Taking to simply lying now, are we? Page 6, just under that table I mentioned: Risk of becoming a victim
• The risk of being a victim of violent crime one or more times a year for those interviewed by
the BCS in 2003 was 4.1 per cent.
Tell me, what percentage of 100000 is 4100? That is not what you proposed. Let's review: 'UK Violent Crime Rate: 4,100 per 100,000 citizens' That means, a rate of 4,100 violent crimes per 100,000 citizens. Now, to justify the doctored data, you are presenting another statistic, which express another result: 'The risk of being a victim of violent crime one or more times a year for those interviewed by the BCS in 2003 was 4.1 per cent.' The risk of being a victim of violent crime one or more times a year for those interviewed by the BCS in 2003 was 4.1 per cent. According to the 2002/03 BCS, young men aged 16 to 24 were most at risk, with 15 per cent experiencing violence in the recall period (Table 1b and Simmons and Dodd, 2003) That means the RISK (not the rate) of a violent crime to happen against a citizen during a whole year is 4.1%! That has nothing to do with the RATE (not risk) of violent crimes per citizen. Moreover, this is above the table you suggested: Table 1b Risk of becoming a victim of violent crime, year ending Dec 2003 BCS interviews So, the calculation is based on the number of people interviewed, not on the UK total population number. |
|
|
|
I saw it just before he deleted it, nethead posted using this account then immediately deleted it. Was a typical nethead post, mentioned it was an anon account and he never got the money, then asked roger to end it as he had to leave in a few mins. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=75200I am sorry BadBear, but I did not got it. You mean that nethead is bitbitman? |
|
|
|
If I knew his passphrase, I could have logged into his account, and taken my money back. You finally destroyed your moral reputation with this phrase. |
|
|
|
What are the transactions ID of the BTC supposedly sent to Nikolaos? The current privacy policy states:
But we will disclose these information ...... to protect against misuse or unauthorized use of our website.
I think this falls pretty clearly within that. That is not what the privacy policy implies. Your policy suggest that you will only disclose personal information only when legally required by a government agency. Moreover, the user did not misused the Internet page. http://memorydealers.com/terms-and-privacy/We will not disclose or sell your personal contact information to any third parties without your permission. But we will disclose these information when legally required to do so, at the request of governmental authorities conducting an investigation, to verify or enforce compliance with the policies governing our website and applicable laws or to protect against misuse or unauthorized use of our website. He has also since threatened my family with the following statement that is obviously directed towards me: "FuckingTheDeadBodyOfRogersMom"
How the threat was made and by what kind of media? |
|
|
|
Notice that Myrkul did not provided any explanation for the statistics he posted. Myrkul also forged the second statistic. The second reference do not contain the data which he published. Mykul doctored the evidence. |
|
|
|
Now, the corporation has such a security force, in the form of the police force and US military, providing that security protection for then for free, paid for by taxing those very same people who are protesting! Completely misleading and false. Corporations also pay taxes, therefore a corporation is also entitled to protection as is the individual. In short, misbehaving in an AnCap setting will likely be much more expensive than playing by the rules and staying ethical, which is very much not the case now. What I am wondering is, I keep saying and explaining this point over and over and over.... So why doesn't it sink in, and these same stupid hypotheticals keep coming up again? All you have is assumptions without any scientific evidence to prove the hypothesis. In other words, what you have is a fantasy world which will never exist outside the delusional imagination of some users in this forum. |
|
|
|
But burglars and robbers are different types of criminals...
The premise I am contesting assumes that door locks could not deter 'dishonest people'. Whatever the perpetrator is a burglar or a robber, his/her chances to break in a well secured house are very low when compared with a house which is poorly secured. Therefore, door locks can deter 'dishonest people' and that is why these methods are applied. As FirstAscent already proposed, if these methods were not efficient, they would not be applied or recommend. |
|
|
|
See if you can spot the logical fallacies in your argument.
