Bitcoin Forum
April 17, 2014, 06:24:37 PM *
News: Due to the OpenSSL heartbleed bug, changing your forum password is recommended.
 
  Home Help Search Donate Login Register  
  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
221  Bitcoin / Pools / Re: [2220 GH/s] Slush's Bitcoin Mining Pool (mining.bitcoin.cz) on: July 30, 2011, 09:41:29 PM
Or you could just lower the threshold to your current balance?
0.1 is the lowest I think. If I stop mining anything below that won't be sent to me. Not much, but every little thing counts.  Wink

I'm working on the upgrade. Soon payouts will not be limited to two decimal digits Smiley
No sweat. I've enjoyed the pool while it lasted. Now difficulty is too high for me and I'll only mine on borrowed power with a cpu.
If you're changing things, perhaps the option to have the full balance paid out if no shares have been submitted in X days?
222  Bitcoin / Pools / Re: [2220 GH/s] Slush's Bitcoin Mining Pool (mining.bitcoin.cz) on: July 30, 2011, 09:32:23 PM
Or you could just lower the threshold to your current balance?
0.1 is the lowest I think. If I stop mining anything below that won't be sent to me. Not much, but every little thing counts.  Wink
223  Bitcoin / Pools / Re: [2220 GH/s] Slush's Bitcoin Mining Pool (mining.bitcoin.cz) on: July 30, 2011, 08:40:12 PM
Last mining I'll do in this pool.

Might I ask why?

That other pool pays out the full amount after 7 days of inactivity, so I can mine a little every now and then and when I get tired of it I'll all come to me and I won't have to do anything. I have a few btc in another pool that I can't get out because it's too small. I like this pool but I don't want to leave the few bitcents I'll manage to scrape together here because I didn't manage to get up to some threshold.
224  Bitcoin / Pools / Re: [2220 GH/s] Slush's Bitcoin Mining Pool (mining.bitcoin.cz) on: July 30, 2011, 08:22:21 PM
We got a 9 second block! Smiley
And I managed to get a share or two there. Sweet sweet 0.03 BTC.  Smiley
Very sweet. 0.03503616
Last mining I'll do in this pool. I'll do some hobby cpu-mining in some other pool if/when I get access to free power. Probably elegius or whatever it's called.
225  Bitcoin / Pools / Re: [2220 GH/s] Slush's Bitcoin Mining Pool (mining.bitcoin.cz) on: July 30, 2011, 08:12:02 PM
We got a 9 second block! Smiley
And I managed to get a share or two there. Sweet sweet 0.03 BTC.  Smiley
226  Other / Politics & Society / Re: Religion is a plague on: July 23, 2011, 11:48:03 PM
The news report him as being a right wing nut, not a religious one.
which news? FoxNews? They "forgot" to mention the extremist christian detail on their report:
http://www.foxnews.com/world/2011/07/23/gunmans-background-puzzles-police-in-norway/

In europe the man is reported to be a christian fundamentalist:
http://www.spiegel.de/netzwelt/netzpolitik/0,1518,776087,00.html --> "Ein konservativer Christ sei er, heißt es, ein Muslim-Hasser und Freimaurer."
http://www.timesplus.co.uk/tto/news/world/europe/article3103461.ece --> "A far-right Christian fundamentalist"
http://www3.lastampa.it/esteri/sezioni/articolo/lstp/412699/ --> "cristiano fondamentalista con simpatie di estrema destra"
http://www.lemonde.fr/europe/article/2011/07/23/pres-de-90-morts-dans-les-deux-attaques-en-norvege_1551920_3214.html --> "les enquêteurs le présentent comme un "fondamentaliste chrétien". "Il a certains traits politiques penchant vers la droite et antimusulmans"

He is a right wing and religious nut. His motivation might have been right-wingish, because he attacked leftwingers(which are mostly infidels) and their kids. But the christian fundamentalist part doesn't seem to fit in some media's "terrorists are muslims only" concept. If he was a muslim but did it for right-wing reasons...the muslim religion part would be all over FoxNews.

Right. My bad. Right winger AND religious nut.
227  Other / Politics & Society / Re: Religion is a plague on: July 23, 2011, 09:23:39 PM
...and yesterday a fanatic Christian bombed Oslo...

