I'm pretty sure its illegal to record a phone call without the other parties approval in the United States. I wonder if they've taken this into account? Like, when person A initiates recording, does it just record or does it ask for confirmation from person B?

were past the stage of "don't write down your passwords". Too many sites, too many passwords... Personally, I use pwSafe (a mac and iOS version of Schneiers password safe), but i know plenty of people who keep notebooks hidden with their passwords all written down. Better that than use a single password everywhere.

Whats the alternative, though?

You can object to the notion all you want, but as far as your tax return goes, that's exactly how you have to treat transactions in Bitcoins, as if you sold the Bitcoins for dollars at the moment of purchase.

FIFO is just the default most brokerages use. You can also (usually) choose to use LIFO, or even specific lot selection. As far as I know, you can only use "Average Cost" with Mutual Funds, though.

Yes, it's taxed like any other investment asset.

The issue is that, if you go ahead and use it as a "currency", each transaction becomes a taxable event. Say you buy bitcoins when they're worth $500 each. You buy a coffee when they're down to $490, get groceries when they're at $600, buy more Bitcoins when they're worth $575 (new tax lot), then buy a Dell computer when they're at $375, each of these transactions is a separate item on your Schedule D.

For people who have them, the best 'solution' from a tax compliance stand point (not that I'm an accountant or anything, nor that many Bitcoiners seem particularly concerned about taxes), is to hold your Bitcoins and then convert them when you know you're going to be making some purchases (i.e., you know you're going to buy 3 cups of coffee and a computer that day, so you sell $450 worth of Bitcoins and make each purchase with cash). That way your Schedule D will at least be slightly more manageable (1 entry for that days activity rather than 4 distinct entries).

You're not factoring the effect all of the other cointerra miners would have had on the difficulty. The effect is not insignificant.

No, you can only look up and guess what he would have made. You also have to figure in the results of all the other delayed cointerra orders coming online a couple months earlier. Those 2 TH wouldn't generate nearly as much if 2 PH of other hashing powe came on in December, followed by 4 PH in jan and 8 in feb.

Miners face many risks. The value of bitcoin. The number of other machines coming online. And the likelihood of receiving their machine, which is often only in the planning stage when they order it.

In the real workd there is no such thing as risk free. When you buy a stock at X there's no one to sue if it goes to W instead of Y. And people investing in miners face new risks. The adage don't invest what you can't afford to lose is just as relevant. And the courts shouldn't be the refuge of people who simply bet wrong. And Thad's what it was , betting that Cointerra could produce what they said they would when they said they would with no prior experience doing so, just a guy who worked for many years in the semiconductor field.

Don't i recall that these disks were advertised as having shelf lives of 100+ years? And that they were fantastic archival mechanisms... and now we're finding out that they only lasted 10% the rated time

This site says 50-100 years; http://searchstorage.techtarge...

Though the government only thought they'ed last last 2-5 years here... http://www.archives.gov/record...

Oops. Accidentally posted that too soon and before logging in.

Anyways, had those people had bitcoin wallets on their computers, those assuredly would be emptied.

Third party wallet hosting services aren't an answer - while there may be some trust worthy operators out there, there's far too many people that aren't. People who would never ben entrusted to hold $10 throw up a pretty website and see $10 million transferred to their control. Even if they resist the temptation, just the knowledge of how many coins those services become huge targets for criminals.

So, no... as cool of a concept as bitcoin might be, an electronic currency that allows for irreversible transactions is not a good thing for the average user.

I start a company that makes widgets. I'm the only employee, so I make the widgets. I'm sure we'd agree that I'm producing something.

Next, I hire 10 people to make the widgets, and I take on a managerial role. Am I still producing something? It's not by my own hands, anymore.

Later, I hire people to do the management so I have no day to day responsibilities. It still is the conpsny I started, so if someone asked how I didn't have to work anymore, I'd say "I started company and my company makes widgets". Heck, I might take more direct ownership and say "you know all those widgets? I own the company that makes them, those are my widgets". I'd be insulted if you said I had no role in their production.

Even further along, you see how great my company is and buy it from Me. When someone asks what you do, you can say "my company makes widgets", can't you? You didn't start the company but you own it, and you can make it stop making those widgets at any time, so you can definitely take credit can't you?

So... Regardless of who created it, a 100% owner can definetly take credit for their company's production, can't they?

What about a 75% owner? 50% 49.999%

A share of stock isn't just a piece of paper, it's proportional unit of ownership of a company. If no one owns greater than 50% of the shares then there is no one with final say over what the company does - everything must be agreed upon by a consensus of the company's owners. And each person gets a vote in proportion to their ownership.

Don't like what a company does? Submit a proposal so the other owners who disagree can vote too

I remember during gulf war II, people were urging one another to divest themselves of Haliburton stock, like that would have any impact on the company at all. I suggested the other route / people who didn't like their war profiteering should band together and buy as many shares as they could. If the disaffected bunch could get 51% ownership they could actually make a change- I suggested that they could, through a simple shareholder vote and majority ownership, turn Haliburton into the worlds biggest lollipop manufacturer.

So. I do argue that owning shares of a company is equal to owning a company directly. You just need to reach consensus with the other owners. No different than me and you or a husband and wife owning a company, except there a lot more voices

Not only can you go to Duck Duck Go's website, they also host a hidden service on the tor network. So, if you want to search the internet without big business looking over your shoulder, they're a great choice... I like startpage.com, too.

Regardless of the users IP, Hulu can track those users and sell their information, VPN or not. They've got those subscribers billing credentials, after all. A VPN is useful if you don't want someone else looking into your connection, but for the site you're visiting, especially one that needs your credit card, a VPN isn't meant to be a protection from them getting your info. Your ISP won't (or at least shouldn't) have a clue that you're visiting Hulu, should you be using a VPN, though.

So no, there is no attack on anonymity here.

Why would the nsa need to steal FTP logins this way? Aren't FTP logins already done in plain text, meaning they could scarf them up as the traffics going through routers they control?

We only learned how to do what we do from our parents (the British). And every other empire or attempted empire in history would have used the tools available just like we do. Besides, doesnt Britain (or maybe just London) have more cameras than people at this point?

Say what you want, I'd rather be here in the us than so many other places... China, Russia, any of the "istan" countries, any Arab country, Israel, any where in Africa, and so forth.

Not to minimize our wrongs (and if you're bored enough to look at my old xomments you'll see I'm consistent at calling them out) but there are plenty of other countries that are far worse than us. Yeah, some do it with our support but plenty do it without.

I just get perturbed, here and other places (ahem... Reddit!), where people act like the US is the singular most evil and oppressive country in the world, when the fact of the matter is that that we can even say such things without worry of reprisal means that we have it far, far better than huge swaths of humanity.

Could we be better? Of course. Could we be worse? Frighteningly more so.