Comment Re:Not true... (Score 1, Informative) 339
By this same logic, they don't take USD, GBP, JPY or, in fact, any currency. They use a third party exchange called Paypal, Visa, Mastercard, etc...
Idiot.
By this same logic, they don't take USD, GBP, JPY or, in fact, any currency. They use a third party exchange called Paypal, Visa, Mastercard, etc...
Idiot.
The ASIC era will aim to fix the 51% attack problem... or at least make it extremely costly. The farther we get into the ASIC era, the less and less likely and more costly it will be for someone to subvert the network.
1 year ago, it would have taken less than 1 million dollars to wreck the bitcoin network. 1 year from now it will take at least $100 million, if not more, assuming the price of BTC doesn't tank or something.
Granted, $100 million is pocket change for some large corporations and of course governments, so the threat is still there. But as time goes on, the cost starts to rise further and further out of reach of all but richest of entities, until it gets so costly as to be unfeasible. At that point, it's cheaper to wage a legal or physical war, but that's another problem entirely.
The Core2Duo was built on 65nm technology. It's not THAT old.
For this type of device, 65nm is pretty freaking awesome actually.
Like I said - "...last I heard." When they first started taking pre-orders, it was bitcoin only. I'm buying bitcoin outright these days, so I haven't followed the saga.
mmmph. Recaptcha: "outright"
But again, that is incorrect. BFL has always taken Bankwire along with bitcoins. There has never been a time BFL only took BTC for payment, ever.
May be, because, sealing chips is a faster way to make money? If I were given two options one is quick but less money, other takes time and makes more money, I would choose the quick.
That's why you're poor.
"If mining Bitcoins was so profitable why would they want to sell the chips? Wouldn't they be better off keeping these chips and mining the Bitcoins for themselves?"
They ARE mining bitcoin for themselves. The biggest player in the space - Butterfly Labs - is only accepting payment for their ASICs in bitcoin, last I heard. So their production line is just another bitcoin mining operation: and likely somewhat more profitable than outright mining over time.
This is, of course, false. BFL accepts payment via Paypal and bankwire as well.
If mining Bitcoins was so profitable why would they want to sell the chips? Wouldn't they be better off keeping these chips and mining the Bitcoins for themselves?
If BFL were to mine instead of selling the chips, they would quickly have more than 51% of the network hashrate and the confidence in the bitcoin network would erode and the value would drop. It doesn't make any sense for one entity to mine all the bitcoin and devalue the currency... then it's worth nothing and it was for naught. No, it's far better to distribute the hardware far and wide, making it impossible for any single entity to gain a controlling portion of the network.
No, it doesn't make any sense for BFL to mine with their own hardware, it makes much more sense to grow the bitcoin network and for BFL to supply the hardware to do so.
prices would have come down long ago if the industry was getting a share of the resells
AH-HAHAHA... yeah! Right! I guess we can chalk Braben up as one of those idiots that are good in one area that think they know what the fuck they are talking about in other areas. What a clueless fuckstick to make a comment like that.
Cause that line worked with CDs and all other media that preceded games and continues to be sold today. Oh wait.. not it hasn't. It has never worked, ever with any industry. The prices will remain high as long as people continue to pay the prices. They will only drop when people stop paying prices. Claiming otherwise is just idiotic. Making that claim and the used game market is utterly laughable and makes my opinion of Draben go straight to the toilet (yeah, like he cares, I know). What a dumb ass.
Uhh, isn't that grounds for disbarment? I thought it was basically illegal to represent both parties within the same lawfirm, it being a conflict of interest and all. It was my impression that it was grounds for disbarment if a lawyer knowingly did that. I would find it incredibly hard to believe that the firm did not know they were representing Google and also suing them... that just seems virtually impossible.
Why the hell do these morons keep tabling impossible and/or extremely EXPENSIVE (compute-wise) proposals without talking to someone who knows ANYTHING about IT and technology FIRST?
The last thing the world needs is ignorant luddites making the technology decisions for the global internet infrastructure.
The real question should be, why doesn't everyone, everywhere just laugh at the *IAA's when they come into the room with their stupid demands? At this point, it's pretty much a given that anytime they bring something to the table, it's going to be utterly ridiculous and should be ignored by anyone with even a modicum of intelligence.
Why keep letting them into the room to begin with?
What? Smartphone pioneer? How do they figure that?
They were a PDA pioneer, but did very little, if anything revolutionary or pioneering in the Smartphone space. They just did what everyone else was doing... they did not pioneer anything in that space. They were already pretty much washed up and a has-been by the time the smartphone revolution rolled around. Not saying their phones weren't nice or quality or anything, just saying they weren't anything revolutionary.
It may be inconsistent but I'm prepared to go to war with your country over thumb-first counting. Burn inifidels!
I have just one thing to say: 2 you and the swine humping oxen you rode in on!
Oh here, let me translate: 4 off heathen!
1. Politicians and government no longer represent what the people want. The bribary by the copyright lobby has gone way beyond the pale, and the political corruption of government seems unstoppable.
2. Politicians and government are now costing businesses money. While traditionally the government has supported businesses more than individuals, this has now reached the point where business finds itself at odds with the customers that provide its income, and that is a terminal situation.
The messages are pretty clear. What's unclear is where this is going, other than sending SOPA to hell.
Unfortunately, it's not a terminal situation for big business. Take a look at the telecom and to an extent the cable industries. When they start losing customers, they lobby to get "fee" attached to their bills (and other companies bills WTF!) that directly benefit them. Universal Service fund immediately springs to mind, but there are lots of other examples. Just pick up a bill and read it carefully.
Canada has that goofy law where you pay taxes on blank media... which goes directly to the recording industry. Government mandated payments to a business because the business forces away customers.
Ooops, you'll hit a problem when you get to 4 (00100).
Only if you're one of those freaks that starts counting with their thumb. The problem comes at 2 for the rest of the civilized world.
You don't hold your thumb up when you are miming to someone that you want one of something you use your index finger, so why do you start counting with your thumb? It makes no sense consistency wise.
The summary reads like an angry teenager implying that they could do better.
Really? Do yo have any idea how hard it is to actually manage launching something like that in to space? We should be more amazed when everything goes right and a rocket actually makes it there. The rocket failing is, of course, not a good thing... but at least they are trying in the face of failure, instead of giving up and whining about for a decade like the US did after the shuttle disasters.
Launching a rocket into space is a marvel of just about every discipline involved.
It is easier to write an incorrect program than understand a correct one.
