"Phil Shapiro says 20,000 Teachers Should Unite to Spread Chromosomes (Video)"

I was wondering whether the video showed the actual spreading of the chromosomes....

This is about the Problem of Evil as it pertains to the idea of God as being both just and omnipotent by definition. Put another way:

Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent.
Is God able to prevent evil, but not willing? Then he is not just.
Is God neither able nor willing to prevent evil? Then he is neither omnipotent nor just.
Is God both able and willing to prevent evil? Then why is there evil in the world?

Most defenders of faith fall back on the Job argument: "God is able to prevent evil, he's just not willing to do so, but he can't possibly be injust, because that would violate Scripture. Therefore, it must be because we can't comprehend his reasons." But if the justice of God is not the justice of Man, than how can we call it "justice", or indeed, assign any human quality to it?

...there's just God when he's drunk." -- Tom Waits

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P... :

Epicurus is generally credited with first expounding the problem of evil, and it is sometimes called "the Epicurean paradox" or "the riddle of Epicurus":
"Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?" - 'the Epicurean paradox'.

Yes, as I understand it, the whole point is that BTC are meant to be spent on goods/services, and the recipients can then spend their BTC on the goods/services they need, and so on, without the need to ever convert to or from other currencies except maybe to pay local taxes. In such a world, the exchanges become far less important.

But I don't think we're at the point yet where a community of people buy groceries, gasoline, pay rent and utilities, etc. purely by using BTC. And if the exchanges can't be trusted, the BTC user base may start to degrade to much smaller population of speculators, hoarders, and true believers waiting for a change in the technological or political winds.

At which point you basically have the Flainian Pobble Beads from The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, which are only exchangeable for other Flainian Pobble Beads...

Actually (to answer the AC), Wesley Crusher was the annoying one, mostly due to the Mary-Sue-ing scriptwriters, and the fact that no one really wanted to see a teenage boy on the bridge of the Enterprise no matter who was playing him. Wil Wheaton was just an actor, all grown up now, and apparently a pretty nice guy. And when a little girl asked him a question about being bullied for being a nerd, he responded like this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

So: famous Trek actor, nice guy, nerd-friendly, and he tours with Jonathan Coulton. Lots of folks like him. As for everyone else, well, haters gonna hate.

Hwil Hwheaton seems like a nice guy.

I'm guessing.... no.

So, you're saying that Bitcoins are too much of a hassle to use and too much of a risk to buy and sell because of the exchanges -- even though you're convinced that you're going to get "near-guaranteed 50-80%" profit if you purchase a few bitcoins now.

You can see why some people here might be skeptical of it being the currency of the future.

...do any other, ahem, organs become more spherical? Because that could be a deal breaker.

I find that most debunkers and detractors operate out of some kind of emotional offense

Well, to be fair, most fans and defenders probably operate out of some kind of emotional defense. For example:

I have no strong feelings about Bitcoin, for or against. Which is why I found it amusing that when I mentioned the transaction malleability issue in a recent discussion -- and subsequently quoted the 3rd party sources (Forbes and TechCrunch) which attributed Silk Road 2's problems to this issue -- one of Bitcoin's staunch defenders accused me of wearing a "tinfoil hat", which was odd because I was neither putting forth a conspiracy theory nor quoting a source which was. This individual said that I could either believe his facts or [what he asserted to be] non-facts from sources that I consider to be slightly more reliable than a random pseudoanonymous Slashdot user. Yes, "Appeal to Authority" may be a logical fallacy, but you can't counteract it simply by claiming to be more authoritative, all the while resorting to Argumentum ad Hominem.

Has Bitcoin been demonized? Well, it has gotten bad press, because of various things. What it has been used to purchase. The problems with various exchanges. The perceived complexity of use compared to conventional fiat currency.

Then there are the Bitcoin fellow-travelers, like the Winkelvoss twins and Bill Gates, who I think manage to turn a lot of Slashdot readers off Bitcoin simply by singing its praises. Sure, that's irrational too. If I found out that Steve Ballmer liked chocolate and kittens, I wouldn't immediately hate those things. True, I'd enjoy them a little less because of the uncomfortable association, and I wouldn't eat them in the same sandwich like he does, but still. Chocolate and kittens.

Are non-Bitcoin adopters jealous of the ones who jumped on the mining bandwagon early? Maybe, in some cases, there's a fox-and-the-grapes issue at work. But mostly I think there's just a lot of eye-rolling at the picture of a bright, shiny, government-intervention-free financial future that some cryptocurrency advocates are hyping. See https://www.youtube.com/watch?... to understand what this is like on the receiving end.

So let's allow for a little irrationality on both sides of the fence.

My bad, then. But that's the trouble with trying for a parody of Comic Book Guy in a world where this exists.

(I recommend suffixing such posts with ~s or bracketing them with <ComicBookGuy> tags)

Come on, GP was being funny. No need to go full Comic Book Guy on him.

By feeling truly present, you can share unbounded spaces and experiences with the people in your life. Imagine sharing not just moments with your friends online, but entire experiences and adventures."

We need some PR-friendly slang for this new kind of interaction. I propose that we call it "going outside". There could be entire phone apps devoted to "calling" your friends and arranging to "meet" them somewhere...

No, it's just that, â, Issac Asimov really did, â, stammer and clear his throat a lot, âoe, when, â, he said this.