Always down with a They Live reference.
Fine, but that doesn't change my basic point. Why bother with an auction that will necessarily get less than an open market?
The same reason you wholesale anything; You get a transaction that moves a large volume quickly. Basically all consumer goods you buy in any kind of branded store works this way, Wholesalers, whether manufacturers or a middleman, sell large volume to companies who then take the burden of distribution but reap the benefits of charging retail price and profiting on the difference between that and the wholesale cost plus infrastructure/logistics costs. The wholesaler gets the benefit of moving a large volume at an agreed upon price and not having to worry about inventory control, distribution, or logistics of getting it to the consumer.
This is not strange, or even strange at all. Side benefit in this case, they get the auction entry fee from everyone bidding regardless of whether they win and also a look into who is interested in amassing a large quantity of bitcoins.
Honestly this shouldn't require explanation,
Ahh, I see you show interest in the Naughty Childrens Energy Consortium. Please subscribe to our material at www.caltropsinthefireplace.com
Cast off the shoe, Follow the gourd!
Note: it is Russia and China that have everyone afraid to intervene for the most part. What we have here is a clusterfuck of the current iteration of the Great Game causing political tensions that make most nations leery to the point that everyone refuses to take any action.
This is doubly so for America as you add in the Democrats knowing damned well that no matter how justified an intervention is they will be tarred even more by Republicans claiming it was simply warmongering (see Libya).
So those in power amongst the major powers are too busy glaring at each other while thousands and thousands of Syrians die and even more are displaced. You are right about apathy being a major problem as even if it seemed ineffectual, massive protests concerning inaction in Syria would force the news outlets to at least have to mention the issue rather than continuing to sweep the problem under the rug beyond the odd "shits still crazy in Syria" headline.
I know it's pretty cliche to scream slashvertisement whenever there's an article involving a purchasable gadget, but jebus tapdancing christ guys when you advertise the price including a link to their store for something like this it really is getting sad.
If it ISN'T intentional you sure are letting submissions take you for a ride.
That only worked because the government thugs had arrived.
Had it only been the mall cops they would have been sued out of existence, its illegal in BC for security workers to even carry handcuffs.
So given a situation where of those informed and interested in the bill there is a significant amount of opposition, and of the remainder of the population people either don't know or don't care enough to support the bill, does this imply to you that this legislation is representative of the will of the people?
If this was a case of 19K for and even 1 against I might be able to buy the argument of sampling bias. When not one single person supports it in the consultation it is not only reasonable to infer that the legislation is not desired, but damn near certain.
Basically all this states is that you have those that are willing to write in against it, and those who are ignorant of it.
Sorry but at a rate of 19K to 0 the statistical significance is there to derive overwhelming disapproval from the result. Do you honestly believe if the populace was MORE aware of the details of the bill that suddenly there'd be an outpouring of support?
ack, replying to undo cocked up moderation
s/is considers/considers/ goddamnit.
heh, the phrasing is saying that the EFF is considers the suit to be of that type, not that they coined the phrase.
Before everyone finishes patting themselves on the back about how stupid Carreon is, how he has invoked the Streisand effect and a bunch of bad PR ask yourself this: How many of us had honestly even heard of Funnyjunk before today.
Given that it contains so much user submitted content, imagine how many ads have been served on pages where people have gone to flame them, despite the bulk of slashdot readers using adblocks on unfamiliar sites.
I wonder if his ego might still have them laughing all the way to the bank depending on how long it takes them to drop or settle the suits. Even before the internet its been known in marketing that the only bad publicity is no publicity.
well, if nothing else, I chuckled a little.