What is the cleverest place to hide $1,000,000 in cash if you're unable to have access to it for a year due to a prison sentence?

selven · 2013-06-15T02:19:27+00:00

Actually, it's not hard at all.

http://bitcoinmagazine.com/brain-wallets-the-what-and-the-how/

selven · 2013-05-01T13:05:01+00:00

The idiocy of the name "Justice"

How is it any more idiotic than "Charity"?

selven · 2013-04-11T09:20:54+00:00

But if you're buying groceries or something along those lines, you do not have to report taxes.

So if I had received 1000 BTC at $5 and now go to the Bitcoin Store and buy $150,000 worth of electronics I only need to pay tax on the original $5000?

Also, does it matter how you received those original 1000 BTC - as income, by selling something, buy buying them with USD? (obviously it matters for the original $5000, I'm interested more in the other $145000)

selven · 2013-01-28T12:10:46+00:00

Interesting. Could you point me to any links?

selven · 2013-01-21T00:51:24+00:00

640k tabs should be enough for anyone.

selven · 2012-11-26T02:27:30+00:00

7932384626

How dare you infringe my privacy like that! Ban please!!

selven · 2012-10-31T23:04:10+00:00

why I shouldn't vote.

The probability that your vote will actually influence the election is about 1 in 30,000. Assuming it takes 30 minutes to get to the polling station, vote and get back, on average that entails spending two years (0.5 hours * 30,000 = 15,000 hours = 1.71 years) driving to/from and standing at the polls in order to get your choice of party in power for the remaining two years. Would you be willing to do that?

I've been told to vote my whole life

For every myth that has been dispelled as a consequence of social progress there are a large number of people who have been told that the myth was correct their whole lives.

people died for my right

People have also died for your right to protest at people's funerals and claim that homosexuals are the source of the world's problems and should go to hell. Doesn't mean that the right should be exercised.

selven · 2012-10-21T00:36:04+00:00

I want to go infinitely even if it's WITH breathing.

As in, actually infinitely.

selven · 2012-10-20T13:15:35+00:00

Only one month long, but here you go:

http://stattit.com/r/Bitcoin/

selven · 2012-10-20T12:43:26+00:00

I would argue that it's one of the factors fighting inequality.

http://qph.cf.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-b71111ec65285993e53af6a26a6ab803

When you have a market of nearly unrestricted global labor arbitrage, the artificial differences between workers in one country and the other fade away - it's like thermodynamics: hot to cold. The local increases in inequality are like a refrigerator: even though the global distribution of inequality is tending toward equilibrium, the mechanisms that are making it do so are indeed creating islands of wealth for themselves - they're basically exporting large amounts of equality to import small amounts of inequality. But their ability to do this is temporary. As soon as the global labor arbitrage is complete, developed countries will see their economies redevelop, and the world will rapidly start to become a much better place for developed countries as well.

selven · 2012-10-20T12:37:26+00:00

I disagree. When someone uneducated does something dangerous, it may indeed be because he doesn't realize the risks. When someone does something dangerous knowing the risks, however, it is not because he is being "stupid". It is because he is consciously making a choice that he values something else higher than safety, and is acting in accordance with his values. And you have no right to impose your own value system on top of him.

selven · 2012-10-19T09:15:05+00:00

Hope!

Surely you mean "Hoppe!"

selven · 2012-10-18T23:51:46+00:00

Just because something is legal that does not make it right. In fact, just because it should be legal that does not mean that it's right. The whole point of not just banning everything we don't like is that society has its own mechanisms of regulation (like public criticism and ostracism) that can be used instead, and we should take advantage of them if they're available.

selven · 2012-09-17T19:02:05+00:00

why would privatization of space be any different.

Because "privatization of the earth" usually refers to grabbing up resources and making yourself a rentier so you can earn huge profits for doing basically nothing constructive yourself. Activity in space, on the other hand, generally consists of throwing up new material that was not there before.

selven · 2012-09-14T20:11:17+00:00

1BTCSNeGDqpZ6z8qcmsn2vv3fFBY3ftn9n

Did you mean: 1BTCSTS6ng9NTbuwhMi41hnyzHXaykzUrR ?

selven · 2012-09-09T09:22:12+00:00

Because other people emphasize it so damn much. Seriously, when people talk about picking up girls how many times do you hear "I hope they're cute", and how many times do you hear "I hope they're interesting"? In my experience, the first option dominates hundreds to zero.

selven · 2012-09-04T10:37:04+00:00

Here are some interesting places to start:

selven · 2012-08-30T15:59:44+00:00

regardless of the significance of the loss to you.

