Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:Parallel Construction (Score 2) 181

Interesting, but it still doesn't clarify any tax implications. Under U.S. law (not applicable in Australia, of course) bitcoin is taxable under capital gains law only when it's exchanged for something else of value. That doesn't appear to have happened in this case. Newly-mined bitcoin is also treatable as business revenue based on *bitcoin's price at the time the bitcoin was mined* which until Mt. Gox opened in July 2010, was measurable only at fixed-rate bitcoin exchanges such as New Liberty Standard that set their prices equal to estimated mining cost. So revenue - mining cost = taxable profit = zero. Bitcoin mined after Mt. Gox opened may have been deemed profitable, depending on difficulty and mining expense. I haven't seen any analysis of any immediate profitability of Nakamoto's likely mining rewards. I suppose it's doubtful that anyone involved with bitcoin mining filed relevant information in their tax returns in bitcoin's early days. Perhaps the home invasion is just a fishing expedition.

Submission + - Wired Thinks It Knows Who Satoshi Nakamoto Is (

An anonymous reader writes: In a lengthy expose, Wired lays out its case that Bitcoin inventor Satoshi Nakamoto is actually Australian CEO Craig Wright. As evidence, Wired cites both leaked documents and posts on Wright's blog from 2008 and 2009 establishing a connection between him and the launch of Bitcoin. Wright is also known to have amassed a significant Bitcoin fortune early on. Wired tried to contact Wright and got some perplexing responses, and they admit that it could all be a (long and extremely elaborate) hoax. But hours after publishing, Gizmodo followed up with the results of their own investigation, which came to the conclusion that Satoshi is a pseudonym for two men: Craig Wright and Dave Kleiman, a computer forensics expert who died in 2013. After questioning (read: harassment) from both publications, Wright seems to have withdrawn from public comment. Regardless, both articles are quite detailed, and it will be interested to see if the leaked documents turn out to be accurate.

Comment Re:Lots of other possibilities (Score 1) 339

They noticed odd things about the light curve throughout the four-year observation period, while the earth was making four orbits around the sun, so the occulting object would have to be big enough to occult the the star from anywhere in earth's orbit. That means an occulting object would have to have significant size compared to the area of either the earth' s orbital area or the star's cross-sectional area, whichever is smaller.

Comment Re:Evidence of the Great Filter? (Score 1) 365

Also, stars orbit the galactic center with wildly varying orbits:

As long as it's possible from time to time to hop from one star to another, one civilization can be all over a galaxy in 250 million years. That's less than 2% of the age of the universe.

Comment Re:Full Price? (Score 1) 155

If someone wants to buy a cheap TV for $200 do they insist on getting financing from the manufacturer? No, they use their credit card. Why would a phone be any different? I also don't get it why anyone would want to buy a phone from Verizon in the first place. Do people want to buy a toaster from their electric company or a car from their local gas station? Carriers should be in the business of providing a monthly data allotment and nothing more. Hopefully, this change is the first step towards a more competitive marketplace. More competition should eventually lead to *fully* open-source cheap and powerful phones.

Comment Government Finances (Score 1) 195

Option 1: The government spends millions of dollars inspecting and enforcing safety rules. No accident happens, and the government collects nothing. Profit for the government: negative millions.

Option 2: The government spends nothing on inspections or enforcement. An accident happens, and the government collects billions of dollars in fines. Profit for the government: positive 18.7 billion dollars.

Comment Re:One of many big lies (Score 1) 940

The weird thing is that the mainstream media celebrates when property prices go up and moan when property prices go down; but they also celebrate when rents go down and moan when rents go up. Putting the two together, the media seems to want property prices high but rents low - which makes no economic sense. The only thing I can figure is that the media figures that more of their readers/viewers already own than are looking to buy, and more readers/viewers are renters rather than landlords. I guess that logic makes sense in a cynical kind of way - the media is playing both sides of the fence to increase their own market share and profits - like a military arms manufacturer that sells to both sides of a conflict.

Slashdot Top Deals

"There are things that are so serious that you can only joke about them" - Heisenberg