Good point. But wait...why don't my cheetos cost 1400$ a bag then?

Ohh yea, there is a regulatory body in place to make sure that wild valuation swings don't happen minute to minute.

It amuses me that people think they have a new idea about currency when in such a short time it has exampled the pitfalls of every single unregulated on before it.

Yes, my cashier usually spot checks forex to see how many bags of cheetos I can afford because the dollar value fluctuates wildly due to its nature as a purely speculative vehicle.

Trying to sidestep the feds when it comes to possible financial crimes is never a good idea. If they tell you to knock something off be glad that's all it was and move on.

This guy is being paid anonymously in what he considers a currency to send a physical representation of that to another location to which he does not verify is the originator. From my very limited understanding of the law that is what the feds are taking issue with.

Also, he is essence creating a physical currency. But I'll let the feds figure out what is and isn't legal with those coins and what is and isn't transferring funds.

Anyway, the point is that they are going to attack anywhere bitcoin tries to leave "the cloud". Silk road put bitcoin in the feds crosshairs and they aren't going away.

Exactly. Why would we want this currency that only moves in value only .5% a month. We want a currency that moves 20-50% in hours.

Imagine the fun of grocery shopping with it by the time you get done shopping you have to either take out 1/2 of it or you get 50% off!

....That it took this long for the feds to come in to play. No matter how neato your new currency is; if it's heavily used to electronically launder money and/or buy illegal items the days are numbered. Bitcoin -> Currency has and always will be the choke point the government(s) control. Unless they somehow setup a 100% bitcoin society but I don't know how that would work.

Science project? Really this sounds like something dreamed up by a kid, one who hasn't heard of 200mph winds that that elevation.

There is most likely a corporate play in action here but I can see if the test in some way makes someone who can't afford medical testing/treatment off themselves because they know how terrible X disease can be then it's probably worth review. Or the inverse, someone not treating a very serious issue because the test came back ok (which is probably more likely).

Just look how many people show up at the doctor because they have convinced themselves their (low blood sugar) symptoms are 100% a brain tumor according to WebMD.

Yea, as sad as it is they are just trying to get ahead of the ball here because the writing is on the wall that once again a 3rd party service provider is required to act as an agency of law enforcement.

Law enforcement should be saying "sure please leave those up so we can track down the actual criminals instead of sending them to another 1000 little 'dark webs'. But alas, the easiest and most public thing is to tell google how serious they are about the problem and require them to do something about it.

Google should not have to filter any website, ever. Regardless of the content if it meets the same selection and searching algorithms every other site does. That they are or do is playing censor at the governments behest and when they are doing that they have no longer any reason to be trusted no matter what you are searching for.

It's who's selling the solution. The sales people cater to the execs/management and know the buzzwords that make the all tingly.

If the suggested solution comes from IT/Bottom up it's usually a lot of details they can't grasp and don't really care about.

I think that is probably more of a business decision. If they allow it the site would have been crushed immediately with porn and low value users.

We prefer the eggshell method of security: We can withstand brute force and brazen attempts but a tiny tap crumbles the whole operation.

It will be a fun day (if it already hasn't passed) when passengers are under more scrutiny than the employees, thus the TSA actually being the biggest threat.

This is exactly the type of thing that needs to be done so people can be informed voters. Unless you're heavily engaged in local politics pretty much the only information you are going to get is the fluff they want to feed you and any controversial stuff that made it into the news.

"If your security solution requires that you pass a law making it illegal to break your security, then it's not a solution."

I love that quote. Pretty much sums up the entire argument when it comes to DRM.

I don't know how it works there but most people who get suspended or revoked here continue to drive because it's a virtual necessity for most.

Increased penalties are rarely a deterrent for speeding. Maybe it works in Virginia where they are on their way to introducing summary execution for certain offenses. (2500$ fine for 81mph)