Its still a Schedule 1 substance, indicating it has no recognized medical value, and on the other hand, the government owns patents on THC compounds used to shrink tumors.
Don't worry folks, it was just a few "bad apples", who happened to be vetted, highly trusted, undercover law enforcement officials. Just goes to show you how only criminals use Bitcoin.
I forgot my yahoo password long ago, I had used my yahoo account to register a domain name. At the time, I agreed to allow recurring billing (though I don't consciously remember doing this). After a few years of seeing the recurring charge on my bank statement, I called to get a debit card with a new number. They sent me a new card with the same number (but new expirey). After discovering a fresh charge in the next yearly cycle, I called my bank to "contest" the charges. They asked if I had talked to them (the vendor, Yahoo in this case) or otherwise explicitly cancelled my "subscription" and told them I had no way of recovering my account information and wasn't about to navigate their phone-based customer service. My bank did absolutely nothing to help me. Moving forward, I've sought to minimize any form of accounts following this paradigm. Getting rid of passwords is great, long over due, but there are bigger problems with these organizations.
It will be great when this substance can be officially studied in a clinical setting but so long as its a schedule 1 substance at the federal level, well, its worse than methamphetamine (on paper).
What was your experience like getting your prescription details from LensCrafters? I've heard they don't like give up the details to allow customers to easily work with a competitor.
I was making a sarcastic remark, echoing the sentiment of all of the "free market" zealots and politicians. Not only are they talking out of both sides of their mouth, their statements are misleading as we see in hindsight.
The only benefit I can see is there is an overall increase in liquidity but the cost of that liquidity is quite high.
As jordon0day just wrote in an unrelated thread, "we have plenty of evidence that people are really bad at being suspicious of the often unreliable stuff they read on the internet"
I think this is a group that is highly sensitive to face value of statements people make and when someone makes an uninformed remark, their entirely argument is cast aside. Dissent is welcomed, but it needs to be backed by a solid justification.
We live in a world filled with speculative bubbles. You have speculators to thank for their price discovery efforts. This enables you to pay the "true value" of a given commodity at a given moment in time.
I wouldn't be so quick to cast anyone off, especially someone who undertakes personal initiatives such as this to ensure their own survival. The "economy" might suffer if more people adopted this attitude, but its hardly the end of the world. It is not our position to judge if this person's potential is wasted or not, you can't really be any more subjective.
He's only a burden in as much as the fall in his personal consumption reduces the overall demand for things he might have purchased. In other words, its no sweat off of anyone's brow. Being individually resourceful doesn't increase the burden on anyone else.
Microsoft's data centers have been used for mining for over a year and its been used by internal teams to compensate people outside the company (working with open source vendors) and its a very convenient way to bypass the age old fight for money in the budget.