|
It's money, so like any money you could sell something, provide a service, buy it with another currency. Buying is definitely the fastest, unless you are willing to sell something below market value. I think anyone here would give you 1BTC for your car.
|
|
|
|
|
Apples and oranges. I don't think a graph showing the performance of stocks has much to do with bitcoin at all. There has never been a dead cat bounce because bitcoin has not, and likely will not die. Stocks NEED money, I mean absolutely NEED money to function. Bitcoin does not need or give a crap about money. She is a computer program, not a stock.
|
|
|
|
Only ships that are capable of sustainable operation in arctic are nuclear icebreakers. US has only one, while Russians maintain or build more than dozen of those
That will change with the global warming. It is estimated that by 2030, the Northern Sea Route will be navigable 9-months a year. This will greatly reduce the time duration for ships traveling from Europe to East Asia and vice versa. IMO, Russia is stepping up its presence in the Arctic, in order to secure the Northern Sea Route.  For example, the distance between Yokohama and Rotterdam is 17,913 km via the Suez canal, and 11,279 km via the Northern Sea Route. If you are right, that would only leverage position of Russians further in the future, once the control over the area is established. That will be simply unacceptable for western establishment. Some western powers might not like it, but they already agreed to it. The Arctic is being divided up by many nations according to the "rules of the Sea" laid out over 30 years ago. At that time many did not want to believe the data about the warming of the planet. Now there is absolutely no question among scientists that the north pole is going to melt away and open the arctic to navigation.  |
|
|
|
I find it ironic that the same people who can't hold on to their own data want to hold mine for security reasons.  |
|
|
|
...
I think the NSA is happy about bitcoin. When terror is using it more they will have an easier time.
...
Actually this is why they are interested in bitcoin, to the extent they are. Bitcoin makes it much, much, much harder to track money. In fact it can be used in a way that the NSA has no idea who is doing what. Traditional banking can be as easy to track as making a phone call. What about fiat cash? Harder to track. But consider that each dollar has a unique serial number on it, or that bills are regularly marked for use in police operations. Some countries, I think Denmark is one, record each bill each time it enters a bank. That goes a long way in determining the history of a bill. |
|
|
|
...
I think the NSA is happy about bitcoin. When terror is using it more they will have an easier time.
...
Actually this is why they are interested in bitcoin, to the extent they are. Bitcoin makes it much, much, much harder to track money. In fact it can be used in a way that the NSA has no idea who is doing what. Traditional banking can be as easy to track as making a phone call. |
|
|
|
|
In some ways this is already the way it works. Not exactly, but changes to the protocol are by adoption of the winning chain.
|
|
|
|
|
My understanding is that this claim has legal merit. The rules of the sea developed in the 1980's allow nations to define their sea territories by their continental shelf. Russia's claim is consistent with these agreements. Some may try to equate this with the land grab in Ukraine, but this is very different.
|
|
|
|
|
Then NYC is a loser. This is why regulation is such a subtle thing. Sure, the government has an obligation to prevent laundering, but they have killed the golden goose with over regulation. Now the money that was going to New York will go to London, Dubai, and other forward thinking places.
It was a stupid move that could cost billions.
|
|
|
|
|
As far as the future price... You can ask and ask all you want, but you will never get anything but guesses. No one knows the future. All you can do is delude yourself into thinking you are the exception.
|
|
|
|
We need to send in armies and kill every single male in that country, every single one all of them, children, old every single one.
I'll loan you an AK, when do we leave? Unfortunately that is the problem. Who is "we"? Are you willing to fight? Because I have some connections and could hook you up. P.S. I don't want to go either. My brothers in the army.. He would go on half pay.... and it seems everyone else would.. The army boys are dying to go smash teeth. They have tanks, if you have a panther tank with air and arty support count me in. Just going up against tanks and arty with an AK.. nope. If America was what it was suppose to be we could take our personal tanks over there and show them what's up but it's not. Hoo-Ah! to your brother! It's so true that the Army grunts want to get these guys. I think some of their cred is just based on fear. Look at this video of a DAESH(isis) attack. The one guys confidently taunts the enemy. He knows they are afraid. We have to remind people that most of these guys are not pro fighters and can be crushed. http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x2v8tyo |
|
|
|
We need to send in armies and kill every single male in that country, every single one all of them, children, old every single one.
