ManagingPrime

The amount that be created is finite...21 million I belive. Quite unlike the fiat currencies we now know. The code is open source. Do you trust linux based systems? If the project continues to gain more interest it will become more secure. The fact that we are not seeing devestating attacks on the system speaks volumes...the project is a threat to existing schemes and there are a number of parties that would like to see bitcoins just go away.

Terrorists are just people. They don't just come out of the womb practicing counter-survelience techniques. I see where you are going with it though. It kind of makes you wonder how long the database has been in existence and at what point did the standard image have enough resolution to identify a unique iris. The phone I'm on now tracks my eye movement and I'm certain the resolution is good enough to pull a usable image of my iris from less than a foot away from my face...things that make you go hummmmmm. As long as the technology is used to identify/ kill enemy combatants, I mean terrorists, who are of a darker complexion than me, speak a different language than me and live on a different continent....I guess I'm alright with it.

Idk. I think a number of those big shots are in dying industries, with the possible exception of the pharmacutical industry, but I envision them losing their grip at some point. Add to that the growing interest in liberty among the worlds youth and I see something like decriminalization on the horizon. In any case, I'm shielded on a state and local level and I don't plan on ever living somewhere where I'm not. Ten years ago I could have said that arizona would adopt mmj and people would have said, "yeah...keep smokin buddy.". Times change as much as they stay the same. Capitalists will pursue lower yielding sustainable investments when their unsustainable investments have run their course.

Think about how long we've been in country and how terrorists are made. Some kid that got displaced along with his family when he was 10 years old, ends up at a refugee camp handful of years later he's with AQ, but in the database from the te at the camp. That's just one scenario and others have been mentioned. Even if the majority of people are not in the db, which is probably the case now, the tech is still useful as all get out.

I'm not fully aware of where the technology is at this point, but I do know there are systems that can scan and identify several people at once from distances far enough where the hardware can be obfuscated. However,I can assert that the technology will get smaller, faster and better real quick. lol

You can have your iris scanned without knowing it. Welcome to the 21st.

Marijuana is bad. If you smoke marijuana, your babies will be born naked. Everyone who smokes marijuana will die. Eventually. I prefer to think of marijuana as a mistress whom you later find out is a mister and no amount of salt baths will wash away the shame.

In my time in the sport I've gone from making considerably more than 20K/yr to considerably less and then back to considerably more. When jumping as much as I would like I've always been broke. All that said, if I had some fiduciary responsibility to you I would advise against using any of your primary income for jumping. Fresh out of school and at an entry level position is tough. You need to try and build as much reserves as you can. There was mention of packing on the weekends, etc. Depending on your level of dedication and what drop-zone is around you can definitely pack for jumps. To pull decent jump numbers you will be working your ass off on the weekends, but it's a great experience that I've seen many work to their advantage. In the end, it's your life, live it as you see fit. Skydiving is one of the most piss poor financial investments I can think of, but if you have a love for it, it's one of the most rewarding I can think of. Buy a couple jump tickets...rent/borrow a rig and dip your toes back in. One way or another you will figure it out.

Is there an option for "neither" or "boobies"?

Maybe you can... Wendy P. Thay would be an example of dealing with a single counterparty. Apparently there are p2p bitcoin loan programs already in place. I'm a fan of people putting their money where their mouth is. If you think it's a good short, go for it. Baring any future Cyprus type events I think it could be a great short candidate. The fact we are even having this exchange demonstrates that it's a potentially viable alternative currency. I don't doubt there are some decent size shorts out there already. How many people ten years ago "would never give" thier credit card info online? Times change.

I want to know how to SHORT it, not buy it. Find someone who will lend you bitcoins. Say an agreement where you borrow 1k bitcoins and at the end of a 1 month, 6 month term you repay the laon in full plus a 10% premium. You could use your home as collateral.

I was actually entertaining buying some a little over 6 months ago. Would have seen a good ROI if I did....story of my life. As far as the origins go. A number of investigative journalists have looked into the creating of bitcoin and there is a high degree of certainty as to who the programmer(s) behind the code are. In theory, it's a great alternative to other currencies. The creation of new money is algorithmic as opposed to by decree from a central authority and the supply is finite. I've been interested in the concept for sometime. I think we'll be hearing more about this and other crypto-currencies in the coming years. That said, as far as "investment" quality goes, it's about as speculative as it gets.

Lol... I'm going to borrow that one.

I'd say it's because the truth hurts. Everyone knows that the whole lot (R&D) are corrupt. The partisans don't like to acknowledge this because deep inside they know they are on the wrong side of history. For those of us that are not partisan it only confirms what we already know and there's really no news here.

That's a good one. First april fools day joke I fell for today. Good thing I parsed that one out before I had the non-smokers in the office some into my office to smell the roses.

A joke's a joke, but that's just going too fuckin' far I forgot to mention that she's beautiful. Well, Bill Maher used to date her. Yeah, well bill maher has a history of making bad decisions. See "pizza man" circa 1991.

At least you're not a nihilist. Kudos for having an ethos.

Sure...for the oh so affordable cost of 2 billion dollars.

