i dont want my wife cheating on me whit a niggar brotha from tha place in here.
so we want equantity, bigger penis for us all.
i want a 50 diameter and 40 long cock thanks
So you're a European with a small package? Why advertise your inadequacy? You can always apply for a U.S. citizenship and never tell anyone you used to be European. Problem solved. |
|
|
|
|
That's one of the problems with a first-past-the-post voting system. At least there were really only two choices... imagine if there were several; you could have a president elected with an even lower percentage of the population!
|
|
|
|
Well, stealing is a crime itself, so yes. I don't see why it would be allowed. It's stealing lol.
Stealing requires ownership, Bitcoin network grants no legal ownership rights.
He didn't get in trouble for "stealing bitcoins", that is a BS headline for lay people. He broke many crimes unrelated to bitcoin and violated certain regulations required as a federal agent. Carl Force, a former U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration agent, admitted to charges of extortion, money laundering and obstruction of justice. He was not charged with "theft of property" aka stolen bitcoins, because there is no such law. Almost all things are regulated under law, whether you are aware of it or not. Currently, bitcoin is not regulated and as such, there are no laws that determine a users rights. He certainly did get charged and plead guilty for stealing Bitcoin. Only it wasn't simply stealing, it was extortion! Carl Mark Force plead guilty on three counts. The third count was Extortion under color of official right (which makes it worse), in violation of 18 U.S. Code § 1951 which states: (a) Whoever in any way or degree obstructs, delays, or affects commerce or the movement of any article or commodity in commerce, by robbery or extortion or attempts or conspires so to do, or commits or threatens physical violence to any person or property in furtherance of a plan or purpose to do anything in violation of this section shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both.
(b) As used in this section—
(1) The term “robbery” means the unlawful taking or obtaining of personal property from the person or in the presence of another, against his will, by means of actual or threatened force, or violence, or fear of injury, immediate or future, to his person or property, or property in his custody or possession, or the person or property of a relative or member of his family or of anyone in his company at the time of the taking or obtaining.
(2) The term “extortion” means the obtaining of property from another, with his consent, induced by wrongful use of actual or threatened force, violence, or fear, or under color of official right.
(3) The term “commerce” means commerce within the District of Columbia, or any Territory or Possession of the United States; all commerce between any point in a State, Territory, Possession, or the District of Columbia and any point outside thereof; all commerce between points within the same State through any place outside such State; and all other commerce over which the United States has jurisdiction. Bitcoin is property. Bitcoin is money. Taking it from the owner without consent is theft. Taking it from the owner with threats of harm is extortion. The laws required to protect your property are already on the books - there needn't be a specific Bitcoin law. .... No, that is not an official governmental determination. He willingly pled guilty to those charges without contest, meaning the government didn't have to prove whether property was extorted. There is no offical judgment, ruling or law for any high court which determines bitcoin to be a property. In fact, different agencies and different US Courts have determiend that bitcoin is many different things, sometimes out right contradicting other judgments. Citing a single case where the defendant pled guilty without contest does not create official governmental legislative determination of what bitcoin is and is not. I cite a single case because to date there are not many cases involving virtual currencies (yet). Burden of proof and proof are totally different concepts. The determination were in the charges themselves. If the prosecutor didn't feel those charges could have been proven, they would not have been levelled. At the preliminary hearing, those charges would have been tossed out and ultimately Carl Mark Force would have given them the finger and walked away scot-free but he plead guilty (most likely) because of the overwhelming evidence against him and to get a lighter sentence. You don't have to accept that one single case anyway; the IRS - which is bureau of the US federal Department of the Treasury has already deemed that virtual currencies are property. FINCEN another bureau of the Department of the Treasury has issued similar guidance and the director has said that virtual currencies are subject to the same rule as other currencies. So if you really need a government definition of value in Bitcoin in order to make the determination of theft, there you have it. Those are official US government determinations... but I maintain that none are needed to determine theft of bitcoins. That is not how the US legal system works, sometimes the federal prosecutors (and low level prosecutors) will lay dozens of charges only to, after many months of trial and testimony, narrow them down to the only ones they believe they could win. They have the right to add or subtract charges in mid-case based upon the record made during the trial. Normally, they lay their so many counts and stick with them, but they still reserve the right to amend them during the trial and not bound to the original charges. There is no doubt that the government had overwhelming evidence against him, they were watching him in real time and letting him hang himself, was my understanding. But the fact that he pled guilty does