After five hundred years, the likelihood that any of the terrorist plots outlined in the Voynich Manuscript have either been carried out or abandoned approaches unity; there's nothing in it that would be useful for extending control over the current population.
Everyone underestimates the Illuminati...
I'm quite certain you won't find many ladies who like being poked in the thigh by a cold, angular piece of metal and glass.
Yeah but the HUD could help the guy find the clitoris...
Since I haven't read the actual paper, I'll give the researchers the benefit of the doubt. But the BBC reporting is terrible. What I got from the story is that a study has demonstrated that this Quantum computer isn't better at everything. Well, duh! Everyone who has even very casually followed Quantum computing knows that they are a new class of computing which can solve a limited set of problems very quickly. I'm really not much wiser after reading this story.
What I got from it is that quantum computing researchers devised some tests for it and that it performed about as well as a desktop computer. I would *imagine* that quantum computing researchers at NASA and Google wouldn't just throw an unsuitable set of tests at it. I *imagine* that they know as much about the D-Wave computer as anyone outside D-Wave know about it and devised tests to, you know, *test* it.
I could be wrong, maybe Google and NASA quantum computing researchers know shit about quantum computing and threw totally unsuitable tests at it.
Prototype engine fails to win Formula One race.
D-Wave machine is hardly a prototype.
It started with video.
Pretty much any new gadget takes off when it's meshed with porn in some way.
Google Glass. A HUD for sex, much needed by geeks?
You actually have some evidence that most purchases are from one-time use wallets?
Also, the money has to go into the wallet somehow. This would mean they would buy the exact amount of bitcoins they needed for that particular transaction and that then goes into the wallet they intend to use for that transaction and then delete the wallet. I think that is too short-term for most bitcoin users. Who in their right mind would buy bitcoins day by day as needed? When the value fluctuates so wildly?
I think its more likely they have a bunch of hoarded bitcoins (that they bought when there was a dip in price), maybe transfer some into a one-use wallet and then use that wallet for the dodgy purpose, being unaware that the wallet this bitcoin was transferred *from* is easily determined.
The potential for mischievous use of the block chain is awesome. Could be a marketers wet dream. Especially as less tech-savvy people start using bitcoins.
Am I the only one who sees the word SCROTUM every time
The acronym should be based on:
SupremeCouRtOfTheUnitedstatesofaMerica.
I'd imagine bitcoin could also be a marketers wet dream; making the connections between people, what one person likes to buy, what the person they bought it from likes to buy, etc.
OK. since these bitcoins can be uniquely identified, how about the BTC community REFUSING them? That'll piss in the Fed's cornflakes.
Right, so anyone who pisses off the bitcoin 'community', their coins are no longer accepted. That would sure make them a good investment... especially if this was done retroactively. The 'community' decide that some guy Joe was really 'bad' and refuse all the bitcoins he ever used... so anyone who happens to have some of these bitcoins in their wallet, shit out of luck dude.
Thats like shopkeepers checking the serial numbers on dollar bills they get from customers, looking them up on a giant registry of dollar serial numbers and declaring "This dollar bill was used by that scumbag Joe the dealer, no I'm not accepting this dollar bill. This was once drug money!"
FFS how do you build an economy on that kind of 'transparency'?
OK, "surrender keys to a shed filled with incriminating documents," Mr. Pedantic.
Except a locked shed requires a physical object, i.e. key, to be opened. The cops don't need you to incriminate yourself if they can find the key (or get a proper warrant to circumvent it).
Conversely, locked data (information) does not require a physical key, but rather information kept within the owner's brain.
Information that would be self-incriminating to give out.
FWIW, I personally don't know of any legal precedent (in the US) that requires one to surrender a key if doing so would be self-incriminating.
In the USA they just have to wait until you are within 100km of a border and then let the TSA take you away.
But they buy and sell patents. If the parties that they send these letters to had enough money, I'm sure they could buy the patent in question. Sounds like an open and shut case, surely?
Magnets?
How do they work?
Java, one of the worst things to happen to computing, ever.
Unless you make/sell RAM.
Send one twin to mars, the other twin stays on Earth. They telepathically communicate. Oh wait, wrong novel?
Kleeneness is next to Godelness.
