Posts by Evil Auditor

Re: opposable thumbs @Hungry Sean

I ain't Spartacus,

you aren't funny - It seems that some commentards simply don't do humour. There are posts (not only mine) which I believe cannot be mistaken as a serious contribution. Truth is, they can and are.

Also saying anything critical about Apple tends to fire up the votes, in both directions.

Re: opposable thumbs @Hungry Sean

I agree that the thumbs serve a purpose - but which purpose? Do I thumb-down a comment because I don't agree with it or because it is rubbish? Personally, I hardy thumb-down a post unless, eg it's inflammatory and humourless, even if I agree with it. Then there seem to be people around who thumb-down a comment simply because it was posted by jake.

However inconsistently they are used, I don't think we should get rid of the thumbs. The only bad thing was to insert the three top comments below the article which was a kind of thumbs-up machine. But El Reg got rid of this long ago.

The badges though, well, I addressed my reservations already earlier on. Btw, is the silver badge awarded automatically?

@hokum

Thank you for the clarification. Well, I didn't take damian Kelly's comment very seriously*. That's why it made me smile. I don't and probably never will know damian Kelly's real attitude towards this topic. But if something looks like irony and smells like irony is probably is irony.

*And neither should you mine. Although part of my day job is to piss people off.

Re: Radiation issues can be addressed.....

Isn't there an area in Russia (or former USSR) with a naturally high radiation level, which does not pose any problem for its residents? They, allegedly, have adopted to the radiation through evolutionary selection.

Breed with them - there's anyway enough time till a manned mars mission is ready - and send the offspring.

Re: Mental health

There I make a light hearted comment about the impossibility to find suitable travellers and you're going all serious! ;-)

Seriously, I agree with you, Lee D. But I believe even Scott, with his untested material, didn't think he would die. Mars on the other hand...well, once there is some habitable space there, why not...

Re: I honestly don't see the point

The point? Getting there only to find the remains of an ancient civilisation who set out to move to earth because their own planet was bloody cold and hostile. Now that is what I'd call irony.

Other valid points are because we can (although not yet) or for the fun of it. That's sufficient reason for me.

Re: Off line

@AC 16:31 GMT

More and more countries inflict restrictions on cross-boarder cash transfers. A bunch of bank notes, while it still happens, is definitely not a good choice (ask e.g. Cornelius Gurlitt - and he didn't even exceed the legal limit), it's too easily detectable. Diamonds are much more compact than cash, can safely be swallowed or rather easily hidden otherwise. So yes, you can pass airport security with a pocket full of diamonds - given they don't bulge your trousers - or alternatively, a stomach/rectum full of them. Changing them into cash is, despite the controls on conflict diamonds not really a problem. Either your diamonds may indeed have a certificate of origin - after all, you're not trading in diamonds but merely transporting wealth - or if they don't, you only have to know the right people. Or do you believe all the certificates of origin are genuine?

But I agree, transporting large amounts of money is easier with bitcoin. It comes with the risk of volatility though, probably a higher volatility than currencies or diamonds.

Anonymisation?

What's the problem with anonymisation of money? Anyway, this you can achieve rather easily without bitcoin. The problem starts when you want to legitimatise dirty money. Can bitcoin do that?

Jeff should only worry if he hasn't, like all the others, closed his Swiss bank account long ago and moved money to much calmer places in the Caribbean. Or, for example, what does the USA do against "financial practices" in Delaware? That would probably be my place of choice for hiding/laundering money - not being a US citizen I'd be safe from the USA and having the money within the USA also safe from all other countries.

Re: Yes, HSBC Bank.................

@AC 16:25 GMT

it is reasonable to regulate the use of a currency.

Why? With bitcoin we are not talking about a currency that is closely interlinked with the economy of a country or area as are $, £, € etc and therefore needs regulation. Bitcoin could be more accurately compared to gold. Gold is freely tradeable and has, besides jewellery and some industrial niche use, no inherent value.

The only real difference is that gold is tangible, bitcoin isn't. Although all the gold I personally own is in 100% gold-backed ETFs, not tangible at all - and freely tradeable.

It surely is valid to ask the questions of those politicians. But the concerns they (and others) have originate in bitcoin being unknown. And alien is potentially dangerous.

Re: to IPO

frank ly,

Good point! And good I'm not a hack ;-)

Re: "there must be a deficit"

I was probably a bit too brief. It's not profits that lead to deficits (one of which would be unemployment). It is the system that enables profit-making companies to exist that, as a downside, also enables deficits (deficit in a general meaning - don't know what Brand meant). Such deficits can be companies closing down, going bankrupt, laid off staff, unemployed people etc.

If you know of a sustainable economic system that allows for privat profits without any deficits please let me know, I'd be very curious to hear about that. So far, I believe with capitalism it's like what Churchill said about democracy...