New on LowEndTalk? Please Register and read our Community Rules.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
Comments
Well...
http://shanghai-pimp-directory.softwarp.com/category/pimps-accepting-bitcoin/ (NSFW)
Thanks
maybe we should start a trike to call for the reintroduction of the thanks button ?
@joepie91 but have to be near Shanghai. Wait, isn't India close to Shanghai? That explains dewlance accepting bit coin.
depends waht close means
By european measurements it is not close :P
Some 4.5 k Km...
i want to buy domains with bitcoins so does any people here know were I can buy and what domain provider acepts bitcoins?
I use https://www.nameterrific.com/
They're not the cheapest but are amazing ! Yes, They accept Bitcoins, see here https://www.nameterrific.com/pricing
Bitcoin has its pros, but its strongest point is also its weakest - the fact that there is a fixed number of bitcoins available. This will lead to inevitable deflation. Deflation is bad because it discourages spending; why would you buy that new car today instead of tomorrow when it costs less than today. This kind of thinking causes economic recession.
Moderate inflation (which is currently fueled by governments printing money with no real value) is better than moderate deflation for the economy.
I think those who can take the risk should consider Bitcoins as a long-term investment.
This is a feature, not a bug.
If you believe an economic system that cannot exist unless there is constant growth, is in any way, shape or form "healthy"... I think you have a larger problem then what currency to accept.
Considered that that may mean that the current economical system is inherently broken and needs fixing?
Please tell me what exactly would you base the economic system on if not growth.
Uhm, the original idea of an economic system for example? Proper resource distribution?
Here's me thinking the idea was to grow the common welfare of mankind. How do you define "proper" in the context of economic resource distribution?
For starters, assuming everything has to do with an "economy" is a problem in itself. That the current economic system is so goddamn pervasive that it influences or controls all aspects of life, does not mean that that pervasiveness is an absolute necessity to keep the world afloat.
"Proper" resource distribution means getting things to people when they need them. Reliably. That is not something that the current economic system provides.
I thought we were talking about the economy here.
As in matter of fact, I quite believe that it proves it.
Is rather an implication than a reason of existence.
You really need to read more than a few Wikipedia articles to understand the world around you.
This sentence alone tells me that you are so convinced that your worldview is the superior and only right one, that continuing this discussion with you is completely pointless.
You're not going to give any solid arguments, not worth it to waste my time on discussing with someone that isn't up for an actual discussion.
I don't know about this one, natural disaster cannot be foreseen most times, yet is usually a cause of supply chain disruptions. Economy or not, you can't force mother nature.
Heh, that's what @jarland keeps telling me.
It's true though, it is pointless to debate me with illogical fallacies.
For future reference, here is a list of arguments not to make. They are from the book "Being Logical: A Guide to Good Thinking", which I recommend to both of you.
Denying the Antecedent. A-B, -A, therefore -B. Basically this means if Louise is running, then she is moving. She is not running. Therefore she is not moving.
Affirming the Consequent. A-B, B, therefore A. If Louise is running, then she is moving. Louise is moving, therefore she is running.
The Undistributed Middle Term. Several nazis were members of the Kaiser Club. Hans was a member of the Kaiser club. Therefore, Hans was a Nazi. This is also known as "Guilt by association" as well as a generalization (i.e. all men in the Kaiser club were nazis).
Equivocation. This one isn't used very much in debate, but is really confusing when it is. It's basically the use of a word with more than one meaning purposely for deception or confusion. For example. Fans make lots of noise. Mrs. Gray was using a fan. Therefore, she was making alot of noise.
Begging the Question. This is an EXTREMELY overused fallacy in debate. Begging the question, is basicall, accepting something that someone says without proof. The "argument" lacks information supporting the premise. But you accept it because you may think it's true or it sounds right.
False Assumption. A false assumption is exactly what it says it is. Assuming something to be true without proof and then it turns out to be false.
The Straw-Man fallacy. Another overly used fallacy. This is where you take your opponets argument and twist it into something easier for you to argue against. They are saying something, and you get up there and say "My opponet is saying 'this'" when in reality they had said something different.
Using and Abusing Tradition. Saying that since things have always been done one way, that way is right.
The Democratic fallacy. The assumption that since most people believe "X" to be true, "X" is true.
Ad Hominem. Against the person. This would look like going after the person in a debate round. ("Well, my opponet is obviously an idiot....")
The Uses and Abuses of Expertise. Assuming that because a learned man says it, then it is so.
