SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Motherboard reports on a strange Bitcoin "lottery" that is now claimed to be a marriage proposal.
Strange event #1: someone claiming to be the anonymous hacker who stole 119,000 Bitcoins from the Bitfinex Bitcoin exchange announced a "lottery" to win 1000 Bitcoins on Reddit, garnering over 7000 responses on the thread from people posting their Bitcoin addresses on the chance that this was somehow legit.
Strange event #2: the Reddit poster actually sent 1000 Bitcoins to the address of one of the users in the thread. Almost immediately the money was sent from that destination to yet another address, one with a public note attached that says "Please send me some money. I'm very poor."
Strange event #3: the poster on Reddit who received the money emerged, admitted to knowing the original poster (not surprising), and revealed that somehow this entire event is some sort of wedding proposal to her (very surprising).
I'm not sure what to think of this. If it's a scam I'm not quite sure who got ripped off.
Previous Coverage: Bitcoin Exchange Bitfinex has been hacked. 119,756 BTC Stolen
(Score: 2) by Capt. Obvious on Sunday August 21 2016, @07:56AM
This just isn't true. Like, at all. Nowadays, governments don't just print money. But that's definitely how things started.
Each dollar is not matched to a debt. There is a supply of dollars. There are also a bunch of debts. But I don't follow why you think the government cannot just print a trillion dollars in bills.
In the US, the government has promised not to just do that, because it leads to bad things. But it could do it tomorrow (okay, probably in like 2 weeks, to change the legislation) if it needed to. Don't you remember the "platinum coin" idea when they were doing debt ceiling things? The idea the government would just coin like 15 trillion dollar platinum coins and pay off the whole debt that way (and crash the economy.)
(Score: 2) by vux984 on Tuesday August 23 2016, @06:43PM
I had to let that post percolate a few days, because... wow. just wow. Are you in some sort of weird denial?
Your argument is that the government can just print money and add it to circulation, without matching it to more debt; as a way to break the debt cycle we are in.
However, you agree that they promised not to do exactly that, then you noted that its actually not legal for them to do it either, and finally you observe that if they did do it 'leads to bad things', up to and including 'crash the economy'.
How dug-in to your position are you? You want to be "right" so badly that you are going to cling to to this nonsense? Fine then, your "right". The could completely trash the law, and crash the economy to prove you "right".
But you may remember I argued the economy eventually collapses under debt cycle that can't be closed.
And your counter argument is essentially, "nuh-uh, they can close the cycle", by just printing money, (which they promised not to do, can't legally do, and which even if they did, we both agree it crashes the economy.
So given that we both agree it crashes the economy, how does that break the debt cycle that leads to a collapse? Triggering an economic collapse to break the debt cycle that will lead to an economic collapse is like drowning someone that has incurable cancer to prevent the cancer from killing them. Bravo mission accomplished. It wasn't legal, and they are still dead. But you were right, you "beat the cancer".