not mean that the extortion charge proves that bitcoin is a legal property. I am aware of what the IRS says and their statement is only an advisory opinion. It is not an official determination that is based on law and legislative definitions, it is only an opinion on how US citizen should determine what bitcoin is for the purpose of paying taxes. So the IRS says that it is a property, but only as far as it determines it as a taxable asset, otherwise for things like property rights and thefts and etc, they don't really care and have no opinion or advice. There is no doubt that US Citizen should pay any taxes on the profit from bitcoins at the time of selling them into fiat, but anything beyond the IRS is speculative until those agencies provide their opinions or the legislators create laws that define and regulate it. In theory, if bitcoin is a property, it should be reported to the FBI and they should investigate each theft report and provide the victim with the result of the investigation as well as information into any prosecutions since bitcoin is a borderless, cross-state, international currency payment system. It would legally fall within in jurisdiction due to the cross state nature of the network. My understating now is the FBI doesn't care and tells users to report it to their local police departments, which is obviously going to go no where. The FBI doesn't want to look into each bitcoin theft becase they are already overloaded with thefts from federally insured banking systems. You make some very good points which I can't dispute. |
|
|
|
Well, stealing is a crime itself, so yes. I don't see why it would be allowed. It's stealing lol.
Stealing requires ownership, Bitcoin network grants no legal ownership rights.
He didn't get in trouble for "stealing bitcoins", that is a BS headline for lay people. He broke many crimes unrelated to bitcoin and violated certain regulations required as a federal agent. Carl Force, a former U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration agent, admitted to charges of extortion, money laundering and obstruction of justice. He was not charged with "theft of property" aka stolen bitcoins, because there is no such law. Almost all things are regulated under law, whether you are aware of it or not. Currently, bitcoin is not regulated and as such, there are no laws that determine a users rights. He certainly did get charged and plead guilty for stealing Bitcoin. Only it wasn't simply stealing, it was extortion! Carl Mark Force plead guilty on three counts. The third count was Extortion under color of official right (which makes it worse), in violation of 18 U.S. Code § 1951 which states: (a) Whoever in any way or degree obstructs, delays, or affects commerce or the movement of any article or commodity in commerce, by robbery or extortion or attempts or conspires so to do, or commits or threatens physical violence to any person or property in furtherance of a plan or purpose to do anything in violation of this section shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both.
(b) As used in this section—
(1) The term “robbery” means the unlawful taking or obtaining of personal property from the person or in the presence of another, against his will, by means of actual or threatened force, or violence, or fear of injury, immediate or future, to his person or property, or property in his custody or possession, or the person or property of a relative or member of his family or of anyone in his company at the time of the taking or obtaining.
(2) The term “extortion” means the obtaining of property from another, with his consent, induced by wrongful use of actual or threatened force, violence, or fear, or under color of official right.
(3) The term “commerce” means commerce within the District of Columbia, or any Territory or Possession of the United States; all commerce between any point in a State, Territory, Possession, or the District of Columbia and any point outside thereof; all commerce between points within the same State through any place outside such State; and all other commerce over which the United States has jurisdiction. Bitcoin is property. Bitcoin is money. Taking it from the owner without consent is theft. Taking it from the owner with threats of harm is extortion. The laws required to protect your property are already on the books - there needn't be a specific Bitcoin law. .... No, that is not an official governmental determination. He willingly pled guilty to those charges without contest, meaning the government didn't have to prove whether a legal property was extorted. Obviously, the federal agent "extorted" the victim, but that does not prove that the gain was a legal property, only that the victim was coerced with threats to provide some form of compensation. "Extortion" is more about the act of threatening to get a gain. Not whether that gain is a certain property type or not, that is irrelevant to the threat for gain. There is no official judgment, ruling or law for any high court which determines bitcoin to be a legal property. In fact, different agencies and different US Courts have determined that bitcoin is many different things, sometimes out right contradicting other judgments and opinions. Citing a single case where the defendant pled guilty without contest does not create official governmental legislative determination of what bitcoin is and is not. It only applies in this case. US money can not be owned and is not a property. So if bitcoin is money and property, that would contradict US law. If you think bitcoin is a property, what aspect is the part that you own? If the bitcoins never leave the blockchain system, how do you own them? If another user generates your private key by chance, does he own those coins too? If the Bitcoin network disappeared tomorrow, where did your property go? If your answer is so simple, why isn't there a clear understanding between agencies? The Bitcoin system does