Latest posts of: The Script

Show Posts
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 [34] 35 36 37 38 39 »

661

Economy / Economics / Re: A Resource Based Economy

on: April 13, 2011, 04:27:26 AM

Quote from: deadlizard on April 13, 2011, 04:10:16 AM Quote from: wb3 on April 13, 2011, 04:04:19 AM Must be the Jumpsuits. Dumpsuits if you will Thank you, I'm also available for children's parties Ahahahhaha! Yes!

662

Economy / Marketplace / [Ponzi Scheme] S/L Doubler

on: April 13, 2011, 04:23:12 AM

Hey, doood, I'd like to refer you to this cool site I found. It's called the "Straight Line Doubler" and if you join it on my referral I'll get 0.20 BTC. Do it! http://sldoubler.com/?id=46

663

Economy / Marketplace / Re: xkcd's bitcoin hole

on: April 13, 2011, 04:12:57 AM

Done. I just sent him 0 + 8i BTC. Whaddaya mean that's not real?

664

Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: NixiePixel (poorly) impersonated

on: April 13, 2011, 04:01:18 AM

Quote from: BitterTea on April 13, 2011, 03:11:27 AM I contacted NixiePixel through the form on her web site, just to verify a hunch... Here's the response I got. Quote Delivered-To: chrisrico@gmail.com Received: by 10.227.137.148 with SMTP id w20cs147907wbt; Tue, 12 Apr 2011 19:02:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.90.160.10 with SMTP id i10mr60557age.65.1302660176301; Tue, 12 Apr 2011 19:02:56 -0700 (PDT) Return-Path: <admin@nixiepixel.com> Received: from gateway11.websitewelcome.com ([64.5.52.14]) by mx.google.com with SMTP id g18si157938anh.107.2011.04.12.19.02.54; Tue, 12 Apr 2011 19:02:54 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of admin@nixiepixel.com designates 64.5.52.14 as permitted sender) client-ip=64.5.52.14; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of admin@nixiepixel.com designates 64.5.52.14 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=admin@nixiepixel.com Received: (qmail 13560 invoked from network); 13 Apr 2011 02:11:35 -0000 Received: from gator587.hostgator.com (74.52.151.18) by gateway11.websitewelcome.com with SMTP; 13 Apr 2011 02:11:35 -0000 Received: from [72.171.231.195] (port=12135 helo=[192.168.1.107]) by gator587.hostgator.com with esmtpa (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from <admin@nixiepixel.com>) id 1Q9pPw-0002c3-8d; Tue, 12 Apr 2011 21:02:54 -0500 Message-ID: <4DA5044D.9060001@nixiepixel.com> Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2011 19:02:53 -0700 From: Nixie <admin@nixiepixel.com> User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.2.13) Gecko/20101218 Thunderbird/3.1.7 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: chrisrico@gmail.com Subject: Re: Akismet: Spam - Message - Verifying You Are You References: <cbdc1b000cfa82f8a5558312067847df@www.nixiepixel.com> In-Reply-To: <cbdc1b000cfa82f8a5558312067847df@www.nixiepixel.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - gator587.hostgator.com X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - gmail.com X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - nixiepixel.com X-Source: X-Source-Args: X-Source-Dir: X-Source-Sender: ([192.168.1.107]) [72.171.231.195]:12135 Hi Chris, No, I have never visited this message board and have no idea who that poster is. Besides, do you really think I would write in such poor grammar? Sorry for the trouble (and the delay responding, I'm not at home). Nixie On 04/10/2011 08:06 AM, Chris Rico wrote: > To: Webmaster > > From: > Chris Rico > chrisrico@gmail.com > > Message: > Hello, > > I come from the Bitcoin message boards. (https://www.bitcoin.org/smf). > There is a poster there that goes by NixiePixel, and I want to confirm > it is actually you, as their behavior is somewhat suspicious to me. > The community is small, and misplaced trust can be very undermining. > Please let me know if this NixiePixel > (http://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=7878) is the > real one or not... I will share your response with the forum unless > you request otherwise. > > Thanks, > Chris > > Akismet Spam Check: probably spam > Sent from (ip address): 208.54.40.67 (m432836d0.tmodns.net) > Date/Time: April 10, 2011 3:06 pm > Coming from (referer): http://www.nixiepixel.com/contact/ > Using (user agent): Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US) > AppleWebKit/532.5 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/4.1.249.1045 Safari/532.5 > > > Good work. I like that this community is invested in trying to keep the forum honest.

