Wow talk about veering off topic, must be time for a Goodwin intervention.  Of course everyone knows that Hiter was a vegetarian. 

It does seem that a lack of nourishment isn't really the problem today though, it's over nourishment.  Last year more people tied of obesity than of starvation.

Where are all those population-control advocates who said in the 1970s we were going to run out of food (and oil)?  Oh yeah, they forgot about technology and the free market.  They usually do.

If Charlie Sheen was our spokesman, Alex Jones would definitely hear about it.

I tried to flog bitcoin to Alex Jones this week but couldn't find an email address to connect to him.  He'd be a good one I reckon.  Must be somebody on here with a connection to him, given the political inclinations of this crowd.

Of course we could also try the 4Chan/Justin Bieber approach:

Your forum statistics are not reliable because of the large number of spam accounts that are on here.

I'm sorry if I offended you.  My remark was based on being a frequent visitor to this forum and only having one self-identified woman post in all that time.  And she came on here specifically to bash something someone else had said, not because she was a supporter of bitcoin.
Also, I was referring to gender on this forum, not online as you seem to have interpreted it.  As to why some people don't feel comfortable posting, I have no way of knowing why they wouldn't do this.  And I don't appreciate the implication that it is the fault of other people on this forum that they won't do so.  If you have some concrete allegations to make, please put them out there (in the appropriate thread).

The larger point I was making is it might be helpful to know who we are, so that we can more intelligently reach out to people who haven't heard of bitcoin.

A small thing: put www.bitcoin.org in your signature at other forums you participate in

A rule of thumb floating around out there is that a Facebook app user is worth $1/year.  I've had a few apps  and those that we tried to monetize actually peaked at $1/user/MONTH.  Too bad we didn't have more users.

So yes, there is huge money in Facebook apps.  That's why Zynga is a $5 billion company.  By these metrics Farmville alone is taking in $50 million/year, I'd bet they're monetizing at better than average.

I remember when My Aquarium launched in summer 2007 (one of the first apps), it was grossing $3000/day.  For a virtual fish tank.  Go figure.

Yes this seems to be a big problem.  It seems any person you are talking to has to have an extraordinarily open mind or they won't 'get' bitcoin unless they are a geek libertarian who spent their formative years with Napster.

Perhaps it would be useful information if we had a demographic breakdown of the current members of this forum.  Data like:
-age
-gender (are there any females on here yet?)
-interests
-profession
-political views
-geography
-education

Once we know who already supports bitcoin, then we can formulate a plan to go after the rest of the planet who are just like us.

How long ago did you do this?  I'm trying to access mtgox and I'm getting:

Forbidden

You don't have permission to access / on this server.
Apache/2.2.3 (Red Hat) Server at www.mtgox.com Port 80

Baron, mtgox claims he has been trying to get you on the telephone.  What do you say to that?

Because the Europeans had just murdered 6 million Jews.  No one was left to pogrom.

Then surely you have considered that there is a difference between people who claim to be Christians, and the actual teachings of the Bible?


That is refreshing.  And pretty rare amongst atheists, I would guess.  Congrats on standing outside the mainstream on this issue.

So he argues one possible reason for the decline in violence is because of the rise of leviathan.  Is this what you are advocating?

Interesting that he points out a significant decline in the number of pogroms in Europe after WWII.  Gee, I wonder why that was?

Of course in measuring the decline of violence it helps to have a very narrow definition of violence.  For example, by excluding over 1 million abortions/year in the US alone is an interesting approach.  Whether you are pro or anti abortion, there is no doubt that 'violence' is taking place during an abortion (lesbian libertarian feminist Camille Paglia has an honest view of what an abortion is, articulated here.

Really though to deny the positive impact of true Christianity on raising the status of women, children, immigrants, the poor and others from the time of Rome to the present day displays a significant ignorance of history.  Also, Pinker should investigate Elliott Wave theory before declaring the death of violence in society.

So are you arguing Canada is Christian or post-Christian?

If you are saying the establishment (CHRC and their minions) is more post-Christian than the populace, we are in agreement. 

Well in Canada they don't burn them physcially for heresy, but the liberals have something called the CHRC with which they burn Christians financially for heresy for violating secular orthodoxy.  You should check it out, quite scary.  So I'm not sure how you think we have 'advanced'. 

And so we're right back to the start: "I'm ok, you're ok as long as you don't do this/that".  But, as always the question is "who decides who can do this/that".  

That is why, waaaaay back near the start of this thread, Atlas pointed out that it is Just. Your. Opinion.

Unless you can point to an external source of morality.

I'm done.

As implausible as a rational creature coming from a rational creator must seem, I would say that a rational creature coming from an irrational force is even more implausible.  And hence, a more irrational solution to the problem.

Alas, I know of no other alternatives.  Do you?

Please see the video: http://johnlennox.org/index.php/en/resource/who_created_the_creator/

I don't accept your challenge, because it makes no sense.

I never said Stalin and Mao were motivated by their lack of belief in God.  In fact I can't think of anybody who was ever motivated to do anything by their lack of belief in anything?  Can you?

I'll tell you what, I'll give you a list of atheist mass murderers, and you explain how their behaviour was inconsistent with atheism.

You give me a list of Christian mass murderers, and I'll explain how their behaviour was inconsistent with Christianity.

Ready?

The great lie being perpetrated is that if religion went away, war would go away:
Imagine there's no countries
It isn't hard to do
Nothing to kill or die for
And no religion too
Imagine all the people
Living life in peace

Most wars having nothing to do with religion, unless you're going to define lebensraum, racism, need for oil, communism as religious motivations.

This canard is the biggest lie going.  More people have been subjugated, abused, and killed in the name of atheistic communism in the 20th century alone than have died in all the religious wars in all the centuries of human history.

Yes, I have a source: http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/

Again, you are just stating an opinion.  Please tell me why this opinion of yours is rational.  Because, there are many examples I can think of where it appears VERY rational to put your will above others.

For example, if an 8 year old kid wants to put his hand on the stove it seems rational, not to mention moral, for me to stop him.

But let's not get distracted by arguments about those too young to make their own decisions.

Let's say my 40 year old friend wants to kill himself because he has heard his wife is cheating on him.  I hope you would agree with me that it is rational and moral for me to stop him, not least because the rumour about his wife was a lie.

And then of course you might say "yes, but your friend's decision was based on a lie".  And that brings us back to the heart of the matter: "what is truth"?  And that leads to "who says it is true", and even "so what if it is true, why should I live my life as if certain facts were true?"

And inevitably, if two people have two different views about what is true, there will be a collision at some point.  And at some point there will need to be a standard against which their differing definitions of truth must be measured.  And if your standard is "rationality", then you need to define rationality, and tell us how we can know our brains are in fact rational.

Once again, I'm not saying my rational abilities should be put over yours.  I am merely asking you to tell me how you know you are rational since your brain, by your worldview, is the result of non-rational processes.