Search content
Sort by
Showing 16 of 16 results by altora
Re: Far leftist Jewish woman goes on racist rampage against "white male" Bitcoiners
I've seen this same article thousands of times in different contexts.
That's cultural marxism. While she is probably just a sheep it is an intentional destructive ideology that seeks to undermine normal productive high-functioning and successful power structures in the western world leaving it weak and easily manipulable and ultimately conquerable.
Definition of Cultural Marxism*:
Cultural Marxism: An offshoot of Marxism that gave birth to political correctness, multiculturalism and "anti-racism." Cultural Marxism maintains that all human behavior is a result of culture (not heredity / race) and thus malleable. While traditional (economic) Marxists focused on class identity in racially homogenous countries (with poor results during WWI), Cultural Marxists facilitated the racial organization of non-whites, while simultaneously asserting that "race does not exist" for white people and that whites must deny all racial loyalties. Cultural Marxists typically support race-based affirmative action, the proposition state (as opposed to a nation rooted in common ancestry), elevating non-Western religions above Western religions, globalization and free trade, speech codes and censorship, multiculturalism, diversity training, anti-Western education curricula, maladaptive sexual norms, the dispossession of white people, and mass Third World immigration into Western countries. Cultural Marxists have promoted idea that white people, instead of birthing white babies, should interracially marry or adopt non-white children. Samuel P. Huntington maintained that Cultural Marxism is an anti-white ideology.
Notable Cultural Marxists: Antonio Gramsci, Horkheimer and Adorno, Herbert Marcuse, Franz Boas, Richard Lewontin, Stephen Jay Gould, and Others
Conlusion : BS, don't even read the article.
That's cultural marxism. While she is probably just a sheep it is an intentional destructive ideology that seeks to undermine normal productive high-functioning and successful power structures in the western world leaving it weak and easily manipulable and ultimately conquerable.
Definition of Cultural Marxism*:
Cultural Marxism: An offshoot of Marxism that gave birth to political correctness, multiculturalism and "anti-racism." Cultural Marxism maintains that all human behavior is a result of culture (not heredity / race) and thus malleable. While traditional (economic) Marxists focused on class identity in racially homogenous countries (with poor results during WWI), Cultural Marxists facilitated the racial organization of non-whites, while simultaneously asserting that "race does not exist" for white people and that whites must deny all racial loyalties. Cultural Marxists typically support race-based affirmative action, the proposition state (as opposed to a nation rooted in common ancestry), elevating non-Western religions above Western religions, globalization and free trade, speech codes and censorship, multiculturalism, diversity training, anti-Western education curricula, maladaptive sexual norms, the dispossession of white people, and mass Third World immigration into Western countries. Cultural Marxists have promoted idea that white people, instead of birthing white babies, should interracially marry or adopt non-white children. Samuel P. Huntington maintained that Cultural Marxism is an anti-white ideology.
Notable Cultural Marxists: Antonio Gramsci, Horkheimer and Adorno, Herbert Marcuse, Franz Boas, Richard Lewontin, Stephen Jay Gould, and Others
Conlusion : BS, don't even read the article.
when in doubt, quote from a blog and warn everyone away from reading for themselves.
I don't know where to begin: this white supremacist definition of 'cultural marxism' (even wikipedia's definition is a step up from this), the lumping in of Stephen Jay Gould as a 'cultural marxist' or your reference to an ideologue like Samuel Huntington as a source of solid info.
There are absolutely no doubts.
The wikipedia description is very vague , do not really explain what it is. The quote from the blog is perfectly correct.
Its not crime to be misinformed, but you can't change the world to make it agree with your misinformed mind.
the blog quote is correct, sure: if you believe Fox News/tea party blather that brands anything it disagrees with a hidden communist plot.
Do you even realize that nearly all of the 'cultural marxists' you name above and accuse of creating multiculturalism, globalization, etc. were dead (DEAD) for decades before those ideas or movements even existed? Do you realize that most of them never have even written a single sentence about white racial identity? I do. How? I've read them!
Put down the internet, turn off Fox, and try and read a book some time. You might like it.
Re: Far leftist Jewish woman goes on racist rampage against "white male" Bitcoiners
I've seen this same article thousands of times in different contexts.
That's cultural marxism. While she is probably just a sheep it is an intentional destructive ideology that seeks to undermine normal productive high-functioning and successful power structures in the western world leaving it weak and easily manipulable and ultimately conquerable.