665

Other / Politics & Society / Re: "Anarchists" rioting in London

on: April 13, 2011, 03:53:04 AM

Quote from: jpent on April 07, 2011, 11:47:30 PM Quote from: wb3 on April 01, 2011, 12:29:44 PM Quote from: bitcoin2cash on April 01, 2011, 05:51:21 AM If I supported initiating violence to achieve my goals, I'd be pro-government. So if the stranger peacefully walks into your house with no weapons and turns on the TV, sits in the chair, and eats your food, it will be OK because the stranger didn't use any violence. Or is it your opinion that someone imposing on your space a violent act? If so, don't ever go to a city. By the way, I believe it was Rothbard who coined the term 'anarcho-capitalism', but also later regretted it and acknowledged that it is misleading. The meaning of words are essentially defined by how most people understand them, and most people don't associate anything compatible with capitalism with anarchy. Why do people get so hung up on words? Fine, don't call it "capitalism". Call it "voluntaryism" or "free markets" or "laissez faire society" or "market anarchism". If it's well-defined, argue the points and not the semantics. Quote from: jpent on April 07, 2011, 11:47:30 PM I see this as the only problem with Voluntarism. The non-aggression principle assumes that violation of a persons property is an aggression. However, property rights are not objective, as they are determined by the interactions and agreements between the parties involved. This is a good point, and one that needs to be clarified. If someone doesn't respect your property claims and "violates" them, what is the correct course of action? Perhaps this is where the community comes in. If you live in a community where you know your neighbors and respect each other's property claims then outsiders who attempt to infringe on your claims will be ostracized by the community and will not have any of their rights respected. Or if you were to take action, your neighbors would support you, resulting in the Outsider not having the ability to enforce his counter claim.

666

Economy / Economics / Re: A Resource Based Economy

on: April 13, 2011, 03:42:59 AM

Quote from: benjamindees on April 13, 2011, 03:38:12 AM Star Trek is a futuristic technocracy powered by magical crystals where everyone wears jumpsuits and follows the orders of a bald man with a French name. I've seen the show, I just don't see the connection to reality. Who obeys Frenchmen? (Just kidding, Grondilu.)

667

Other / Off-topic / Re: Atrocities

on: April 13, 2011, 03:36:32 AM

This reminds me of R.J. Rummel's list of "democides"--murder by government. http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/20TH.HTM

668

Other / Off-topic / Re: Buy a Silver Keiser

on: April 13, 2011, 03:20:50 AM

Quote from: benjamindees on April 12, 2011, 12:07:56 AM ... and crash JP Morgan. http://www.silverkeiser.net/Official-1-Ounce-Silver-Keiser_p_13.html Expensive. That's like 17% over spot, not counting shipping.

669

Economy / Economics / Re: A Resource Based Economy

on: April 13, 2011, 03:19:08 AM

Quote from: markm on April 12, 2011, 03:51:10 PM Well lets try this scientific need determination of what to do, maybe? How much bread and water (and some vitamins minerals etc in it presumably) do those people scientifically need? If the latest Trek movie proves to have actually solved the problem it was apparently created to solve, to wit that of getting joe public to actually watch movies about resource based society, then is it scientifically necessary to have these folk produce one showing more precisely the now-to-2063 span during which the timetable as last I heard it apparently calls for a major world scale disaster or war or something to occur in order to set the stage, or would it be scientifically adequate to have Paramount produce it? -MarkM- (more important, is the world scale destruction leading up to Zephram's flight scientifically necessary?) What are you talking about?!? What does Star Trek have to do with this topic?

670

Other / Off-topic / Re: I feel ignorant today.

on: April 09, 2011, 03:40:51 AM

Quote from: creighto on April 06, 2011, 10:32:52 PM I'm surprised no one has mentioned Atlas Shrugged yet, even though that's not quite what he is asking for. Considering his Moniker it's a fair bet he's read it already? Oh Atlas, what have you gotten yourself into? This forum loves to recommend books. Happy reading.

671

Other / Off-topic / Re: I feel ignorant today.

on: April 09, 2011, 03:38:47 AM

Quote from: Distribution on April 06, 2011, 10:07:34 PM For a quick read: The Law by Frederic Bastiat. For an entertainingly educational read: anything by Tom Woods (I haven't read his newest, Rollback, but Nullification and Meltdown are both excellent). +1

672

Other / Off-topic / Re: My doubts about anarchy

on: April 09, 2011, 03:26:31 AM

Quote from: FatherMcGruder on April 08, 2011, 10:05:43 PM I do agree that markets will function better without government intervention, and that governments will always intervene despite the promises of their supporters. However, free markets will never exist in the presence of middlemen gatekeepers, employers, renters, usurers, people who collect more than their work entails, if they actually do any. Can you tell me what your definition of "work" is, and how it is decided how much one person should rightfully collect? This will help me understand your position better.

673

Economy / Lending / Re: Looking for a Trust Loan Pay 20ß and get 30ß!(closed)

on: April 06, 2011, 11:47:17 PM

Forgive me, but this is starting to smell fishy.

674

Other / Off-topic / Re: This game is very simple... [7.9899 BTC Reward]

on: April 06, 2011, 07:10:29 AM

Quote from: FatherMcGruder on April 05, 2011, 01:25:46 PM Quote from: The Script on March 30, 2011, 07:57:16 PM ...creationism... Do not want. Who cares? People are free to believe what they will.

