This old chestnut?

It's 2016, and we are STILL having this one?

2001 wants it's bullshit arguments back.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... aka "There ain't no such thing as a fair election"...

But a contract that breaks the law is not a contract in law. So... if the govt made it expressly legal to circumvent it, then that clause in the contract would be void.

This is run of the mill stuff - you often see language in contracts "...to the extent enforceable by law...".

2 seconds on google would let you discover that you don't need a signature to make a contract.

I think I might even have had an account there...

Has aerospace solved the halting problem then?

Oh look - another meaningless flamewar... what's this about again?

well, perhaps not sure. Just hopeful.

I am sure that you can make the counter argument for me.

1. Queue all orders
2. Delay. 1 second? 2 seconds? Even maybe 5 seconds.
3. Randomise the queue
4. Execute all orders
5. Goto 1

Should stop this kind of bullshit.

Words fail me.

That thing had to go. I miss my plugs, but, that fucker had to go....

1. Queue all orders
2. Delay. 1 second? 2 seconds? Even maybe 5 seconds.
3. Randomise the queue
4. Execute all orders
5. Goto 1

Kills front running, probably kills HFC. Basically strategy proofs the whole thing. Somebody cryptomath geek can probably finess the protocol some more, but this is the basic plan.

No, seriously, who the fuck is John Romero?

Prohibition fails. Google are just supporting the problem, not the solution. They should be advocating decrimilization and treatment as an illness, not as a crime.