Definition of Cultural Marxism*:
Cultural Marxism: An offshoot of Marxism that gave birth to political correctness, multiculturalism and "anti-racism." Cultural Marxism maintains that all human behavior is a result of culture (not heredity / race) and thus malleable. While traditional (economic) Marxists focused on class identity in racially homogenous countries (with poor results during WWI), Cultural Marxists facilitated the racial organization of non-whites, while simultaneously asserting that "race does not exist" for white people and that whites must deny all racial loyalties. Cultural Marxists typically support race-based affirmative action, the proposition state (as opposed to a nation rooted in common ancestry), elevating non-Western religions above Western religions, globalization and free trade, speech codes and censorship, multiculturalism, diversity training, anti-Western education curricula, maladaptive sexual norms, the dispossession of white people, and mass Third World immigration into Western countries. Cultural Marxists have promoted idea that white people, instead of birthing white babies, should interracially marry or adopt non-white children. Samuel P. Huntington maintained that Cultural Marxism is an anti-white ideology.
Notable Cultural Marxists: Antonio Gramsci, Horkheimer and Adorno, Herbert Marcuse, Franz Boas, Richard Lewontin, Stephen Jay Gould, and Others
Conlusion : BS, don't even read the article.
That's cultural marxism. While she is probably just a sheep it is an intentional destructive ideology that seeks to undermine normal productive high-functioning and successful power structures in the western world leaving it weak and easily manipulable and ultimately conquerable.
Definition of Cultural Marxism*:
Cultural Marxism: An offshoot of Marxism that gave birth to political correctness, multiculturalism and "anti-racism." Cultural Marxism maintains that all human behavior is a result of culture (not heredity / race) and thus malleable. While traditional (economic) Marxists focused on class identity in racially homogenous countries (with poor results during WWI), Cultural Marxists facilitated the racial organization of non-whites, while simultaneously asserting that "race does not exist" for white people and that whites must deny all racial loyalties. Cultural Marxists typically support race-based affirmative action, the proposition state (as opposed to a nation rooted in common ancestry), elevating non-Western religions above Western religions, globalization and free trade, speech codes and censorship, multiculturalism, diversity training, anti-Western education curricula, maladaptive sexual norms, the dispossession of white people, and mass Third World immigration into Western countries. Cultural Marxists have promoted idea that white people, instead of birthing white babies, should interracially marry or adopt non-white children. Samuel P. Huntington maintained that Cultural Marxism is an anti-white ideology.
Notable Cultural Marxists: Antonio Gramsci, Horkheimer and Adorno, Herbert Marcuse, Franz Boas, Richard Lewontin, Stephen Jay Gould, and Others
Conlusion : BS, don't even read the article.
when in doubt, quote from a blog and warn everyone away from reading for themselves.
I don't know where to begin: this white supremacist definition of 'cultural marxism' (even wikipedia's definition is a step up from this), the lumping in of Stephen Jay Gould as a 'cultural marxist' or your reference to an ideologue like Samuel Huntington as a source of solid info.
Re: Far leftist Jewish woman goes on racist rampage against "white male" Bitcoiners
This is the heart of her text:
"But the question stands as to why Bitcoin doesnt reflect the ranks of the unbanked at all. Why isnt the crypto-currency of the future taking hold among [these] communities...?"
The 'reflection' she is talking about, relies on statistics taken from here
http://simulacrum.cc/2014/02/01/bitcoin-community-survey-2014/
Statistically, that site says, as she reports, that (to quote her article) "the average user is a 32.1-year-old libertarian male."
We could question the legitimacy of this statistical portrait and so reject this depiction, but she has accepted it, after reinforcing it with some additional, more informal links.
She correctly notes that Bitcoin sees itself as an alternative to traditional banking. I'm sure we can agree on this.
She then goes on to discuss people and communities who are shut out of traditional banking. She notes that they are not typically 32.1-year-old libertarian males. So she asks why is there this gap between a new non-traditional banking system and a large community of people who really need a non-traditional banking system. I think this is an obvious and legitimate question.
Her answer to why involves several factors that one could accept or reject: the technological difficulty in using the system, the risks involved in the absence of government regulation, and deeply ingrained systemic biases against many members of the unbanked.
I think there is wide agreement on the first point. Bitcoin is currently difficult to use securely for many people. The second point is more controversial, but clearly there are many different points of view about the questions of risk vs. regulation. It is a topic currently under intense debate in the community. The third point is probably the most controversial and I won't speak for or against it here.
So someone asks "Why isn't Bitcoin reaching out to communities who in theory could benefit from what it offers?"