not grant users any rights and is use at your own risk. If the government wants to declare it a legal property type, they don't understand what Bitcoin and the bitcoin blockchain is on a technical level. Ownership and property rights are virtual illusions here. I see you wrote more while I was typing (and making my lunch for work tomorrow). What aspect do I own? The input, the amount of Bitcoin and the output signed by the private key of the input which is kept in your wallet and usable by you using your private key.If they never leave the blockchain how do I own them? The blockchain is merely a ledger for tracking spends. You own them by virtue of the private key (and the record of transfer)If another user generates your private key by chance, does he own those coins too? That will never happen. It's possible but not probable.If the Bitcoin network disappeared tomorrow, where did your property go? Failed investment. I could write it off on my taxes as a capital lossIf your answer is so simple, why isn't there a clear understanding between agencies? I actually don't know this to be true... but how many agencies need to agree when bitcoin evidently has value? ~$700 USD per BTC at present |
|
|
|
Well, stealing is a crime itself, so yes. I don't see why it would be allowed. It's stealing lol.
Stealing requires ownership, Bitcoin network grants no legal ownership rights.
He didn't get in trouble for "stealing bitcoins", that is a BS headline for lay people. He broke many crimes unrelated to bitcoin and violated certain regulations required as a federal agent. Carl Force, a former U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration agent, admitted to charges of extortion, money laundering and obstruction of justice. He was not charged with "theft of property" aka stolen bitcoins, because there is no such law. Almost all things are regulated under law, whether you are aware of it or not. Currently, bitcoin is not regulated and as such, there are no laws that determine a users rights. He certainly did get charged and plead guilty for stealing Bitcoin. Only it wasn't simply stealing, it was extortion! Carl Mark Force plead guilty on three counts. The third count was Extortion under color of official right (which makes it worse), in violation of 18 U.S. Code § 1951 which states: (a) Whoever in any way or degree obstructs, delays, or affects commerce or the movement of any article or commodity in commerce, by robbery or extortion or attempts or conspires so to do, or commits or threatens physical violence to any person or property in furtherance of a plan or purpose to do anything in violation of this section shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both.
(b) As used in this section—
(1) The term “robbery” means the unlawful taking or obtaining of personal property from the person or in the presence of another, against his will, by means of actual or threatened force, or violence, or fear of injury, immediate or future, to his person or property, or property in his custody or possession, or the person or property of a relative or member of his family or of anyone in his company at the time of the taking or obtaining.
(2) The term “extortion” means the obtaining of property from another, with his consent, induced by wrongful use of actual or threatened force, violence, or fear, or under color of official right.
(3) The term “commerce” means commerce within the District of Columbia, or any Territory or Possession of the United States; all commerce between any point in a State, Territory, Possession, or the District of Columbia and any point outside thereof; all commerce between points within the same State through any place outside such State; and all other commerce over which the United States has jurisdiction. Bitcoin is property. Bitcoin is money. Taking it from the owner without consent is theft. Taking it from the owner with threats of harm is extortion. The laws required to protect your property are already on the books - there needn't be a specific Bitcoin law. .... No, that is not an official governmental determination. He willingly pled guilty to those charges without contest, meaning the government didn't have to prove whether property was extorted. There is no offical judgment, ruling or law for any high court which determines bitcoin to be a property. In fact, different agencies and different US Courts have determiend that bitcoin is many different things, sometimes out right contradicting other judgments. Citing a single case where the defendant pled guilty without contest does not create official governmental legislative determination of what bitcoin is and is not. I cite a single case because to date there are not many cases involving virtual currencies (yet). Burden of proof and proof are totally different concepts. The determination were in the charges themselves. If the prosecutor didn't feel those charges could have been proven, they would not have been levelled. At the preliminary hearing, those charges would have been tossed out and ultimately Carl Mark Force would have given them the finger and walked away scot-free but he plead guilty (most likely) because of the overwhelming evidence against him and to get a lighter sentence. You don't have to accept that one single case anyway; the IRS - which is bureau of the US federal Department of the Treasury has already deemed that virtual currencies are property. FINCEN another bureau of the Department of the Treasury has issued similar guidance and the director has said that virtual currencies are subject to the same rule as other currencies. So if you really need a government definition of value in Bitcoin in order to make the determination of theft, there you have it. Those are official US government determinations... but I maintain that none are needed to determine theft of bitcoins. |
|
|
|
Well, stealing is a crime itself, so yes. I don't see why it would be allowed. It's stealing lol.
