I wouldn't just want a band-aid.

That does not counter my arguments as to why that's exactly what you get.

It's entirely possible to close loopholes like this while making the tax code much less complicated,

Are you a lawyer who's actually read the tax code and has concrete ideas, or are you simply asserting this?

The problem is that if you insist on treating law as a computer program, which following it to the letter in essence is, you'll run into the same problem as actual programs: it'll start simple, but soon the first weird corner cases show up, and you add special-case code to handle them, and then more, and then more, until the whole thing is an utter mess where any chance is likely to have unintended consequences. And you just know that you should just rewrite the thing partially or completely, but of course the process simply repeats if you do.

There's a much smaller chain there- C++->machine code. Here we're talking about Language X->Javascript, then interpreting that Javascript in a VM in your browser. Oh, and add a possible JIT step in between. And factor in that there's multiple VMs (each browser has its own).

What makes a product or service from Yahoo unique?

Flickr for one is now unique. It was not before. But the new all-out focus on always seeing the largest image possible is quite different than any other photo sharing site. All of the others, even 500px, drill down into a single image view with a small image, Yahoo displays as much as possible in the window it is given.

That sounds like a maintenance nightmare. The code you're writing and debugging is not the code actually running, making debugging require you to know a second language and be able to figure out where the bug is in both. No thanks, that sounds like a great way to waste lots of time. I hate Javascript, but until something else is native in the browser there is no alternative.

And I'm not going to keep a fridge stocked with 30 varieties of soda, flavored waters, juices, and energy drinks. At my best, I'd buy a case of Dr Pepper to set next to my desk, and having anything else involved bartering with coworkers.

But for any other serious financial transaction, well, unless you are a mobster or a dope dealer or otherwise involved in something illegal, the real question is WHY DEAL WITH IT.

Define "serious financial transaction". How does it differ from a regular financial transaction?

But in any case, the reasons to use Bitcoin is: you don't need the approval or cooperation of any third parties. You don't need a credit card, PayPal account nor even a bank account. You don't need to pay fees associated with these nor care if a government or a lobby group disapproves of your business. You don't need to worry about chargebacks nor people stealing your card number. You don't need to wait until the next day to have your transaction verified. Your have privacy - no, even if I don't do anything wrong or illegal I still don't want a stalker watching me. And you don't need to worry about things like the recent bank troubles in Cyprus.

Bitcoin is simply superior in over-the-Internet transactions, especially multinational ones.

McDonalds, for over a decade, served their coffee at temperatures hot enough to instantly cause severe burns

Which is the proper service temperature for coffee.

McDonald's customers should be defended from having hazardous material hastily handed to them,

Which includes pretty much everything served at McDonald's.

and medical professionals should be defended from being duty-bound to treat everyone, even if there's no reimbursement for the expense.

Dunno how this fits in with the rest - is it a Slashdot comment equivalent of a rider? In any case, you're wrong - with great power comes great responsibility, no matter how much it might clash with anyone's political ideology.

Still, it's not a difficult problem to solve another way - simply use a single-payer medical system and the doctors get their reimbursement from the government.

I totally agree, that's why I've ignored this and the PS4 "launches". As far as I can tell it's really more of an effort to poll people about what they like than any kind if real launch.

Rather than one it seems like zero might have been a better choice.

You may want to re-think that... use the old rule of imagining what taunts third-graders can make of your name, now think of "Zero" again in that light.

One is way more Zen.

I see you posted AC to avoid rebuttal. Bad luck for you; I read AC posts sometimes.

You know that's 'in public' by all definitions except for yours right?,

Only an AC considers private restaurants public space... Sadly that gaffe was the intellectual highlight of your whole post.

You get that people can turn them off right?

You understand that there's no indicator if they have, right?

You know this how exactly?

Because that's how people are using them (ref: Scoble).

And assuming that something legitimately wrong happened, this is wrong how exactly?

It's not wrong. It's Wrong. And it points out that anywhere they go there is no more Private space - my original point. Do try to keep up even if it means you have to tell the driver of the short bus to accelerate a bit.

I'll let you have the last response so you can claim the throne of clowns as I know you are so itching to do.

The solution is not to expect every single one of the thousands of players to voluntarily adhere to what you consider to be wrong. The solution is not to try to keep on eye on these players and shame or boycott them into playing honorably. The solution is to outlaw the tactic.

And then you get where we are today: with absurdly complex laws that try to split every last hair and control everything in a vain attempt to enumerate badness. And of course it requires a huge bureaucracy to actually enforce all those laws.

The default transaction fee is 0.0001 BTC. 1.2 cents.

The "Main" tab in "Options" menu of the qt client says: "Optional transaction fee per kB that helps make sure your transactions are processed quickly. Most transactions are 1kB. Fee 0.01 recommended."

Also, setting this to 0 in results in both "Debit" and "Net amount" in "Transaction details" be the same thing, and "Transaction fee" to not show up. So I conclude that 0.01 BTC is indeed the default fee.

I wasn't aware it was bad form morally to ask not to be taxed twice on the same revenue..

Indeed, the entity that seems to be crossing a moral line is the one asking Apple to pay tax a second time.

It's odd how Apple's tax evasion is somehow so awful, even though they pay an effective tax rate of 30% and $6 BILLION dollars, when other companies get away with paying zero without fuss.

That actually sounds great: "I was here when the company-mandated calendar app told me to be." Someone else gets the blame, and you got to skip a meeting. I don't see a downside.