Stopping Short at Analysis. It's easy to do this. You analyze something, be it a point, or a conention; but then you never put it back together.
Reductionism. This is the fallacy of focusing in on one small aspect of a whole and saying that that is all it is. Looking at the body and saying that all it is is a bunch of chemicals thrown together. The body is made up of chemicals, but that is not all it is.
The Red-Herring. The red-herring is a fallacy because it appeals directly and only to emotions. It is bringing up a volatile and emotionally charged subject to divert the judges attention.
The Inability to Disprove Does Not Prove. This is exactly what it says it is. Just because there is not enough information to disprove something, does not mean that you have proven it.
The False Dilemma. Saying that there are only two possibilities that we must choose between. (Your choice is A or B. That leaves no room for A and B, or C)
Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc. This fallacy is basically illustrated by the caveman example. The caveman looks out of his cave and hears the birds. Then he sees the sun rising. He then thinks that because the birds chirp, the sun rises.
My question is this:
Can countries or organizations follow the money in Bitcoin network?
Do they count who changes bitcoins back to dollar?
Because if not, then the most obvious reason for this money to exist is that people can use it to "wash" money and to hide it. It is a currency which is not controlled by any government.
The currency itself, yes. The people who own it, no. (Or well, not necessarily).
How do you mean?
No, not really. The most obvious reason for this money to exist is because certain governments can't seem to exist without meddling with other peoples finances (Wikileaks donation blockade, for example).
And even that does not say anything about the reason it was designed by someone. Plenty of encryption algorithms, for example, are designed to be used for whatever reason people might need it - not with a particular goal in mind. I fail to see how that would be any different for Bitcoins.
For the developer(s) of the Bitcoin protocol (hackers in the traditional sense, not the breaking-into-things sense), this was a nice technical challenge. Combine that with the idea of someone somewhere that it would be quite nice to take away control from one or more notably corrupt organizations, and it's pretty easy to get a network like this running.
Correct, that was sort of one of the main aspects of the Bitcoin design. "Government" in this context being any kind of third party that wishes to govern you, not necessarily the state as we know it.
Anybody has a bitminer specific device?? How about renting them ???
Just to help you out, here's a poster for the 'TL;DR' folks.
That would be because they are.
The same could be said about other currencies, especially when you'd start dabbling into the definition of the word "illegitimate". I'm not sure why people are getting such a tunnel vision on "Bitcoin is used for illegal things" when they at the same time conveniently ignore that the exact same thing is happening with the dollars (and/or other government-instituted currencies) they have in their hands. "Every dollar bill has traces of cocaine on it" it was, right?
Do provide your sources. I'd love to know how one does statistical analysis on a currency where it's not feasible to connect an address to a particular purchase or seller.
Fascinating study of an anonymous marketplace on the deep web: Traveling the Silk Road:
A measurement analysis of a large anonymous online
marketplace
I love you.
Since the times it was invented, currency has been used for "illegitimate" purposes. Most religions are treating them with suspicion, some forbid it and some forbid some functions of it, such as credit.
Modern religions where ppl are bowing to the godlike corporations and governments treat bitcoin the same.
Whatever escapes their control is dangerous and the propaganda will sing the same tunes with terrorists, drugdealers and their favourite one with the child abusers all the time.
The important thing is, keep ignoring them and eventually they will lose.
There cant be any government and religion without the ppl to pay for it. Kill, imprison, destroy enough business and there will not be many ppl and money to to support them.
There is no need for a revolution, just passive resistance, in the end they will force us to work, like the communists, when you were almost as hungry, ill and cold with or without a job, the law was brought to force you work.
Hey @Maounique I just took a dump and it wasn't as solid as usual. Would you blame the catholics or the protestants?
Joke. Please keep your "every discussion is a great chance to share how much I hate religion" posts in "the cest pit." Some of us come here to get away from that stuff.
Its a first step, but not all ppl in the world can get away of it, in many countries and regions it is a deadly danger present all the time.
Leaving that apart, any discussion about money and especially non-controllable money the state and it's religion come into play, as they wish to control that resource to gain more power over the individuals.
Not everyone in the world can look at porn either so why don't you exercise your freedom and flood this forum with it? Because it's an inappropriate venue for such a thing, right?
Here you go: http://www.lowendtalk.com/discussion/4319/the-cest-pit/
Well, if religion=porn in your view, fine, didnt expect you to agree with me so fast
http://www.lowendtalk.com/discussion/4319/the-cest-pit/