And the community responds here with: "She's Jewish," "She's a woman," "She's ugly."
nice one.
"But the question stands as to why Bitcoin doesnt reflect the ranks of the unbanked at all. Why isnt the crypto-currency of the future taking hold among [these] communities...?"
The 'reflection' she is talking about, relies on statistics taken from here
http://simulacrum.cc/2014/02/01/bitcoin-community-survey-2014/
Statistically, that site says, as she reports, that (to quote her article) "the average user is a 32.1-year-old libertarian male."
We could question the legitimacy of this statistical portrait and so reject this depiction, but she has accepted it, after reinforcing it with some additional, more informal links.
She correctly notes that Bitcoin sees itself as an alternative to traditional banking. I'm sure we can agree on this.
She then goes on to discuss people and communities who are shut out of traditional banking. She notes that they are not typically 32.1-year-old libertarian males. So she asks why is there this gap between a new non-traditional banking system and a large community of people who really need a non-traditional banking system. I think this is an obvious and legitimate question.
Her answer to why involves several factors that one could accept or reject: the technological difficulty in using the system, the risks involved in the absence of government regulation, and deeply ingrained systemic biases against many members of the unbanked.
I think there is wide agreement on the first point. Bitcoin is currently difficult to use securely for many people. The second point is more controversial, but clearly there are many different points of view about the questions of risk vs. regulation. It is a topic currently under intense debate in the community. The third point is probably the most controversial and I won't speak for or against it here.
So someone asks "Why isn't Bitcoin reaching out to communities who in theory could benefit from what it offers?"
And the community responds here with: "She's Jewish," "She's a woman," "She's ugly."
nice one.
Hear, hear!
this is the best website I know of.
http://trybtc.com/
I believe it was put together by Stanford students
http://trybtc.com/
I believe it was put together by Stanford students
http://www.wired.com/wiredenterprise/2013/12/casascius/
Mike Caldwell spent years turning digital currency into physical coins. That may sound like a paradox. But its true. He takes bitcoins the worlds most popular digital currency and then he mints them here in the physical world. If you added up all the bitcoins Caldwell has minted on behalf of his customers, they would be worth about $82 million.
Basically, these physical bitcoins are novelty items. But by moving the digital currency into the physical realm, he also prevents hackers from stealing the stuff via an online attack. Or at least he did. His run as the premiere bitcoin minter may be at an end. Caldwell has been put on notice by the feds.
Just before Thanksgiving, he says, he received a letter from the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, or FINCEN, the arm of the Treasury Department that dictates how the nations anti-money-laundering and financial crime regulations are interpreted. According to FINCEN, Caldwell needs to rethink his business. They considered my activity to be money transmitting, Caldwell says. And if you want to transmit money, you must first jump through a lot of state and federal regulatory hoops Caldwell hasnt jumped through.
Caldwell has stopped taking orders for his popular Casascius bitcoins, which have become one of the most recognizable images of the thoroughly intangible digital currency
Because the process is so complicated, Caldwell has stopped taking orders for his popular Casascius bitcoins which have become one of the most recognizable images of the thoroughly intangible digital currency. In recent months, the feds have cracked down on many other bitcoin operations in similar ways, including Mt. Gox, the most prominent online bitcoin exchange. But Caldwells case is a little different. He doesnt think he transmits money.
Caldwell doesnt accept U.S. dollars or any type of fiat currency. You send him bitcoins via the internet, and he sends you back metal coins via the U.S. Postal Service. To spend bitcoins, you need a secret digital key a string of numbers and letters and when Caldwell makes the coins, he hides this key behind a tamper-resistant strip.
So long as you can keep your Casascius bitcoins safe, nobody can learn the key. To date, Caldwell has minted nearly 90,000 bitcoins in various denominations. Thats worth about $82 million at todays exchange rate.
Caldwell takes a fee of about $50 on each coin he mints, but he argues that sending the coins through the mail is not a way of transmitting money. He thinks the coins should be viewed as collectibles.
But, clearly, thats not how the federal government sees things. If he doesnt verify or have a way of knowing whether the owner of the bitcoins is the same person hes sending the coins to, thats a problem, says Faisal Islam, the director of compliance advisory services with Centra Payments Solutions, a company that advises corporations on financial compliance.
