There are many libertarians who believe in a minimal state and real courts of law, but, yeah, if there are individuals in the cryptocurrency space crying for government intervention at the level of the protocol, then they're missing the point. You don't have to be a libertarian to see the usefulness of Bitcoin, though.
No need to create their own blockchain, though -- they could simply build it on top of the Bitcoin blockchain if it offers an efficiency for this purpose. See here for an example of that sort of thing: http://insidebitcoins.com/news...
There's also Tether USD: https://tether.to/why-use-teth...
Immutability and censorship resistance come to mind.
Your first question reminds me of this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
What illegal proceeds was he taking by selling them his bitcoins for their dollars? Their dollars were illegal proceeds? No, this wasn't a case of individuals with past illegal proceeds trying to cover this up by selling their dollars for bitcoins. IANAL, but money laundering generally refers to the process of making illegally obtained money look as if it was obtained legally. This isn't that. This transaction may well have involved legally earned dollars and legally earned bitcoins, unless proven otherwise.
Regular NTSC DVDs are 480i/p, meaning something like 720x480 when progressive scan, not 720p. 720p refers to something with 720 vertical pixels, e.g. 1280x720.
The More You Know
==============*
You may have a brain the size of a planet, but you can't really see from the specimens' point of view, any more than a cow knows what it's like for a bacterium to die.
The difference is that Yog-Sothoth CAN really see from the specimens' points of view. Yog-Sothoth can do anything.
Here's my argument referring to what you said would be acceptable authorities on morality being objective: "One study found that most philosophers today accept or lean towards moral realism, as do most meta-ethicists, and twice as many philosophers accept or lean towards moral realism as accept or lean towards moral anti-realism." Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_realism
I've been wanting to use something that is lighter weight than Ubuntu on a relatively older netbook (the original Lenovo IdeaPad S10 from 2008), but I haven't been able to get the wireless drivers to work on it with either Lubuntu or Xubuntu, originally having tried 11.04, and later 11.10. Ubuntu, on the other hand, had the wireless working right out of the box. Why is it that these Ubuntu variants can break something as standard as wireless drivers? I searched around and tried to follow some directions in various online forums to get the Broadcom BCM4312 to work by running some command line instructions, but simply had no luck. Maybe it will be fixed in the variants of 12.04?
Yeah, I might have to get a PS3 and HDTV for this...
As far as a doctor transcribing the information/diagnosis in front of you, I've actually appreciated having one of my doctors doing this, as it allows me to actually hear the more technical aspects of his description in real time, and it allows him to correct it if he's misheard anything or I hear anything contrary to what I've described to him right then and there. It makes the visit much more personalized. As far as rude and unhelpful office staff and mixing up of records, that's obviously unacceptable.
Is there a reason why you are spelling their site name with a capitalized
smpoole7, you really need to watch Greg Craven's videos (at least the first one). He covers all of the issues you bring up over the course of his series: http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=92EE5DBE2987982F
It's actually not of greatest importance to know whether climate change is anthropogenic in nature or not. Even if rainbow-colored fairies were the root cause of it, we'd still need to come up with a way to stop it. What really matters is whether or not we should trust what the scientists are predicting, and what the risks would be to let it continue unabated.
If climate change continues to move in the same direction, then based on the risks involved I've been convinced that we do need to come up with a way of stopping it. The thing is, it takes political willpower of a majority to call for the right application of funds to develop a solution, so the most solid argument I've seen to convince others of this perspective is contained in the following set of videos by Greg Craven, and it lies in the proper application of risk management to develop the most informed perspective on the chances of bad things actually occurring. If you can, at least watch the first one: http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=92EE5DBE2987982F
!07/11 PDP a ni deppart m'I !pleH