The news report him as being a right wing nut, not a religious one.
228  Other / Politics & Society / Re: Maximum role of Government? on: July 23, 2011, 09:21:15 PM
Yes, Political parties are rather like that everywhere. Here's a question for you: what's that political party that pushed green initiative made up of?
Meat popsicles?
lol.. yes, Humans. People, like you (presumably), and me. If they feel that green projects are important, and popular enough that pushing them won't get them de-elected, then why don't they start a kickstarter, instead of a political party? Perhaps because there's more money for themselves in running a government than a charity?
Or perhaps they feel that working through a political party is the most efficient way of getting things done?
Come now, we do assume that they are rational beings? No one thinks government is efficient.
Seeing how "the market" has been unable to fix a lot of things that regulation fixed rather quickly

Name one example of a market failure that was 'fixed' by regulation.  Just one.
Employee safety regulation comes to mind.
229  Other / Politics & Society / Re: Maximum role of Government? on: July 23, 2011, 08:54:18 PM
Yes, Political parties are rather like that everywhere. Here's a question for you: what's that political party that pushed green initiative made up of?
Meat popsicles?
lol.. yes, Humans. People, like you (presumably), and me. If they feel that green projects are important, and popular enough that pushing them won't get them de-elected, then why don't they start a kickstarter, instead of a political party? Perhaps because there's more money for themselves in running a government than a charity?
Or perhaps they feel that working through a political party is the most efficient way of getting things done?
Come now, we do assume that they are rational beings? No one thinks government is efficient.
Seeing how "the market" has been unable to fix a lot of things that regulation fixed rather quickly I'd say that some things the government does better. Perhaps this is one of those things. I'm a pragmatic person. Use whatever works.
I don't really see the market taking the lead in being green.
230  Other / Politics & Society / Re: Maximum role of Government? on: July 23, 2011, 08:29:58 PM
Yes, Political parties are rather like that everywhere. Here's a question for you: what's that political party that pushed green initiative made up of?
Meat popsicles?
lol.. yes, Humans. People, like you (presumably), and me. If they feel that green projects are important, and popular enough that pushing them won't get them de-elected, then why don't they start a kickstarter, instead of a political party? Perhaps because there's more money for themselves in running a government than a charity?
Or perhaps they feel that working through a political party is the most efficient way of getting things done?
231  Other / Politics & Society / Re: Maximum role of Government? on: July 22, 2011, 09:33:07 PM
Yes, Political parties are rather like that everywhere. Here's a question for you: what's that political party that pushed green initiative made up of?
Meat popsicles?
232  Other / Politics & Society / Re: Maximum role of Government? on: July 22, 2011, 08:13:12 PM
Then I guess, people don't want green innovation, and therefore, Government is wasting our money.

Perhaps not. But people need green innovation, which is why the Government is wasting our money.

If they needed it, they would want it.
Only if they know that they need it.
If they didn't know they needed it, why did they vote for it?
Where I'm at a political party is kind of a package deal. You might not vote for exactly this, but you get it as a bonus, because it's necessary.
233  Other / Politics & Society / Re: Maximum role of Government? on: July 22, 2011, 08:03:34 PM
Then I guess, people don't want green innovation, and therefore, Government is wasting our money.

Perhaps not. But people need green innovation, which is why the Government is wasting our money.

If they needed it, they would want it.
Only if they know that they need it.
234  Other / Politics & Society / Re: Maximum role of Government? on: July 22, 2011, 06:52:17 PM
Then I guess, people don't want green innovation, and therefore, Government is wasting our money.

Perhaps not. But people need green innovation, which is why the Government is wasting our money.
235  Other / Politics & Society / Re: Maximum role of Government? on: July 22, 2011, 05:47:11 PM
Well, Fuck. You're right. Your single exception invalidates the whole of libertarian theory.  Roll Eyes

(PS: Yes, that IS how markets work: If people don't see the need to compete... they don't)

I have more examples, but don't give up. Some of your ideology can still be saved. Having certain areas being subjects to competition is a good thing. Not everything about libertarianism is completely bonkers. I can give examples of good things about libertarianism too.

Really? That's how markets work? That's why if there is  a supermarket somewhere there won't be another supermarket in the same area? Again, reality doesn't agree. People see the need to compete all the time, because some things can always be done better.
236  Other / Politics & Society / Re: Maximum role of Government? on: July 22, 2011, 09:33:27 AM
No, actually, it pretty much is. I leave you alone, you leave me alone, and we never fight. See how simple that is?