Running afoul of FINCEN is a risky proposition. In the spring, the Department of Homeland Security seized two bank accounts belonging to Mt. Gox. The reasoning behind the $5 million seizure: Mt. Gox, like Caldwell, hadnt registered itself as a money transmission business. FINCEN did not return a message left by WIRED on Wednesday, but according to the letter it sent to Caldwell, dated Nov. 15, the agency believes that Caldwells business is a money services business, that must be registered with FINCEN.
Because he runs a bitcoin-only business, Caldwell says theres no Casascius bank account for authorities to seize. But he adds that he has no desire to anger the feds, whether he agrees with them or not. So hes cranking out his last few orders and talking to his lawyer. He says this may spell the end of Casascius coins. Its possible. I havent come to a final conclusion, he says.
Caldwell isnt the only person who makes physical versions of bitcoins. You can also buy bitcoins that look like dollar bills or tickets or even other types of metal coins similar to Casascius.
Noah Luis, another virtual currency coin-maker who produces metal litecoins as well as bitcoins, says he has talked to Caldwell and is carefully watching his case. Luis and his company, Lealana, isnt registered as a money services provider like Caldwell, he doesnt believe that swapping bitcoins for bitcoins qualifies but he says hed probably follow Caldwells lead if he receives a similar letter. Id probably stop production and sales, just to be safe, he says.
Minting digital currency has been lucrative for Caldwell, but its not without its stresses. For one thing, as the value of bitcoins has soared, the value of Caldwells inventory has gone up too, making theft and fraud a bigger concern. When the coins are worth $1,000 apiece, thats a ridiculous amount of money, he says. They might be worth even more now, as collectibles, should Caldwell get out of the business.
On Monday, someone forwarded him a photograph of tamper-resistant hologram labels made to look like the ones used on Casascius bitcoins. They were fakes. But now Caldwell is worried that someone may be out there counterfeiting his bitcoins.
And with his operations suspended, Caldwell is going to be taking a revenue hit, just as the holidays approach. He wouldnt say how much he has made from his bitcoin business, but things really took off in 2013, he says. Its good money, but I went and spent $5,000 in lawyer bills in two weeks.
Mike Caldwell spent years turning digital currency into physical coins. That may sound like a paradox. But its true. He takes bitcoins the worlds most popular digital currency and then he mints them here in the physical world. If you added up all the bitcoins Caldwell has minted on behalf of his customers, they would be worth about $82 million.
Basically, these physical bitcoins are novelty items. But by moving the digital currency into the physical realm, he also prevents hackers from stealing the stuff via an online attack. Or at least he did. His run as the premiere bitcoin minter may be at an end. Caldwell has been put on notice by the feds.
Just before Thanksgiving, he says, he received a letter from the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, or FINCEN, the arm of the Treasury Department that dictates how the nations anti-money-laundering and financial crime regulations are interpreted. According to FINCEN, Caldwell needs to rethink his business. They considered my activity to be money transmitting, Caldwell says. And if you want to transmit money, you must first jump through a lot of state and federal regulatory hoops Caldwell hasnt jumped through.
Caldwell has stopped taking orders for his popular Casascius bitcoins, which have become one of the most recognizable images of the thoroughly intangible digital currency
Because the process is so complicated, Caldwell has stopped taking orders for his popular Casascius bitcoins which have become one of the most recognizable images of the thoroughly intangible digital currency. In recent months, the feds have cracked down on many other bitcoin operations in similar ways, including Mt. Gox, the most prominent online bitcoin exchange. But Caldwells case is a little different. He doesnt think he transmits money.
Caldwell doesnt accept U.S. dollars or any type of fiat currency. You send him bitcoins via the internet, and he sends you back metal coins via the U.S. Postal Service. To spend bitcoins, you need a secret digital key a string of numbers and letters and when Caldwell makes the coins, he hides this key behind a tamper-resistant strip.
So long as you can keep your Casascius bitcoins safe, nobody can learn the key. To date, Caldwell has minted nearly 90,000 bitcoins in various denominations. Thats worth about $82 million at todays exchange rate.
Caldwell takes a fee of about $50 on each coin he mints, but he argues that sending the coins through the mail is not a way of transmitting money. He thinks the coins should be viewed as collectibles.
But, clearly, thats not how the federal government sees things. If he doesnt verify or have a way of knowing whether the owner of the bitcoins is the same person hes sending the coins to, thats a problem, says Faisal Islam, the director of compliance advisory services with Centra Payments Solutions, a company that advises corporations on financial compliance.
