[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
timmy waxes a widdle on AP
>(Hint: One reason I seldom discuss AP is that to me it's just a special
>case of the larger issue of untraceable markets for such acts, something
>I've been worried about for almost a decade now. There is little reason to
>engage in the fiction of a "betting pool" when a hit may be untraceably
>contracted for and the standard fee ($1000 or less in some inner cities,
>$5000 for ordinary suburbanites, $30,000 or more for high-profile
>cases...so I hear) be paid with untraceable cash...as soon as truly
>untraceable digital cash becomes a reality.)
I always thought you hated to discuss AP because you didn't want
to appear overly knowledgeable on the subject.. heh heh
hmmm, interesting points. sounds like a *lucrative* business.
perhaps even some major *investment*opportunities* involved, eh!!!
but I'm still a bit confused about those prices. what determines
them, anyway? risk to the assassin? it seems that it ought to be
as easy to snuff out one person as it would another. e.g. everybody
walks alone out at night at different times, it seems.
perhaps we have some assassins that are offering some kind of
"value added" services to justify the difference in pricings.
otherwise, it would seem to be a scam just like IBM did with
one of their printers-- have a version that has a "slowdown
chip" in it and charge less for that one. charging what the
market will bear regardless of cost so to speak...
since you are so open to discussion of the subject,
would you care to speculate on the cost of, say, a person
who has a large stock portfolio? or how about a cyberspace
crackpot? I guess the latter would go for something like $100
on your sliding scale and the former for 100K+, maybe?
do you have to pay different amounts of money whether you want
a special kind of arrangement like a slow, agonizing demise?
does that cost more or less than the quick and deadly type?
I must admit I'm new to the concept and could definitely use
some input from someone with some obvious knowledge on the
subject such as yourself.
I do rather like Jim Bell's ideas of pools however. maybe not
have a betting pool, but just a pool of contributions from multiple
"donors". do you think that idea has no merit? it seems like there
ought to be all kinds of uplifting applications of that
so who are your "sources" for those estimates, anyway, timmy?
hee, hee. be vewry carefwul!!! we're hunting wabbits!!!!