675

Economy / Lending / Re: Looking for a Trust Loan pay 20ß and get 30ß!(OPEN!)

on: April 04, 2011, 07:25:36 PM

Quote from: JackRabiit on April 04, 2011, 06:18:57 PM well yeah thats kinda my point, So anyone feel like loaning? You are looking for another loan?

676

Economy / Economics / Re: Bitcoin Millionaires

on: April 03, 2011, 10:41:57 PM

Quote from: doood on April 03, 2011, 11:05:17 AM The highest balance is around 400,000 BTC, but that balance may be several owner's wealth grouped together in something like mybitcoin.com Similarly, one owner may own several of the high-balance addresses. I didn't realize you could see the balances of different bitcoin addresses. How?

677

Other / Off-topic / Re: My doubts about anarchy

on: April 03, 2011, 10:32:19 PM

Quote from: wb3 on April 03, 2011, 07:55:39 PM BTW: Recent statistics show Homeschooling the fastest rising education method with the best results. They are using combined Homeschooling resources to share information and teaching techniques. I know of one community homeschool that is better equipped than a private school. Good points about education. I also believe that education could be done a lot more effectively for a much lower cost. I was homeschooled and am doing just fine in "the real world". Most people are surprised when I tell them I was homeschooled because I don't have the social awkwardness they expect from homeschoolers.

678

Other / Off-topic / Re: My doubts about anarchy

on: April 03, 2011, 08:10:53 AM

Quote from: FatherMcGruder on April 03, 2011, 02:51:13 AM Quote from: The Script on March 31, 2011, 09:15:54 PM With your example of B taking the product of A's labor there are only two cases. 1) A agrees to the trade with B 2) A does not agree and is coerced by B 1) is capitalism. 2) is theft. Thoughts? There are three cases: 1) A agrees freely to trade with B. 2) A agrees but not freely to trade with B. 3) A does not agree and B takes A's product anyway. The first case is a cooperative exchange. If A has some weakness that might compel him to accept an unfair deal (lack of access to a market, an addiction, hunger, sickness, a lack of access to the means of production, blackmail etc.) and B takes advantage of that weakness, we have capitalism, and subtle theft, in the second case. The third case represents straight-up theft, but it is also capitalism because B took advantage of A's weakness in his inability to prevent the theft. So your system would check every transaction between people making sure that there was no "unfairness"? Life is unfair. If A agrees, however reluctantly, he does so because he thinks the transaction will make him better off. Even if it is not the ideal exchange he could hope for. And while I agree people should try to present "fair" trades to the best of their abilities, what system would you support that would ensure that all such trades are "fair"? There really are only two cases. Either A is coerced, or he agrees (reluctantly or enthusiastically) because he will be better off than not making the trade. Even if it is a really shitty trade. Now I agree that people shouldn't try to take advantage of others who are a bad position, but that's more in the realm of ethics. Traditional anarchism, that is a complete lack of hierarchy cannot exist because humans are not created equal as far as abilities go. Some will naturally gain "dominance" over others. Some people want leaders. I just don't understand why you would think that somehow we can do away with all authority and hierarchy in human society. Would you do away with families since parents are hierarchically above children?

679

Economy / Economics / Re: Bitcoin Millionaires

on: April 03, 2011, 07:44:51 AM

I doubt it since there are less than 6 million BTC in circulation ATM. I could be wrong though. Perhaps one of the early members has a huge hoard of BTC. If I were them I would.

680

Economy / Economics / Re: Monetary Sovereignty

on: April 03, 2011, 07:43:11 AM

Quote from: chodpaba on April 03, 2011, 04:41:24 AM Quote from: The Script on April 03, 2011, 12:27:13 AM Quote from: chodpaba on April 02, 2011, 04:08:38 AM Quote from: The Script on April 02, 2011, 01:11:58 AM Roger Mitchell claims that the United States is Monetarily Sovereign and therefore can fund unlimited programs because it can always print more money. http://rodgermmitchell.wordpress.com/2010/08/13/monetarily-sovereign-the-key-to-understanding-economics/ My understanding of the way the US "prints" money is that it actually sells US Treasury bonds to the Federal Reserve, and therefore at some point has to pay back those bonds with interest. If this is true, this guy is completely nuts or just doesn't understand basic economics. Thoughts? The answer to that question depends on who actually controls the Federal Reserve. There are several clues in Lewis v. United States of America: http://bulk.resource.org/courts.gov/c/F2/680/680.F2d.1239.80-5905.html Dude, I've been looking for definitive evidence that the Federal Reserve is a private organization and not under the Federal Government's supervision. While I know this fact to be true I wanted something I could use to convince the nay-sayers. And here it is. I'm poor, but give me your bitcoin address and I'll send you 1 BTC as a token of thanks. Thanks, but you can give it to Nina Paley: http://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5336.0;topicseen Done. At first I was irritated that the contribution had to be EXACTLY 1.29 BTC (?!??). Then I looked at my Mt. Gox balance which was xxx.29. It was meant to be.

Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 [34] 35 36 37 38 39 »