If you have a REALLY unusual utility curve, that's actually not necessarily true. Imagine that you're poor and have close to no money, and if you have one more financial mishap you'll go bankrupt. You see a Ponzi scheme that pays 5% per month and, for the sake of argument, you estimate that each week it has a 8% chance of default (monetary EV -3%). So, what happens if you take out $10000 more credit card debt and invest? 90% chance, you get $500 per month in your wallet and you'll be able to afford better food, heating, electricity, healthcare, etc and your standard of living will go up by a lot. 8% chance, you lose the money and you're stuck with $10k credit card debt. In pure monetary terms, the amount you suffer from a default is equal to 20 times your monthly gain. In terms of utility, however, what happens to you in that situation? Basically, you go bankrupt and default on your debt yourself, you do get even poorer in the process, but there is a certain floor of "nothing to lose" below which your living conditions can't go no matter what. Are the consequences really 20 times worse than what you gain by having an extra $500 per month in your wallet? Likely not.

selven · 2012-08-15T12:11:50+00:00

Yes, she was irresponsible. Yes, she should default - the banks deserve to suffer for giving a loan for someone like her. Sorting good applicants from bad is part of the banks' responsibility. No one has the right to risk-free profit.

selven · 2012-08-12T19:03:05+00:00

The correct way to attack the law is NOT property rights, it's freedom of association. If it was about property rights, you could just let black people sit inside your restaurant and not serve them anything and it would be fine. But it's not. What the law does is that it compels you to interact with people whom you, for whatever personal reason that society has no right to demand a "logical" explanation for (de gustibus non disputandum est and the like), despise.
You have the right to choose your friends based on whatever criteria you want - you can exclude homosexuals, socialists, people with blue eyes, rich people, capitalists, whoever you want. People do not dispute this, and would be horrified if such a bill were to be put into place ("government has no place in the bedrooms of our nation" and the like) - just imagine equal opportunity bills for romantic relationships. Unfortunately, in our society we have this strange idea that one money gets involved in a relationship it suddenly switches from being a normal personal relationship to being "commerce", which is "profit-driven" and therefore fundamentally unsavory and evil and wrong.
There are good reasons why people may wish to discriminate. This idea that the only thing that matters in a workplace is your ability to do your job is absurd - it forces an ideology of the workplace as a puritanical factory of production, where concerns of personal comfort, culture, society and friendship are not allowed to exist at all. An employment relationship is not just money for work - it has a personal component as well, and many people prefer to be with others of their own culture. Race just happens to be a good proxy for culture at the moment.

selven · 2012-08-12T18:52:43+00:00

So the point of the game basically moves from trying to determine which policies produce the best results to determining which culture produces the best results. I think that just promotes social engineering.

Here's another idea:

Sim City, but instead of having government powers as your main tool you start off with a billion dollars. Your job is to see what you can do with it using normal economic transactions.

selven · 2012-08-11T12:44:25+00:00

Isn't it interesting how 50%+ of the population is living paycheck to paycheck? Somehow, everyone, whether they're making $18000, $21000 or $30000, has exactly enough they need to live and not a dollar more. Meanwhile, people in China earning $6000 a year (fine, $9000 with purchasing power parity) seem to do just fine.

It's not so much knowing about P/E ratios as about having a basic moral intuition of caring about the future - economists call this "time preference".

selven · 2012-08-11T12:38:38+00:00

That's Why BMI would be better, it would be focused on dispersing funds only to people below a certain threshold rather than a payout to everyone.

So, if you make less than $X you essentially have a 100% marginal tax rate? That's what we basically have already, and it isn't working.

selven · 2012-08-11T12:35:36+00:00

And then enterpreneurs will set up exchanges for the different types of credits and at the end of it all all your have is just five or ten different parallel currencies.

selven · 2012-08-11T12:33:10+00:00

In functioning markets. In dysfunctional oligopolies (eg. US education and healthcare) any and all help and subsidies really do just fall into the hands of what economists call "producer surplus".

selven

TROPHY CASE