32 calculator if any disputes of solution.

Here is how to independently determine the winner with no programming on Windows calculator:

• Verify the block hash from two independent sources (ideally one being your local blockchain),
• Open Windows Calculator. Select View->Programmer. Select "Hex" radio button,
• Paste last 10 digits of hash into calculator (73ef1acb71 in block 170267 in this example),
• Press "Mod",
• Enter number of tickets (711)
• Press =
• See winner (example winning ticket number is #141)
  

Better yet, I hope the forum admins turn his IP in to the cops of his local area.

Even better if he's posting from work, and the IP leads them straight to it.

The bulls need some serious volume to overcome any remaining bears. I don't really see it atm...but that could change I suppose.

Don't get me wrong. I check your predictions regularly. Very helpful and interesting with all these drawn lines and such. Just pointing to the fact that there are probably more than a few variables that are beyond a technical analysis. Thefts for example and unpredictable reactions of the market. Perhaps if one could factor in a bit of chaos theory?!

When the order is placed, message me an address I can pay once I pick it up.  If I do not receive a message by 9:30 PM EST (2:30 AM UTC), this offer is void.  I will pay the amount on the receipt converted to bitcoins at $4.9/BTC no later than 11PM EST.

About to break through $5 again? 

Not like they haven't tried, but as soon as their bank turned them down, no other bank was willing to have them as customer as well.

It is an extension of credit on the customer, not the merchant. If the customer does something dumb with the line of credit, it should be their responsibility, not the merchant's. At most, it should be a problem shared by the customer and the bank that extended the credit. This is akin to a mortgage in a house: if you bought a 400K 1 bdr appartment in LA before the bubble bursted, you and the bank are stuck with the debt, and you pay the price, not the seller of the property.

While I do understand there should be some merchantability protection for the consumer, it seems to me that the merchant ALWAYS ends up paying for the broken dishes, not the banks, and almost never the consumer. This is by the way, after the merchant has already been pounded by some irrational "processing fee" by the credit card companies.