They are just numbers. Bitcoins could therefore be subdivided as small as is reasonable or required for actual usage. For example, the main Bitcoin client currently allows you to display bitcoin figures in BTC, mBTC (1/1000 BTC), or BTC (1/1000000 BTC).
I believe the current Bitcoin protocol supports subdivisions up to 8 decimal places. Apparently this can be extended further with minor alterations to the existing Bitcoin protocol.
Also, they're just floating-point numbers. Should the need arise they could be subdivided indefinitely with only minor alterations to the existing Bitcoin protocol.
I love my Galaxy Note. It is an awesome Phonelet. Unlocked international with ICS. Add a headset (it does look a little odd when you talk into it) and you are gold.
SD
Well, there goes the accuracy of my domain name regexes.
If you want to know what's next, I can dig out my old slides.
Yes please. This would be interesting to see.
There are some eastern european 'gentlemen' that will pay top dollar for quality information. Just extract the names and social security numbers, you can keep the drive.
SD
I keep all the good data locked in the foamy grey stuff. I can carry nearly eighty gigs of data in my head. Good luck decrypting that mess.
StinkyDog
And that would be exactly the reason you have no right to a negative opinion.
I think non-voters most certainly have a "right" to a negative opinion, whether or not they choose to "voice" that opinion via voting. They simply view voting as a nearly useless (inaudible) way to voice their opinion; or perhaps that increasing the "percent abstained" figure is a more valuable way to express their opinion -- the "vote of no-confidence".
Personally, I would wager that posting my opinion in the Slashdot comments is likely to have at least as much, if not more, of an impact than visiting the voting booth ever will.
"If you don't order chicken or beef from the menu, you don't have a right to discuss the morality of animal consumption." But I'm a vegetarian!
Close, in my new paper I out the real cause, Prehistoric Intelligent Interplanetary Sand Kracken. How could it be anything else?
SD
Magnetized steel beams are not the likely culprit. How did it make it this far with such a lousy summary? This reads as a grounding issue. The symptoms fit perfectly. The steel beams are connected to earth at one potential and the grounding rod / waterline bond is at another. Somewhere in the house, connections are bridged so current is flowing from one ground path to the other on a high resistance link. The fix is to bond the building steel to the common earth that the electrical panel is utilizing with a hefty piece of copper wire. Drain the imbalance and modern electrical equipment starts working correctly.
SD
If you think that having a theistic outlook on the world is irrational, prove it. Show me, point by point, exactly why there can't possibly be gods in the universe.
OK, I'll give it a shot.
I originally wrote this for a slightly different audience so please forgive any digressions.
I work strictly from definitions here, because you can be sure something that you reason about from your own definitions is correct. Whether those definitions also accurately describe what they are commonly understood to mean is something we can discuss.
Truth: something which follows from its assumptions (definitions).
Cause: something which has an effect, and "creates" that effect.
Necessary cause:
a cause which is necessary for an effect to arise; without the cause, the effect would not occur.
Sufficient cause: a cause which can create an effect, but is not the only possible cause which could do so.
God: the creator of all things.
Totality:
everything without exception. Any thing you might conceive of as being outside of the Totality, is by this definition a part of the Totality.
Thing: some object that can be distinguished from the Totality.
Finite: not the Totality; bounded. Any thing, as defined, meets this definition of finite.
Infinite: Utterly without boundaries. No thing can be infinite by definition. By this definition, the Totality is infinite -- utterly without boundaries.
There's absolutely nothing wrong with choosing to adhere to a faith, or to a religion, as long as you recognize that as a choice.
While I agree that we shouldn't deny people the right to believe what they like, it would be negligent to ignore the more serious harm that religious belief causes: a willingness to believe in fantasies with no grounding in reality.
However a person lives their life, they will serve as an example to others. If they live their life believing in fantasies and demonstrably false ideas, they cannot help but encourage, or at the least not discourage, such irrational behavior in others. Consequently it's not really possible to avoid "harming" others in this sense.
Such people are also more susceptible to being manipulated and accepting other baseless ideas as true; witness the audience of FOX News.
Thus I think everyone has a responsibility to eliminate their own irrational beliefs.
This is without even considering the probable benefits that would come from more people striving for a completely rational mindset.
"Life is a garment we continuously alter, but which never seems to fit." -- David McCord