Stealing requires ownership, Bitcoin network grants no legal ownership rights.
He didn't get in trouble for "stealing bitcoins", that is a BS headline for lay people. He broke many crimes unrelated to bitcoin and violated certain regulations required as a federal agent. Carl Force, a former U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration agent, admitted to charges of extortion, money laundering and obstruction of justice. He was not charged with "theft of property" aka stolen bitcoins, because there is no such law. Almost all things are regulated under law, whether you are aware of it or not. Currently, bitcoin is not regulated and as such, there are no laws that determine a users rights. He certainly did get charged and plead guilty for stealing Bitcoin. Only it wasn't simply stealing, it was extortion! Carl Mark Force plead guilty on three counts. The third count was Extortion under color of official right (which makes it worse), in violation of 18 U.S. Code § 1951 which states: (a) Whoever in any way or degree obstructs, delays, or affects commerce or the movement of any article or commodity in commerce, by robbery or extortion or attempts or conspires so to do, or commits or threatens physical violence to any person or property in furtherance of a plan or purpose to do anything in violation of this section shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both.
(b) As used in this section—
(1) The term “robbery” means the unlawful taking or obtaining of personal property from the person or in the presence of another, against his will, by means of actual or threatened force, or violence, or fear of injury, immediate or future, to his person or property, or property in his custody or possession, or the person or property of a relative or member of his family or of anyone in his company at the time of the taking or obtaining.
(2) The term “extortion” means the obtaining of property from another, with his consent, induced by wrongful use of actual or threatened force, violence, or fear, or under color of official right.
(3) The term “commerce” means commerce within the District of Columbia, or any Territory or Possession of the United States; all commerce between any point in a State, Territory, Possession, or the District of Columbia and any point outside thereof; all commerce between points within the same State through any place outside such State; and all other commerce over which the United States has jurisdiction. Bitcoin is property. Bitcoin is money. Taking it from the owner without consent is theft. Taking it from the owner with threats of harm is extortion. The laws required to protect your property are already on the books - there needn't be a specific Bitcoin law. In Canada, laws pertaining to theft are very broad: Section 322(1) of the Criminal Code 322. (1) Every one commits theft who fraudulently and without colour of right takes, or fraudulently and without colour of right converts to his/her use or to the use of another person, anything, whether animate or inanimate, with intent (a) to deprive, temporarily or absolutely, the owner of it, or a person who has a special property or interest in it, of the thing or of his property or interest in it;(b) to pledge it or deposit it as security;(c) to part with it under a condition with respect to its return that the person who parts with it may be unable to perform; or(d) to deal with it in such a manner that it cannot be restored in the condition in which it was at the time it was taken or converted.[6] Bitcoin is covered. |
|
|
|
Dibs on the nativity scene! That is beautiful  |
|
|
|
I could do some exchanges on the forum, but I would like to use a MM.
Who are the active middle-men on the forum with long and clean history?
I would like to do exchanges under $50 at a time.
Do a search for escrow. There are some trusted members here doing that. |
|
|
|
|
You've either not copied your old wallet.dat into the correct location for the new install or you have copied the wrong wallet.dat file into the correct location as the wallet encryption will not simply disappear; you will still need to enter a password to access the wallet.
|
|
|
|
but as xhomerx10 said, the fastest average block confirmation time is the indicated value you should be looking for.
About the fastest transaction are like discussing about the priority, if someone pays more and they will get special access rather than the other are less for pay them. somehow I can say if the average timing of the transaction is same. more value and more priority. True enough but that special access is consistent across all coins so the underlying indication of speed should still be the average block confirmation time. In saying that, I would imagine that most immature altcoins won't have a backlog of unconfirmed transactions so fees probably wouldn't be an issue in that case. |
|
|
|
What are your thoughts on wind trees? It seems like an alternative to solar. Wind Trees Video That's pretty but I can't imagine there would be value in it for Bitcoin miners. Also it's pretty low to the ground; how are you going to keep the kids out of it? |
|
|
|
|
Wow. Multiple, simultaneous emergency orders all pertaining to Iran.