People see progress in green initiatives, and gaps in welfare. So, the charities fill the gaps, but don't spring up to push green initiatives where government is making progress. In economic terms, there is no demand, so nobody supplies. (or rather, what demand is there is already met)

I wasn't aware that your government had been dissolved. Why didn't anyone tell me AnCapistan was here?

It is, if you live in a bubble and your actions don't impact anyone else. Outside of that things get a little more complex.

I would have to call bullshit on that argument again. That's not how markets work. People see a demand/market and think "I could do that better" and compete in the current market. If people just gave up because there already is a supplier somewhere you wouldn't have competition anywhere. New business pop up everywhere doing almost exactly the same as the business already there, while trying to differentiate themselves in various ways.

No, the government hasn't been disolved. Still you refuse to answer though. When the monopoly was discarded and anyone was free to compete what you said would happen hasn't happened. Why do you think that is? Perhaps reality isn't as simple as you'd like it to be?
237  Other / Politics & Society / Re: Maximum role of Government? on: July 21, 2011, 11:52:36 PM

Your right to swing your arm ends at my face. Why should that be any different for anything else?

It's not that pre-existing charities would decide to blow the money on hookers and blow,  but that no new charities would come into existence, because of the existing government funding. Same for any that did: "Sorry, GreenPower Collective, My taxes already pay for the kinds of research you say you'd be funding, so, I'll pass."

You just did. The successful ones got bought out. I'm not saying that won't happen without the government, but I'd wager there'd be more competition for them to buy out than they can afford to pay off.

Because life just isn't that simple.

Really, no new charities? So, since there already are government welfare programs no new soup kitchens will emerge? Good to know. I'd say that reality disagrees with you again though. People donate to such charities all the time, even though they pay for it with taxes. Why not for a green initiative? Because it won't support your ideology?


It hasn't been for 15 years, how long should the consumer wait for the market to fix the prices? Or should the consumer just sit tight and hope that perhaps their children will see real competition in the market?
238  Other / Politics & Society / Re: Maximum role of Government? on: July 21, 2011, 11:24:37 PM

Not contesting point 2. Doesn't mean that forcing people to pay for your vision is the way to get it done.

As for the reason why it's not getting done, You actually could argue that the market isn't free enough.
Rather than leave it there, though, I'll explain:
The government makes a great deal of fuss about how much money they spend on 'green' projects. This has two chilling effects on green charities: 1, "They're already doing it". This would affect the charities themselves, since the government is already doing it, there's no need for it to be done.2, "I already pay for that". This would affect the people who would potentially give to the charity, since their taxes already go to pay for the green programs they would sponsor, there's no need to give more.

I disagree with you about not forcing anyone. I don't believe your right to fuck things up is greater than others right to not have their life fucked up.

Chilling effects? So charities with a lot of money and being ever so much more efficient than anything the government will not develop the solution to all problems because "the government is already funding green tech, so let's just sit on our money instead, or use it for hookers and blow".
And people who just can't give to charities because they pay too much tax won't give to charity anyway. It's not the taxes that prevent it, it's their will to give.
So I would say that your arguments would be of better use in a field as fertilizer since it's clearly bullshit all of it.

And you still haven't explained why no new players emerge in the power market and undercuts the profit monsters that are there now. It should happen according to your theory, and no significant artificial barriers of entry exists according to papers about the power market. And when I say new players, I mean large enough players to actually have an impact. Those who have tried have been either unsuccessful or bought by the major players.
239  Other / Politics & Society / Re: Religion is a plague on: July 19, 2011, 09:54:51 PM
Terrorist bombed Bombay less than a week ago.

Point being? You're still safer there than in Rio. Or Montevideo. Or ... well you get the point.
240  Other / Politics & Society / Re: Maximum role of Government? on: July 19, 2011, 09:50:12 PM
1, they're doing nothing a sufficiently motivated rich individual or private charity couldn't do, and arguably more efficiently.
2, we would have wind turbines, and other clean sources of energy, when they became cost effective (ie: oil prices raised to the point that turbines, even with their low initial efficiency become worthwhile)

1) But IT ISN'T HAPPENING. Nothing stopping neither of those doing it today, and if they can do it better everybody wins. But it isn't happening. What? Is the market not free enough for a charity to do their thing?

2) So after global warming have reached the tipping point and we're all screwed then? You remind me of myself when I was ten and built boxcars. Just when I realized that the car was going a bit too fast I remembered that brakes would have been good to add to the car too. The market is really good at resource allocation, but when it comes to planning it sucks, and not just a little.
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
Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!