Protip: There's 3 of them There is not fallacies in my argument because I am not arguing. I am directly mocking your argument. After you're done, come back and we might be able to have a debate. As it is, you're just blathering without making any sense. Like the nonsense you projected from your psyche? Door locks are to keep honest people honest. They do nothing to deter dishonest people. Can you tell me how your puny little door lock will stop my foot? I'm going to make a guess here: You think that having more lights (streetlights, porch light, etc...) in your neighborhood is a good thing and makes your neighborhood safer, too, right? 95% of locks are a joke, especially on suburban households. The tolerances on the tumblers in your locks on your front door (deadbolt included) are so incredibly sloppy that I could manually pick them in under a minute. I was ass deep in muck and mud in the jungles of Panama trying not to die from poisonous animals, plants and disease while eating dried out but more often soggy MREs and hoping some asshole didn't frag me because he was too jumpy or some piece of shit guerrilla didn't stab me in the night. Yes, your sad plight of having to walk around a bad neighborhood in the evening and being able to go home to a warm house and hot food was weighing on my thoughts, let me tell you. I am so sorry you had to brave the jungles of Compton for 10 minutes every few days. I haven't said word one about gun control, I was telling you about locks. In fact, if you are some place I am going to be, soon, I will be happy to give you a demonstration as to just how ineffective your lock is, assuming you give me permission. Perhaps you should do a demonstration for the British Metropolitan Police and convince the crime prevention department that 'door locks do nothing to deter dishonest people' because you 'was ass deep in muck and mud in the jungles of Panama trying not to die from poisonous animals, plants and disease': http://www.met.police.uk/crimeprevention/docs/bumblebee_burglary_prevention.pdfMuch of our work is aimed at making you feel safer in your community and helping you avoid crime. This booklet offers you straight forward advice on how to improve your home security and dramatically reduce the likelihood of experiencing a burglary.
(...)
Burglary can have a long-lasting emotional impact on victims, leaving them feeling isolated and vulnerable. However, by taking just a few simple measures you can reduce the chances of it happening to you. This section gives you a wealth of simple and practical advice on how to deter thieves, so you feel more secure in your home.
Why might your home be targeted? Most burglaries tend to be opportunistic, rather than planned. Burglars usually choose houses that have little or no visible security. So if your home does not look secure, seems unlived in, or provides unobserved access, it could be at risk. Understanding what burglars look for when choosing their target will help you identify weak spots in your home’s security.
(...)
Doors and windows are the primary route of entry and exit for most burglars, so it’s vital that you know what the safest kinds of doors and locking systems are. Remember to take this guide with you if you are considering buying new ones.
(...)
Lights can be a very successful crime prevention measure at night. |
|
|
|
No, I was simply telling you about locks because you are misinformed about them and seem to be suffering from the delusion that a lock is there to keep dishonest people out. They are not and never have been, they are to keep honest people honest, nothing more. Inaba, beyond your horrible job as PR, you are also an funny douche... You initial premise is complete fallacious. Tell me, if locks are there to keep honest people honest, what happens when locks are not there? Dishonest people are keep dishonest? Do you realize how absurd is your premise? Let's try again: 'Doors are there to keep honest people honest'. Should people buy more doors to keep more honest people honest?  |
|
|
|
I find it very hard to believe that Hector is a scammer. I consider him as reputable as Charlie Shrem or Roberto Gutierrez from AurumXchange. We have transferred nearly half a million worth of BTC this year alone.
Somebody here is trying to scam and believe me, its not hector.
My reputation is untouchable. I am the oldest miner and one if the pioneers of the bitcoin movement. I am ok.
Maria Bitcoin Founder.