I agree. I may be using the term wrong, but I see the cognitive dissonance where on one hand people see the government as largely responsible for societies problems and on the other via the government as a means of solving those problems. IMHO, I think this is a result of people not feeling vested in the democratic process. The system just feels broken. Certainly, I suppose modern technology could well make more inclusive/democratic political processes possible. Let's say we develop a system where every citizen gets to vote on every bill, and even gets to propose legislation, say by petitioning the government. You've already raised the problem that politicians don't educate themselves on every bill they vote on. How would you ensure that citizens voting directly on legislation have bothered to inform themselves? We now live in a culture where money = speech, so the vested interest with the most money has the biggest megaphone. Is there any way to ensure the public hears (much less understands) an objective discussion of the pros and cons of legislation before voting on it? If not, isn't there a risk that such a democracy would just become bread and circuses for the most vocal agitators, without even a middleman to possibly put some brakes on the process (not that they have been doing that). I very much like the idea of incorporating modern technology into the political process, but personally I would stop short of direct democracy. While at some point in the future direct democracy may be the best way to go, I don't think we are there yet. I can see the merits of a republic, even if more so if that republic tips it's hat to direct democracy. If you want a modern example of direct democracy you just have to look at the occupy movement. No offense to it's supporters, because I agree with them on a lot of points, but the whole direct democracy bit kind of makes me want to puke. It's above my pay grade too. I mean, with the demands of modern life, who can really afford to be politically active? Particularly, when it comes to such broad and far reaching reforms. There is a problem though. For example: At the start of 2012, 40,000 new laws went into effect in the US. The vast majority of those laws made new criminals that did not exist previously. The average American citizen now walks around unknowingly breaking laws everyday, may of which could result in criminal prosecution....it's too much. We need a system where we make good laws...I don't think we've been doing that.

Generally, I like the idea. However, I don't think it's really "fresh" enough to address the growing dissatisfaction among the youth. While this applies to Europe more than the US I find that the sentiments are shared here. My generation and those who are younger are quite aware of the "illusion of options" and in both cases there is a desire for a more radical departure from the status quo, however, I concede the Europeans are a bit ahead of their American counterparts. http://rt.com/news/eu-unemployment-change-decentralization-065/ Some interesting quotes from the article: “I think its [Europe] quite a dangerous situation because that means you have politicians and bureaucrats ruling over nearly 500 million people, not necessarily do they know always what the best things are for us,” Matej Arsenak Ogorevc told RT. “The consequences of a lost generation are not merely economic, but are societal, with the risk of young people opting out of the democratic participation in society,” the report warns. Just because you have large groups of people that have opted out of democratic participation, it does not mean they don't care about the issues. They just don't think anyone is listening or has their best interests at heart. That's dangerous when you look at the whole host of issues not just facing Americans in the coming years and decades, but all people as we become a more globalized society. Ignore that youth at your peril. Just because they are not voting does not mean they are not a force to be reckoned with. IMHO time is running out to bring people back into the tent and that's not going to be done without some grand ideas and restructuring of how our democracy works. Otherwise, I think we could see the emergence of Libertarian Socialism...not that I'm against it, but that change could be very painful to those who have a vested interest in the current system. -Rant over.

the real world says that your proposals are unworkable, never mind the philosophical failures I see in them. These are black hole sized holes and they have been pointed out, without a reply from you. That it doesn't solve any problems is the biggest failure. The urge to solve the status quo leads to a lot of lousy solutions, with the premise that SOMETHING has to be done. Drug testing welfare recipients is a great one. Nearly every gun control proposal. Term limits. All simplistic, all failing to look at even the obvious second order consequences. The problem's I see, maybe no one else see's them as a problem: 1. Many legislators don't read the bills they vote on. 2. Many legislators (I'm thinking career politicians) no longer represent the best interests of their constituents. 3. Many laws have been passed without constituent knowledge and or approval. 4. Lobbyists have a great deal of influence on the law making process. Instead of them making backroom deals and corrupting political leaders, they can come to "the people" and lobby for any new laws they feel are needed. 5. I don't think we are a nation of the people, by the people and for the people. Somewhere along the way we just became the governed. 6. Many constituents recognize all of the above and feel disenfranchised from the political process. Technology has made it possible to share information near instantly. Perhaps, it's time to use that technology to re-engage voters, but keep "the unwashed, uneducated mob" in check with a default no...we are a republic after all. Maybe it won't solve any problems, but I think it will give the people a bit more ownership of laws that are passed. Sure, we can run with the status quo....it's been working sooooo well. I don't feel this was a nation built on the principal of following the status quo. Please don't dodge this question, because I'm very interested in your input. Can you please provide examples of how you think the proposal would be unworkable and provide examples of the philosophical failures? I'm very interested in your observations, but I can't read your mind. I thought I found a whole in the idea last night. I wondered, what about congresses ability to declare war? Should we really leave that up to popular opinion? My friend countered, "hell yes. If the government is asking me lay my life on the line or to send my child off to possibly die, we should have a say."... I can't really disagree.

Don't think it's anything new. The US govt has quite a bit of practice partnering with exploitative corporations. United Fruit Company Yeah, but these guys take it to a level that UFC could only dream of. They are trying to corner the worlds food market...and doing a good job of it. They are poisoning people and land, know it and are actively covering it up. These companies could very well be responsible for the extinction of the human species and countless others...and I don't think that's an exaggeration. I can only think of one word for them: Criminal. Any government officials covering for them need to be charged with treason and executed. Period.

This thread inspired me to re-watch a documentary on Monsanto that I have not watched in some time. If you don't know what complete pieces of shit these guys are it's worth the watch. http://www.veoh.com/watch/v8968165kYRdfmYC?h1=The+World+According+to+Monsanto Our government has their fingerprints all over this company. The kinds of things that make one go "hmmmmmm".....

Good luck with that when we're talking genetics.

Op states fairly clearly they retain the right to vote against constituents desire for a yes vote.... moving on from that. In regards to the voting system, I'd imagine the best system would be some kind of verified online vote. Obviously, a digital divide still exists so I would imagine there would be publicly available computers in government offices available. I'm not proposing a direct democracy model, but I guess I'm tipping my hat to the idea to some degree. Hopefully, I've made the general idea clear so that some real world examples can be run though it to find any big holes in the idea.