I'll loan you an AK, when do we leave? Unfortunately that is the problem. Who is "we"? Are you willing to fight? Because I have some connections and could hook you up. P.S. I don't want to go either. |
|
|
|
Both of those can be true at the same time though.  Also, why would the press release photoshopped photos? Original Images: 3 images in 1Bedroom with a flag with pole
You can go to http://fotoforensics.com and input any image, and see where changes have been made. They usually show up as very bright. You can look up how to tell the difference and start checking out photos yourself. Notice there is no pole in the mirror? [pictures] I really see no evidence of photoshoping. But of course there is a bias present in the editors choice of photos. If this kid had been perceived to be a victim then they would use an older photo of a smiling child. Who is this?  Why it's Michale Brown. You know him from a years old picture that fits the narrative of an innocent victim.  |
|
|
|
I think we have entered a new normal. An era when anyone qualified to be president would not want the job.  |
|
|
|
As usual, the guy conveniently ends up dead which is all kinds of convenient.
Almost without exception these days, these 'mass shootings' are staged psychological operations. That I am quite confident of.
In terms of the disposition of the perp, it varies. Sometimes it was 'obvious to all who knew him' that the guy was dangerous. Sometimes 'nobody would have guessed.' The goal is to have the population understanding that they are always in danger and these things could happen anywhere at any time unless TPTB has the appropriate monitoring tools to protect the masses. Also, of course, all people need to be surveillance because anyone could be a threat.
Just as is the case with Islamic terrorism, the problem with gun violence is that there is no where near enough of it to achieve the promised benefits so it needs to be synthesized, and that is mostly what we see these days.
Put yourself in a situation where the night before you had been in a theater or whatever and witnessed a mass shooting and injured or people. Can you think of any possible scenario where you were in front of a news camera the next morning and found anything to grin and smirk about? I cannot imagine doing so personally, and I tend to be able to find humor in even the darkest things. The observations of the witnesses alone act so bizarre is strong enough evidence to me to be fairly sure that most of these events are pure psychological operations targetting domestic populations. Further analysis of most of these events by independent citizens only add weight to my suspicions about these things.
I do not believe anything like that is happening. It's always fun to think up some conspiracy. But the evidence points to a very banal, unsexy and expected truth. We turn the insane out on the street, they go off their meds, then they split from reality. It happens all the time and been this way throughout human history. In fact (despite a spike this year) the murder rate is at historic lows. You have to go back 50 years to find a lower rate. |
|
|
|
Yep, that looks like sanctioned theft.  |
|
|
|
Here is an example of the bias found in reporting on criminal violence. This week's nut-job killer at a Tennessee movie theater was described as a "gunman" in all the initial media reports. But why was he not described as a "hatchetman" or a bomber? The only gun he had was a bb gun. He did hatchet some people and had apparently planed on blowing the place up, but these things do not fit the presumption that banning guns is the same as banning violence. As always, it's a mentally disturbed person with a long criminal history who everyone knew was going to kill someone sometime.
Actually they argue the exact opposite. Do you mean "banning violence is the same as banning guns"? My sentence is not very clear here. The point I was hoping to make is that it is not logical to equate a tool used in a violent act with violence. A hammer is not capable of violence as it is an inanimate object. People are violent and may use any number of tools in a violent act. I think it stems from a supernatural belief in the evil power of an object. A mistaken idea that this violence somehow comes from the gun itself. You can hear it in the way shootings are described. "Your honor, my client had no intention of killing the store clerk. But when the clerk grabbed his gun they struggled and the gun went off" That's what a guilty person says about a shooting. "The gun went off" rather than " I shot him to death". |
|
|
|
|
Here is an example of the bias found in reporting on criminal violence. This week's nut-job killer at a Tennessee movie theater was described as a "gunman" in all the initial media reports. But why was he not described as a "hatchetman" or a bomber? The only gun he had was a bb gun. He did hatchet some people and had apparently planed on blowing the place up, but these things do not fit the presumption that banning guns is the same as banning violence. As always, it's a mentally disturbed person with a long criminal history who everyone knew was going to kill someone sometime.
Since nobody want's to spend a dime on treating the vast numbers of homeless mentally ill or give up any right they want to use, the call for banning guns is touted in the press as some sort of response. It's always what others should do and never what I am going to do or give up. You will never see a ban on propane tanks or hatchets, Those are things everyone uses and no connection is drawn between the violence and these items. But people with zero experience in crime and zero knowledge of guns immediately link their ignorance of guns too their ignorance of the criminal mind. It looks foolish to those who know what they are talking about. It is no different that a ban on propane because someone somewhere could blow something up.
|
|
|
|
LOL, a $6 ransom!  That's quite a tale. Did they use bicycles? Because $6 is not even enough to cover the gasoline budget for a kidnapping. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