I will take that as confirmation from you that Caradenada is Hector. If you wish to help with this case, start to provide the evidence which indicates that you transferred to him 'nearly half a million worth of BTC this year alone'. |
|
|
|
English is not Hectors first language and dealing with trolls throwing false accusations around is frustrating. Especially for someone who depends and his reputation to carry out his daily business needs. That said, its very hard to believe that Hector is a scammer because I have transferred thousands with him for a little over a year now and he has NEVER let me down. The evidence gathered is irrefutable. He is a fraudster and your opinion will not change the facts. Moreover, why are you calling him Hector? Caradenada insisted that he is not Hector. So now you are confirming that he is indeed Hector? I would seriously consider removing the tag from Hector, he is a hidden asset in our BTCommunity.
Stay Strong.
Maria M.
If I was you, I would seriously step back from this investigation before you reputation got damaged... |
|
|
|
That is an excellent paper discussing the hash-rate with a very straight mathematical explanation. I appreciated very much. Only this part I could not understand completely: A more accurate model might take into account that generating blocks costs more to the attacker than their reward, and that he would not have mined them at all (or procured the necessary computing resources) if he did not want to double-spend. Such a model could obviate the need to choose a value for q, by posing limits on the hashrate an attacker would obtain to perform attacks of a given value. However, once the focus of the security is the cost of neutrally mining, the number of confirmations required becomes linear, not logarithmic, in the transaction value; this is very poor security, hence in a situation where this is relevant, we have already lost anyway.
What did you mean by 'cost of neutrally mining' and how the 'number of confirmations required becomes linear'? |
|
|
|
Look like BFL AM Dave does not care to use people's private picture to garnish his blog post...
I wouldn't call them private since they were used to garnish a blog post to begin with. You guys sure are reaching... it's pathetic. It is pathetic you try to argue for a company which uses other people's material in their commercial Internet page without declare the source... This is indeed pathetic... http://www.lassiwithlavina.com/© Copyright 2012 Lavina Melwani. Photos © Copyright 2012 Respective Photographers. http://www.lassiwithlavina.com/24_7_talkischeap/christmas-is-an-indian-festival-too/htmlMohina and Ricky Tejpaul with Zarina and Sabina |
|
|
|
You're an idiot. It's the person in the mirror, not the image.
Just to reiterate, you're a moron.
If you don't know what those words mean, maybe the OED will tell you. There is no person in the mirror and sovereignty is not related to an mirror image. You are really delusional.... There may be no voluntary association with the state, but there can be voluntary association to defend against the state. Get enough people together, and they can defend against the subjugation. The only requirement or "rule of law" is that they agree that subjugating another is wrong. http://mises.org/journals/lf/1971/1971_04.pdfI will describe for you the millenial long anarchic society of Celtic Ireland - destroyed after a six century struggle against the English State in the wake of the military victories, confiscations and genocidal policies of successive English governments in the 17th century.
(...)
The rebellions, conquests, and confiscations of the 17th century finished the destruction of the old anarchic society. So, why the Celtic Irish people did not voluntarily organized to defend themselves against the English state subjugation? Perhaps the Celtic Irish people did not have enough mirrors to find where their sovereignty resides? |
|
|
|
A vase appreciating where it sovereignty resides...  |
|
|
|
Amazing... Myrkul is quite delusional... He answer questions with Wikipedia links and thinks that an image on a mirror is where sovereignty resides... |
|
|
|
ill say what i said to the other guy in case you dont read it.
Economics isnt physics and physics isnt economics. You cant base assumptions on the premise that they are. That was not proposed. Just because there happens to be a physical law that happens to correlate to the way that you think (incorrectly but thats neither here nor there) a free market economy would behave... The discussion is not about "free market", but the consensus of an organized society. ...doesnt demonstrate in any way that your hypothesys about how a free market economy would behave is sound. His hypothesis are valid because there is empirical validity for the models he used as example. |
|
|
|
Quite strange... I see the entry in the Google search like that: BCB, verify the email header for the time zone. |
|
|
|
looks quite like one of the profile pics (predimati). Yes, confirmed. That island behind him is quite similar to islands located near the coast where I live, which corroborates with previous evidence indicating his travel choices.  Uploaded with ImageShack.us |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
