Yes. To prove that you have 2.9 bitcoins, you start at the beginning of the blockchain and add up all the transactions putting money into your bitcoin wallet and subtracting money from it to get a total.
This is also why the currency isn't exactly anonymous. Everyone can trace everywhere you've sent bitcoins to and everywhere you've gotten them from.
how the "what" (bitcoin in this case) came into existence.
It's a number, written in on the ledger. Just like how when the fed wants to give a bank a few billion dollars some zeroes appear in their computer.
The way bitcoin works is ALL in the blockchain. Each block consists of:
[data from previous block]
Qzukk gives himself 0.x BTC for solving this block
Bob gave 1.2 BTC to Dave
Sam gave 0.8 BTC to Bob
James gave 0.9 BTC to Bob
[variable data]
In order for this block to be valid, Qzukk has to find [variable data] that makes the SHA-256 of the block be 0x0000000000... (the number of zeroes in the hash is how the "speed" of mining is set. Because of the "Qzukk gives himself x" transaction, everyone is working on a different block (yours would say "gnupun gave himself..."). Furthermore, because of the data from the previous block being used, whoever solves the block and gets it in the blockchain first means everyone else has to start over on the next block, which is why it's pointless for small fry to try and mine now.
If someone goes to the cable company office and says "Say, can I have this persons bill?" who is at fault when they give it up? The person who asked, or the company that handed out the information.
I pointed that out in the last weev thread. It's apparent the general consensus is that the receptionist is personally responsible for giving it out and the programmer is not personally responsible for giving it out.
with a large vertical separating, the big footed guy might find his foot trapped under the brake pedal when trying to quickly shift over.
I actually had this happen the other day in my Honda (and yeah, I have size 13). Fortunately I felt my foot hit the underside of the brake pedal so I recovered and avoided crashing into anything.
The
ar t libc.a
He had to *request* the address for each, individual, ICC
If he had walked into the office building and asked the receptionist at the front "hey what is the email address for customer #1234" and it was given to him, would that be identity theft? Trespassing? What if he asked for all the customers' email addresses, and got them?
The CFAA has no requirements for a proof of authorization
Oh right, you have the CFAA. It's different because it's on the Internet. Thanks to all our representatives who are scared witless by the Internet.
So no online banks, credit card companies, etc.
Sure, if your bank is dumb enough I can walk up to a teller and say "hey, my account is 1234 give me all my money" and they do so, no questions asked, and not even asking to see my ID. And then I walk to the next teller and say "hey my account is 1235..."
In that case we're doing the world a favor by banning them from the internet.
Given the nature of governments, I wouldn't put it past a government to have an import duty on things coming in from anywhere, even if it came from its own country.
If I ever have a stroke and end up with the desire to work with chinese manufacturers on anything, I'm going to have to add "responsible for any costs arising because you ripped off the competitor's design" to the list of things that apparently have to be explicitly spelled out in the contracts like "no lead paint substitution" "no cadmium substitution" "no date rape drug substitution" "no anifreeze substitution" and so on.
The thing is, allowing trademark violations to go unchallenged for no particular reason at all (in law, being kind is not a reason)
That's why you don't let it go "unchallenged", you license the trademark to them for one time use selling this specific lot of multimeters. I'm sure a real lawyer could come up with the correct language to use here to make everyone happy.
Labor for the stuff you want is a system that works. It gives the providers of stuff incentive to give you stuff.
It works as long as "providers of stuff" need labor.
The real problem with the "post scarcity" world is that labor is becoming less scarce than resources. Even if every last thing was made by robots, someone has to pay for the stuff the robots make it from.
Seems to depend on a case by case basis.
My math worked out great. Previously I paid 50% of the premium for my company's blue cross PPO group health insurance plan to the tune of $400/mo. It had a $60 copay, $60 drug copay, and $5000 annual deductible.
Now I pay $350/mo for a blue cross Silver PPO with the same doctors I had before. It has a $30 copay, $150 drug copay (the drug copay seems to be where the insurance companies are really jacking up prices, I guess since they can't stop you from signing up if you're already sick) and I think a $4000 annual deductible. Thanks to my employer not being an asshole and giving me the other $400/mo it used to contribute towards my insurance, I'm coming out on top even after the extra $150/mo for my meds.
The copilot, Fariq Abdul Hamid, seems less than professional
When I was a kid, that's what all the cool captains did. And the cool kids got to go up there and watch.
TIL that it's illegal to do something that the state hasn't made illegal yet.
My electric company recently (last year) changed out its billing system.
The new billing system required me to reset my password to be between 6 and 8 characters, letters and numbers only (but is at least case sensitive).
Kathleen Sebelius
What, she drafted the law that said the government would magick up a website in a few months from rainbows and moonbeams?
The law set hard deadlines for a technology project nobody had ever tried before and that was just one of the signs that it was drafted by someone who had no idea how technological projects work in (or out of) government. The results would have been equally horrifying if congress had passed "The Moon Shot Act of 1961" after JFK's speech with a deadline of colonizing the moon by October 1.
IQ tests for politicians? No, it's not egalitarian. It's not the American way.
I'll say! What does IQ have to do with whether the person will vote for or against abortion?! You have to focus on what's important here!
"Protozoa are small, and bacteria are small, but viruses are smaller than the both put together."