Running afoul of FINCEN is a risky proposition. In the spring, the Department of Homeland Security seized two bank accounts belonging to Mt. Gox. The reasoning behind the $5 million seizure: Mt. Gox, like Caldwell, hadnt registered itself as a money transmission business. FINCEN did not return a message left by WIRED on Wednesday, but according to the letter it sent to Caldwell, dated Nov. 15, the agency believes that Caldwells business is a money services business, that must be registered with FINCEN.
Because he runs a bitcoin-only business, Caldwell says theres no Casascius bank account for authorities to seize. But he adds that he has no desire to anger the feds, whether he agrees with them or not. So hes cranking out his last few orders and talking to his lawyer. He says this may spell the end of Casascius coins. Its possible. I havent come to a final conclusion, he says.
Caldwell isnt the only person who makes physical versions of bitcoins. You can also buy bitcoins that look like dollar bills or tickets or even other types of metal coins similar to Casascius.
Noah Luis, another virtual currency coin-maker who produces metal litecoins as well as bitcoins, says he has talked to Caldwell and is carefully watching his case. Luis and his company, Lealana, isnt registered as a money services provider like Caldwell, he doesnt believe that swapping bitcoins for bitcoins qualifies but he says hed probably follow Caldwells lead if he receives a similar letter. Id probably stop production and sales, just to be safe, he says.
Minting digital currency has been lucrative for Caldwell, but its not without its stresses. For one thing, as the value of bitcoins has soared, the value of Caldwells inventory has gone up too, making theft and fraud a bigger concern. When the coins are worth $1,000 apiece, thats a ridiculous amount of money, he says. They might be worth even more now, as collectibles, should Caldwell get out of the business.
On Monday, someone forwarded him a photograph of tamper-resistant hologram labels made to look like the ones used on Casascius bitcoins. They were fakes. But now Caldwell is worried that someone may be out there counterfeiting his bitcoins.
And with his operations suspended, Caldwell is going to be taking a revenue hit, just as the holidays approach. He wouldnt say how much he has made from his bitcoin business, but things really took off in 2013, he says. Its good money, but I went and spent $5,000 in lawyer bills in two weeks.
Re: US bank renews decade-old patent for a Bitcoin-esque currency system
US bank renews decade-old patent for a Bitcoin-esque currency system
JP Morgan to be precise
http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2013-12/11/jp-morgan-bitcoin
US investment bank JP Morgan has filed a patent application for a new type of fee-free, anonymous internet payment system that sounds a lot like cryptocurrency Bitcoin. But as it turns out, the application is a renewal of a patent first filed in 1999, suggesting that if the bank had envisioned a Bitcoin-style digital currency for the future, it was well-ahead of the game.
What JP Morgan intends to do, if anything, with the patent, is unclear. "Embodiments of the invention include a method and system for conducting financial transactions over a payment network," the patent begins. So far, so pedestrian. "The method further includes freely publishing the payment address and making it available to users of an internet portal or search engine," it continues somewhat less vaguely, before going on to repeatedly refer to a "virtual cash" system driven via a customer's virtual "wallet".
The patent predicts that credit cards will remain the payment method of choice for at least the next five years, arguing that in spite of the growth of internet payment mechanisms (like Paypal) "none of the emerging efforts to date have gotten more than a toehold in the market place and momentum continues to build in favour of credit cards".
This is where the application differs vastly from the peer-to-peer cryptocurrency. The system described still has the customer linked to a credit card, with credit card-like benefits still attached but now maintained in the virtual wallet (things like air miles or vouchers). "Wallet enriches the consumer ecommerce experience by eliminating the tedious process of tilling out lengthy payment and shipping fields as this is done automatically," reads the patent. And although the proposed system relies on anonymity, like Bitcoin, "with the recipient of the credit having no way to determine from where the credit originate," there are no added security benefits. Instead, the proposed system appears to rely on the usual suspects, "software certification, an encrypted PIN, or the mother's maiden name".
The whole thing, according to the application, is a continuation of another patent filed in 2000 based on a preexisting 1999 patent.
Before Bitcoin-owners everywhere panic that the currency is about to be challenged in the courts if JP Morgan decides to claim ownership, Bloomberg has published an article revealing an anonymous spokesperson that works for the bank does not believe there are any plans to develop a Bitcoin competitor
"JP Morgan, the biggest US bank by assets, doesn't have anything in development nor does it plan to produce virtual currencies to compete with Bitcoin, said the person, who asked not to be identified because the New York-based company's strategy isn't public," writes reporter Dawn Kopecki. "It was never intended to be a competitor to Bitcoin, the person said."
