|
Yes it is, but there is really nothing you can do about that, I can't stop a war or overthrow a government.
When the war stops or the government stops the mismanagement these countries will get on their feet more or less automatically.
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, I agree that too many people are still starving, but it is moving in the right direction, and I think starvation well be gone in my lifetime.
Purely man made starvation, like in war torn areas for example, excluded.
|
|
|
|
|
The videos doesn't really address the issues, they only convey current statistics in a very user friendly way. And it isn't true that more people are starving today. It's the very opposite.
|
|
|
|
wrong, you are not the new elite, you are the old elite. noone who is poor could have ever afforded to mine or buy bitcoins or any other cryptocurrency. its a wealthy-people-thing only.
Depends on where you live, someone living in Sweden or the USA can be quite poor with the standards of that country and still afford to buy half a bitcoin. Owners of small quantities of bitcoin in the western world is by no means wealthy or elite. The fact that people are poorer in other places doesn't change that. |
|
|
|
You belong to the wealthy elite as long as the bitcoin price stays at these levels but have you considered the fact that the system has techinical problems and therefore cannot be used for currency.
That's a strange statement, since I've been using as currency for four years. Based on the slowness of transaction. It can be used for transactions that are rare (such as buying lambo or a castle in Estonia), but not for everyday purchases such as cup of coffee/tea and bag of food etc. You see, it is too slow for merchants (the 1st confirmation takes 10 minutes). WorldCoin takes 30 seconds. The transaction is fully confirmed within 1 minute. Oh really? So how come it works in Berlin? http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2013/apr/26/bitcoins-gain-currency-in-berlinAnd remember, this was ten months ago, there are a lot more merchants accepting it now. |
|
|
|
Thank you  Next question is - what will happen next? A) Bounce from the trendline towards new highs B) Something else (what?) B) If it follows the pattern from earlier bumps it will stabilize and we will have a period of perhaps six months or so with little movement and then another giant bumb. |
|
|
|
OBS: By the way, your data set do not have enough information to achieve any accurate result.
Prove it. Nope, that is up to you convince everyone except yourself that your theory is valid. Nope, each person have to prove his own statement. Simply saying "no" is just obstructing. Incorrect. Pointing out that a statement is not adequetly defended is not something which itself needs backing. If you say "unicorns exist", a perfectly valid response is "prove it". It's not on me to prove they don't. Similarly, gbianchi's claims are reversed engineered from the data, so of course they fit. In order to show the validity of the equation and the other claims, he would need to show they work with new data. Calling BS is a perfectly valid response. Nope, If someone says "unicorns exist" and then "proves" it with some kind of argument, you can not just say that it's BS, you have to point out the errors of the argument. In this case he would have to explain why he doesn't think the data is sufficient. That's completely correct, and not what it appeared to me you had said/implied. In this case, I'll do the arguing for the other guy and say that no matter how robust everything appears to be, it's still made to fit pre-existing data and the robustness may simply be to account for that. It needs to fit NEW data, and unless he can cross apply it elsewhere, that just means waiting a few years to get enough. I don't know enough about stats to get confidence rates for the quality of the theory based on new data, but I'm pretty sure one or two weeks since it came out is certainly not enough. I agree with you. |
|
|
|
OBS: By the way, your data set do not have enough information to achieve any accurate result.
Prove it. Nope, that is up to you convince everyone except yourself that your theory is valid. Nope, each person have to prove his own statement. Simply saying "no" is just obstructing. Incorrect. Pointing out that a statement is not adequetly defended is not something which itself needs backing. If you say "unicorns exist", a perfectly valid response is "prove it". It's not on me to prove they don't. Similarly, gbianchi's claims are reversed engineered from the data, so of course they fit. In order to show the validity of the equation and the other claims, he would need to show they work with new data. Calling BS is a perfectly valid response. Nope, If someone says "unicorns exist" and then "proves" it with some kind of argument, you can not just say that it's BS, you have to point out the errors of the argument. In this case he would have to explain why he doesn't think the data is sufficient. |
|
|
|
OBS: By the way, your data set do not have enough information to achieve any accurate result.
Prove it. Nope, that is up to you convince everyone except yourself that your theory is valid. Nope, each person have to prove his own statement. Simply saying "no" is just obstructing. |
|
|
|
|
Semantics, if it's costly it's valuable.
|
|
|
|
I don't think they got it because they too get cancer and don't get any older than the rest of us. And what you say about electric cars may be true in the USA, but you can't project that on the rest of the world. However I also believe that the automotive industry is in cahoots with the oil industry and that's why we don't see more electric cars than we do. But to be honest, the range of an electric car is a lot less than that of an otto or diesel engine car. Thats why I think the new BMW i3 with its range extended model with a tiny 647cc petrol generator is going to be a hit. http://www.techradar.com/news/car-tech/why-the-bmw-i3-is-the-best-electric-car-on-the-planet-1200923#null |
|
|
|
|
Why are "the masters" suppressing all this? don't they want the cure for cancer and long life?
And electric cars have been available for quite some time where I live, in fact the neighbor country to the west, Norway, have the most electric cars per capita in the world if I am not mistaken.
|
|
|
|
|
Friends don't let friends smoke and post.
|
|
|
|
|
Easy, he just answered your question.
|
|
|
|
|
I can't speak for Asia, but in the piss poor parts of eastern Europe, like Moldavia, that particular expense would be around 20-30 USD according to some Swedish forums.
|
|
|
|
Can you really live on $150 a week in usa thesedays ? I am living in Asia. Life is hard, but I am not complaining. I have only some 15-20 coins. But if BTC ever reaches the $ 100,000 mark, I'll become a millionaire.  @ QuestionAuthority I guess you missed that part of the discussion  |
|
|
|
|
So, I just watched this years Nobel price ceremony on TV, and it struck me that if Bitcoin becomes the revolution some of us think. And if the person(s) behind the name Satoshi Nakamoto can be identified, He/she/they will most likely be awarded the Nobel prize in economics.
Edit: Witch would be rather ironic since that prize was added in 1968 by the Swedish national bank.
|
|
|
|
http://astrohacker.com/ahc/bitcoin-is-the-economic-singularity/After reading this, the scale of black market and digital economies and the effect Bitcoin will have on them I am pretty certain we are going to be very wealthy men -- even with a sum as small as 10 Bitcoins. It's just so hard to believe. We are only in the beginning storms with these significant rallies from 10 to 20 dollars. I will not be surprised to see prices from hundreds to thousands in the coming months. The world just isn't going to be the same and we have been blessed as the pioneers. What are you going to do with your Bitcoin wealth once your coins hit upwards of $10,000 a pop? It's gonna take a while for bitcoins to hit $10,000. But if they do I would probably cry, as I sold my bitcoins at $100, I turned down an investment opportunity to spend $6000 on them at around the same price range, and I usually spend them when I get them now. But what can you do.Give them to me, I promise to hold them for you for the low cost of 10 % |
|
|
|
it is as utopian
Nope, far from it. It simply recognizes that there is a "less bad" way than using violence to accomplish things. It doesn't promise perfection or even close to it. It implicitly recognizes that perfection is not achievable. Taxes are actually the simplest and easiest way to fund some things
Similar reasoning is behind why you'll find your car windows broken out if you park in certain places. Seems like this MEP agrees with you. http://adask.wordpress.com/2013/12/05/it-wont-be-long-before-the-people-storm-this-chamber-and-hang-you-and-theyll-be-right/The debates in the European parliament can be fun to watch sometimes. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
