Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?

Comment There is still need for a decentralised exchange (Score 3, Interesting) 293

With the very recent forceful closing of the BitFloor BitCoin exchange, and the inavailability of bitcoin-24, another (european) exchange, there seems to be a crackdown on BitC exchanges going on.

What is needed, is a decentralised method for trading BitCs for other currencies, or else BitCoins can be made to be worthless by shutting down the current centralised, easily identified exchanges. I'd suggest Ripple but that technical solution seems to be going nowhere at the moment, alas.

Comment Re:Bitcoins = tulip bulbs (Score 1) 692

Whether your money loses its value or the assets you can invest it in lose value, amounts to the same in the end: you get poorer. We're stuck between a rock (threat of inflation) and a hard place (a very real deflation and its conjoined-twin sister insolvency).

Comment Re:Bitcoins = tulip bulbs (Score 2) 692

The analogy is sounds, but not at all for the reasons you try to expose.

Bulb tulips were a popular way for investors to save their welth from massive devaluation caused by the practice of clipping gold coins, combined with the special rules of the dutch banking system (free coinage) and the massive influx of precious metals from newly discovered America: gold would flow into the dutch banks, get deposited at facial value in exchange for full(er) coins - or certificates of value which end up buying bullion for minting into fresh new coins, and get shipped back for more clipping and recycling by the princes of Europe. Buying bulbs and bulb stock was one way to escape the madness, much like buying bitcoins today is one way to escape the monetary madness. You can read more here about it.

Comment Re:Enforcement and Boundaries (Score 1) 196

I'm really wondering if the current French government even cares about France being seen as a serious country.

As a french citizen, I can assure you that the last few years have definitely demonstrated that our politicians will squander every last shred of credibility France still has, as long as it can even potentially give them a single vote back.

I mean, seriously... the very existence of Hadopi and its millions of euros worth of budget for nought ? The Florange debacle ? The Peugeot mess ? High-profile Minister posing in marinière with kitchen implements in hands on the cover of a magazine ? Government officials contradicting each other in matter of national policies ? The Twitterweiler communication mishap ? The list goes on and on and on...

Pretty much every member of our governments of the past decades has amounted to little more than a bad clown with delusions of grandeur, much to the population's pain and shame.

Comment Re:Isn't this just bulimia? (Score 1) 483

If that was true

It is true, as duly reported by athropologists, like theo ne I cited above. Within the same regions, the primitive farmers are more often victims of famine than their hunter-gatherer cousins living next door.

then why was agriculture even invented?

Because it allowed for planning and higher population density, in particular a much higher number of children.

how did agriculture based communities overtake hunter-gatherers in population, if there was no scarcity of food?

See the previous point. More population growth leads to morel and needed to sustain it, which is why agricultural peoples spread themselves, conquering the lands of hunter-gatherers until they had pushed them all onto least useable land.

Do you think people would spend that much energy if food was plentiful?

Surveys done by anthropologists show that both hunter-gatherers and primitive farmers spend about 20-24 hours of their week working at "producing" food, with a slight advantage in raw number of calories (2140 daily average) and much bigger advantage in terms of food diversity (upwards of 70 different plant and animal sources) going for the hunter-gatherers.

Switching to farming is not a matter of work spent (apart from the food diversity it's pretty much the same), it's a matter of being able to plan for the future and especially plan for feeding more children as well as securing food supplies in case of a catastrophe such as the Great Thawing Up of 15000 B.C.

Comment Re: Hmm (Score 1) 25

I remember playing V-O back in 2004, for several months (as "Sacred Chao"). Back then we were already promised capships, player-owned space stations and sectors, and PVP-determined domination over the war sectors between the blue and red factions. There was some progress, at one point we could land aboard the automated frigates that would tour the galaxy, and man its turrets.

But, after all these years, there has been no more progress ? I'm underwhelmed.

Comment Re:Isn't this just bulimia? (Score 2) 483

we've evolved to fatten up when food is plentiful so that we don't starve when food is scarce

Not quite.

We've evolved to fatten up to a limited extent when food is plentiful, and to adapt our metabolism to a wide extent whether that supply remains plentiful or shortens up. That's what gives reproductive advantage. For hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of years our ancestors lived a life of plenty as hunter-gatherers (see "Stone-age economics, by Marshall Sahlins) and "when food is scarce" was a rare occurrence that they hardly ever cared to prepare for.

Fattening up without limit, turning obese and diabetic earlier and earlier, and developping cardiovascular disease in ripe age, gives no reproductive advantage and is thus not an evolved trait. They're disease, or more accurately symptoms of a deeper disease of the human metabolism's hormonal regulation system, and it's most probably caused by the foods that did not play a role in our long evolution, foods that were introduced very recently and do affect our hormones.

Slashdot Top Deals

The rich get rich, and the poor get poorer. The haves get more, the have-nots die.