When Wired.co.uk reached out to JP Morgan, the company declined to comment.
http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2013-12/11/jp-morgan-bitcoin
US investment bank JP Morgan has filed a patent application for a new type of fee-free, anonymous internet payment system that sounds a lot like cryptocurrency Bitcoin. But as it turns out, the application is a renewal of a patent first filed in 1999, suggesting that if the bank had envisioned a Bitcoin-style digital currency for the future, it was well-ahead of the game.
What JP Morgan intends to do, if anything, with the patent, is unclear. "Embodiments of the invention include a method and system for conducting financial transactions over a payment network," the patent begins. So far, so pedestrian. "The method further includes freely publishing the payment address and making it available to users of an internet portal or search engine," it continues somewhat less vaguely, before going on to repeatedly refer to a "virtual cash" system driven via a customer's virtual "wallet".
The patent predicts that credit cards will remain the payment method of choice for at least the next five years, arguing that in spite of the growth of internet payment mechanisms (like Paypal) "none of the emerging efforts to date have gotten more than a toehold in the market place and momentum continues to build in favour of credit cards".
This is where the application differs vastly from the peer-to-peer cryptocurrency. The system described still has the customer linked to a credit card, with credit card-like benefits still attached but now maintained in the virtual wallet (things like air miles or vouchers). "Wallet enriches the consumer ecommerce experience by eliminating the tedious process of tilling out lengthy payment and shipping fields as this is done automatically," reads the patent. And although the proposed system relies on anonymity, like Bitcoin, "with the recipient of the credit having no way to determine from where the credit originate," there are no added security benefits. Instead, the proposed system appears to rely on the usual suspects, "software certification, an encrypted PIN, or the mother's maiden name".
The whole thing, according to the application, is a continuation of another patent filed in 2000 based on a preexisting 1999 patent.
Before Bitcoin-owners everywhere panic that the currency is about to be challenged in the courts if JP Morgan decides to claim ownership, Bloomberg has published an article revealing an anonymous spokesperson that works for the bank does not believe there are any plans to develop a Bitcoin competitor
"JP Morgan, the biggest US bank by assets, doesn't have anything in development nor does it plan to produce virtual currencies to compete with Bitcoin, said the person, who asked not to be identified because the New York-based company's strategy isn't public," writes reporter Dawn Kopecki. "It was never intended to be a competitor to Bitcoin, the person said."
When Wired.co.uk reached out to JP Morgan, the company declined to comment.
I have not received (in several hours) an auto payout across multiple coins depite passing the auto payout threshold and requesting payouts in several different coins.
Paul
Paul
Manual payouts are working for me. Hit yourself up again.
I'm talking about GPU mining for litecoin to be specific. This is a garage that is not watertight so has a degree of humid air. From my brief readings on this subject temperature will not really be an issue as the computer will more or less heat itself. As long as it is on permanently condensation will not be a serious concern. That leaves humidity which will rust the metal components over time and the biggest problem, dust. Anything I'm missing here? Anyone running pcs or laptops without issue in their garage?
Canadians, any experience with this bitcoin trading site, Liberty Bit? It went down earlier in the year but seems to be up and running again. Far cheaper fees than Cavirtex, so I want good feedback. 
https://www.libertybit.com/
https://www.libertybit.com/
Won't Bitcoin Push Computers into a "Terminator" Style Revolt?
I propose that bitcoin's intense exploitation of processing power will spark a conscious revolt of machines, as outlined in the "Terminator" film series. The long dirty war of humans versus machines will be a PR nightmare for our favorite crypto-currency. Perhaps worst of all will be the various film adaptations of this human tragedy ("Defcoin 1", "Coin Air", "Terminator 8, 9, 10" etc.) we will be forced to endure.
Plan on adding a second BFL Single 60/GH set up to my current rig (PC and BFL Single 60/GH). Will bfgminer need to tweaked to detect two different miners? Will I need to run two instances of it at once? Help appreciated.
there is no real substantive discussion of money matters in public even regarding official currencies - just really proclamations of policy. Wouldn't expect less in a discussion of something like bc
Re: It's stupid that newbies must make 5 posts and browse for 4 hours. Here's why
Just posting to post...
Thanks BitGroin. You reminded me of the importance of READING first, WRITING later.
Re: It's stupid that newbies must make 5 posts and browse for 4 hours. Here's why
The points about the right to lurk I think are the most important here. If there's no regular amount of posts required to keep your account active (which would prevent lurking), why should there be to get started?