Unfortunately, they never have a chance because they never gain enough credibility in the masses. Just because we (in reference to our community) would rather see someone other than the two popular candidates, doesn't mean the other 240+ million voters agree. That's why I, and many millions of others, focus on the lesser of two evils to receive our votes. Having some "backbone" and "standing up for what you believe" is all well and good, but in the broad view it won't make much of a difference.  


Hmm, fair point and I see what you're saying. That said, I can honestly say I don't have an answer to respond with.



Side Note: I like how this thread went from an article the OP submitted to a debate about voting

Well in this case, you're asserting that only one person has the chance of winning, but since it's still a close race (based on current electoral maps, focusing on swing states) it's not quite possible to call it yet. In fact, it could be possible for each candidate to hit 269 and tie it up in the actual election, resulting in the House making the final decision.

To me, a wasted vote is a vote going to a candidate that doesn't have a chance of winning, which is essentially anyone outside of the two already "approved". Voting for either Obama or Romney isn't a waste.

Well that's not very nice

We should also clarify that you're assuming I only see two options based on my response. The reality is that there are only two feasible options in the election. You can vote Ron Paul, Gary Johnson, Jill Stein, Roseanne Bar, or countless others...but the only two people that actually have a chance are either Barack Obama or Mitt Romney. I'm not one to waste my vote..

All in 3 days  

Meh, believe what you want, I have no reason to lie.

I've watched all the primaries and debates...read all the articles and checked all the facts. Both sides have had their problems, but after seeing what Romney has said and done I just can't justify voting for him. He keeps spouting off the same spiel about 'jobs, tax cuts, and the economy', but he's just selling snake oil. If it was so easy to magically balance the budget, don't you think it would have been done by now?

The plans Obama has put in place during his term have a) helped get me healthcare, and b) helped lower my student loan payments by consolidating with the department of Ed. And now his JOBS Act will help to jump start my company.

Not to mention Obama already has presidential experience, which weighs a lot heavier on my mind than "I used to run a business and I was governor".

Anyway, just my 2 cents. Obviously I don't expect people to agree with me 

Good point, but I didn't say it was perfect ..I just wanted to make the point to look to a model that focuses on GH/s instead of MH/s, since once the transition to ASIC completes (whenever that may be) GH/s is all we'll be seeing anyway.


I'm just pullin' your leg ..I can't remember which ones do what anymore. By typical, I meant "perpetual mining bond", which used to be pretty prevalent before the collapse of GLBSE (and I still seem them around from time to time).

Hahah +1


Oh, and for future reference, I'll just leave this here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-yield_investment_program

I wish I could vote for Romney...
...but since I have an above average IQ, college education, a good job, above average reasoning skills, lack of substantial amounts of money, and I live in a diverse northern State, looks like I'm going to stick with Obama. 

That's a good point. At least for me, I know I've lost bitcoins in accounts I can't ever seem to find again...I know it's not that much (maybe a few tenths of a coin), but multiple that by a few thousand (or more) people doing the same thing and it'll add up quickly.


Excellent realization. +1

Ha, I know right. And yet I still haven't created an account on BFL's forums...maybe I just like arguing with the trolls here

Far from it. The point is to isolate mining with the prototype devices to prevent network disruptions (in total hash rate, difficulty, and profitability). If it was discovered the any of the companies were profiting on their own product, it wouldn't make the community very happy, including their investors. It's a terrible business model.

The same applies to the drug trade...don't use your own product

Given what I've seen in the past, this is a typical mining bond 

That said, I don't have a problem with these kinds of bonds. What I do have a problem with is the cost. 0.1BTC per MH/s? That's not very much...especially given the hardware out there now (and everything coming out soon), it might be better to figure out if switching to GH/s is a much more feasible business plan.

Easy. Whenever we have over 20,000,000 coins in circulation and the value is greater than or equal to $50   

Ha, good point. bASIC goes all out with mining and we all blame it on BFL  ..and then out of anger for BFL we start preordering from the competition 

Lol that poll is ridiculously specific, which leads me to assume the OP is 16 or 17 (so they can pick the 'oldest' choice )

If anything, the poll should be
<18
18-24
25-30
etc etc etc

And then we'll see the polls show everyone under 18 trolls BFL

Quite right. The object is to keep your customers happy and coming back when you release product updates (or new products altogether). For BFL to use their own product would completely alienate the bitcoin community, effectively signing their own letter of insolvency as we all switch to using products from their competitors.

I wouldn't necessarily call one post 'active'...he's primarily active in securities and the Economy section in general...

Updated my Network Analysis from August to incorporate new data released by BFL, Avalon, bASIC, and a new average of mining pool worker speeds. As I expected, there was nearly a 70TH/s increase from my original minimum of 150TH/s, up to 217TH/s now. As a result, I've updated my financials to reflect profitability at a rate of 350TH/s (I try to maintain over a 100TH/s difference to ensure profitability can be achieved at much higher difficulties).

Due to the increase, I've reduced my buyback percentage from 32% per month to 30%, which maintains a stable balance sheet. And yes, it is still profitable as I expected it to be

EDIT: October 24th, 2012 -- Updated my October Analysis to include the new data BFL posted for their preorders, including the "Mini Single".

Here's my latest October Analysis.
Here are my updated Company Financials.

Haha you're probably quite right on this one. I started mining litecoins a few weeks ago, but I don't really see the point. If anything, the price of LTC/BTC is going down.