The problem with "approval" voting is that it asks me which candidate I approve of.
Looking down the list of all candidates, no matter the party, I don't see one that I approve of.

Offer to sign an NDA, but don't ever take over someone else's codebase without making sure you see the code.

Employers: Don't hire anybody who offers to take over someone else's codebase without having seen the code.

This is a complete no-brainer.

and we'd need every one of them in order to build a dyson sphere, too

Is this a trick question? How is "fair use" not applicable?
This is absolutely no different from the "scanning" and "putting up" that google does of every other part of the internet. Why should the fact that it started out in a grossly inefficient medium be any distinction whatsoever?

Have you actually tried doing any research, or are you just assuming that consumers don't want to be tracked?

Ask 50 people, "Would you prefer to see ads which advertisers had determined were more-likely to be of interest to you, instead of a random selection of ads?", and report back.

The correlations are NOT "false". The relationships between the numbers are (almost always) NOT "conterfeit".

"Correlation does not imply causation" means exactly that. If the sky is dark and people are carrying around umbrellas, this does NOT imply that darkness causes umbrellas, or that umbrellas cause darkness. The causal relationship between two numbers is not determined by how often one number changes at the same time as another.

To put it another way: correlation is an *observed* behaviour, causation is a *tested* behaviour.

It's always strange to me that business people understand the importance of keeping track of money, but not other company resources.
To put it in terms they understand, try explaining it in terms of accounting.

Imagine an accountant who only kept track of exactly one number: The amount of money the company currently had.
This accountant might be really good at remembering where all the money is, and can even explain where all of that money needs to go and where it came from, usually. But he only ever actually writes down the current amount.

Throughout the day he does everything on a single calculator, then at the end of the day he writes down the final number, to use as the starting point for the next day.

Sometimes, just before or just after a major transaction, he'll write down the number and maybe the date, first.

But it's only ever one number.

Would you hire that accountant? Would you trust them with your accounts? Even if the accountant seemed really good at staying on top of things?

You can't just keep track of "where you are." you need to know how you got there. You need to know why you took each step along the way.

Indeed. This is the one that people don't seem to understand.
As far as I am aware, no mathematical proof has ever been offered which declares cold fusion to be impossible. This is as opposed to, say, accelerating beyond the speed of light, which has been proven to require infinite energy.

Note that I don't mean to imply that this "cold fusion" is not a fraud, but crying "Thermodynamics!" at every alternative-fuel story makes me wonder how these people would have responded to the discovery of coal.

Why don't we look at this as a starting-point, rather than a solution?

So you want your decentralised and anonymous system to vary the payout based on how many transactions are processed?
I think I found a flaw in the plan.

Wow.

Here's the first thing I found when looking for Guile with ECMAScript: http://www.gnu.org/software/guile/manual/html_node/ECMAScript.html
In summary: Don't use ECMAScript for Guile under any circumstances, btw bitch bitch bitch bitch we are not a project worth paying attention to.

in a country where it's perfectly possible to live without a car, this term is far too short. He should never be allowed behind the wheel on a public road again.

1) Yes.
2) We don't want special treatment. We are willing to accept that others could do their job more effectively if they had multiple monitors (after the developers pushed to get multiple monitors at my office, everyone else followed suit. This seems sane)

bitcoin is designed to have "diminishing returns" in terms of bitcoin generation. ie: the longer the project goes on, the fewer new bitcoins will be generated. This ignores that the longer the project goes on, especially if it is successful, the fewer bitcoins will usefully exist. ie: not just a counter that says how many bitcoins exist, but the number of bitcoins which are valid and usable, as opposed to being lost due to lost keys, etc.