"You've been programming for at least 20 years. That means you've started when things weren't buried behind seven layers of abstraction but had to be done by hand. In languages that didn't help you all that much, but didn't get in the way of letting you get things done either. So, like me, you've seen things those young whippersnappers wouldn't believe."

Those languages still exist, and real programmers learn them and even more powerful stuff that makes you a far better programmer... Like Assembler.

the "young whipper snappers" had better get off their asses and learn it so they can leverage knowledge that their peers do not have so they can be far more valuable in the workforce.

Honestly they really should force CS students to program on Arduinos and Pics before they ever touch larger hardware. Forced to deal with slow processor, tiny ram and near zero storage makes better programmers.

you can patent something that you don't even have a clue how to build it. In fact most patents are just that, obscure ideas.

Again proof the Patent office is a joke. this is simply attaching something to another thing.

I would like to patent the method of attaching things to other things in order to file a patent.

Theoretically true but not necessarily a good idea. The equipment installed is already known to work and whatever issues it has are probably very well understood. Any installation of new hardware is going to bring new bugs and a nuke plant isn't exactly a place you want to beta test things if you don't have to. Plus there are a host of operational certification issues in play. I get why they haven't "upgraded" the hardware.

On the other hand I'm a little bit surprised (only a little) that doing things this way is the most economical method available, even accounting for the risk involved with updating systems.

That place must have had horribly inept IT for them to botch a thin client deployment.

Yup they work great. the trick is getting the netboot working the way you like it so you dont have to manage any storage on the device.

There is one more possible reason which is if it makes the information somehow more comprehensible or easier to work with to someone appropriately trained. I'm not a chemist so I can't really speak to the difficulty or failings of the current periodic table versus this proposed one. However if this proposed version is somehow easier to work with and gives equivalent (or better) results then that could be a credible reason to use it. If it saves time or mental horsepower then that could be a good reason to use it.

Not remotely true. Bitcoins have a market value and can be exchanged for cash. The rules are no different than those for barter. If you mine bitcoins you are realizing taxable income in the form of an asset with value and I promise you that the IRS will consider it taxable. You can be taxed on income in the form of assets other than cash. If you give someone (not family) a car they have to pay tax on the value they received. Happens all the time to winners of prizes.

Doesn't have to be a currency to be an asset. As long as it has a market value the IRS can consider it income. Bitcoins might be a bad idea (I think they are) but they can be exchanged for cash or other assets. The IRS will not remotely care whether you can buy beer with them directly or not.

Then he is in violation of the tax code. Specifically his income is supposed to be declared on Line 21 of the 1040 which exists specifically for cases like this. That is how they put Al Capone in jail - they nailed him for tax evasion. Income is supposed to be declared regardless or source or legality.

Not necessarily true. The IRS may consider it income if it has a market value which Bitcoins do. Whether the asset is tangible or intangible is not relevant. You could receive an intangible asset like a copyright and in some circumstances that could be considered income.

Right now the numbers are small enough that the IRS doesn't much care but technically speaking mining bitcoins IS income and has to be declared on your 1040. Line 21 if nowhere else. In fact you have to declare income from any source, even illegal drug sales which is why Line 21 exists.

Precisely speaking that is an unrealized gain because it has not been coverted into cash or some other asset.

There is no such thing as "intrinsic value". There is either a market for an asset or there is not. Bitcoins have a market value (there are exchanges after all) and that is what the IRS would consider when evaluating how much income you made from mining bitcoins. Items are valued (usually) at the lesser of either cost or market value. That doesn't necessarily make mining or using bitcoins a good idea but they clearly do have a (volatile) market value.

That's for the long term capital gains rate. There is a short term capital gain rate too.

There are ways to do it if you do it through a business. You could deduct some expenses and you could do the home office deduction. The computer would need to be owned by the business and used primarily for business purposes. There also could be depreciation and other fun involved. Frankly I doubt there would be much profit in it but that's a separate issue.

Note that claiming a home office deduction significantly increases your chance of being audited. It's one of the items the IRS looks for because it is abused so often.

Because we all know that a poorly written Application (Oracle) causing an OS problem is the fault of the OS...

Windows is a heap of crap because McAffee grinds it to a halt!