With all these special powers bestowed on the president by the president, citizens of the US wont need to bother electing a legislative branch at the federal level.
|
|
|
|
Actually I think the constitution was suspended before that. The US has been in a perpetual "State of Emergency" since 1979. On November 14, 1979, by Executive Order 12170, the President declared a national emergency with respect to Iran and Obama just renewed it on Nov 3rd for another year. Since 9/14/2001, Proclamation 7463 has been renewed yearly and was renewed Aug 30th for another year by Obama. There was even an over-lapping state of emergency declared in 2009 for the H1N1 pandemic. Seems there are no checks and balances for the declarations of a states of emergency. I know I'm preaching to the choir here but anyone can review the renewals at anytime... at least until there is a state of emergency declared that requires internet kill switches to be operated. |
|
|
|
Glad to see he's alive. Good interview too. Interestingly, one day later, Comey has announced today that the FBI has completed it's investigation into HRC after reviewing the 650,000 emails from Weiner's computer and has not changed the conclusions it expressed in July. Wow. All this only one day before the election. |
|
|
|
Okay I understand, retribution for snowgirl and containent (troubles)... but frankly wouldn't it be better to care for the homeland? I don't even criticize how dangerous for the people involved on the ground all this destabilization is, but how totally out of touch.
Let HK alone!!!!
Ps if they send you there, it's to eliminate you.
Which HK are you referring to? If it's Heckler and Koch then maybe I understand. You are funnier and funnier... Hong Kong, one country two system. The tolerance and care towards the young Chineses embracing more liberty by the cccp is compromised by the foreigners who want to instrumentalize those naive idiots. Rather than Risk on hk, the idea is to create such mayhem in the USA mainland that the CIA and co will not be able to allocate enough resources toward the destabilization of HK and would permit to safely continue the peaceful mgmt of HK. The problem is that young people + high tensions in ultra urban like hk can quickly lead to unforeseenable events. On the contrary moving the front toward America mainland with an aim of saturation is quite risk free in comparison. Uncontainement. So are you implying it was a CIA plot to relocate 200k Uyghurs to Guandong by force coercion voluntarily? |
|
|
|
Okay I understand, retribution for snowgirl and containent (troubles)... but frankly wouldn't it be better to care for the homeland? I don't even criticize how dangerous for the people involved on the ground all this destabilization is, but how totally out of touch.
Let HK alone!!!!
Ps if they send you there, it's to eliminate you.
Which HK are you referring to? If it's Heckler and Koch then maybe I understand. |
|
|
|
I have about 2000 bitcoins, that I will be selling at 100$ less than market price, this offer stands till the 2000 bitcoins are sold. If you are interested send me an inbox and I will fill you in on the details.
For every full purchase of 1 bitcoin you get exclusive entry to the pool mining server, with at least 1800 Gh/s of mining power with no cost on you, this is only for the first 10 people who buy at least 1 full bitcoin.
Thank you,
Haoss
Can you first demonstrate that you possess the Bitcoins? Signed message from the address with the coins will suffice. Also, what pool mining server? How long does this 1800 Gh/s mining power at no cost to me last? Just post the details here. No need to do this in private if you're legit. I added two picture with proof  Date and time stamp added also.   Looks good so far - now can you sign a message? Here's a how-to: https://support.coinbase.com/customer/portal/articles/1526413-how-do-i-sign-a-message-with-a-bitcoin-address- |
|
|
|
Trust me, trump is worse!
I see no reason to trust you. You are saying that Trump is worse then Hillary's satanic blood rituals? Or he is worse then Hillary's handling of classified information? Or he is worse then Hillary's pedo friends? Or worse and then the pay to play Clinton criminal foundation, or worse then the rest of the list of dirty laundry the size of a small moon. No wait, thats not a moon. Yup. Trusting you would be like kicking myself in the balls Edit. Ahh i see, you are a mug selling whore of a person. Carry on selling your trinkets of hate little person. That's pointed and funny I can foresee the highlighted part coming in handy at work too. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
