fine_sandy_bottom @ fine_sandy_bottom @discuss.tchncs.de

Posts

5

Comments

1,679

Joined

2 yr. ago

That's a false equivalence. Yes the USD could be worth $0 but the chances of that are infinitesimal in comparison to the chance that crypto will be worthless.

You have no evidence on which to base an assertion of bitcoin's most likely future value. Past performance is not an indication of future performance.

The only surety is that crypto will consume egregious amounts of energy in the course of producing absolutely no value.

The absurdity is definitely funny, but this type of thing won the election.

Sometimes it's hard to know which battles to pick.

Resisting this appointment kinda forces Trump to double down, because it was an election promise. It also diminishes drs credibility in future matters. "Drs moan about everything".

The thing is, in a year's time bitcoin could be worth $200k or it could be worth $0.

Trump loved crypto because he grifted with some NFTs and then he needed support to win an election. That's done now so we're 1 brain fart away from a royal decree that crypto is bad.

People don't sell up all their shares because they have enough to retire on.

At the risk of sounding uneducated, I wasn't to say I don't think I've ever read a 45 minute article.

I mean most days I would spend at least that much time reading technical advice or commentary, but not an "article".

Do they make antibiotics in your neighborhood?

Hard disagree here.

"Forcing simple healthy choices" completely disregards the many and varied causes of obesity.

This type of thinking reminds me of the war on drugs approach to drug abuse.

Quite obviously, the underlying causes of obesity are many and varied. The only way to resolve an "obesity pandemic" is to have more services directed at understanding an individual's unique circumstances and helping them develop strategies to improve their health.

This sounds expensive, and doesn't sound like an election-winning policy in 2025, but that's where we are at.

I think it might be too late. We just don't have the mechanics in place to manage this type of threat.

Take for example Musk's "lottery" in the US. If not technically contrary to law, very much contrary to the spirit of the law, and while I suspect that some kind of "action" was commenced, it was certainly never progressed in any meaningful way. Closing the gate not only after the proverbial horse has bolted, but after that horse has run amok, sired a foal on the prize mare, and grown old and died.

It was hard enough when nana was sharing memes on facebook or your second cousin was getting radicalised on youtube. Now social platforms are openly influencing "engagement" with bots, very obviously supporting far right rhetoric in the name of "free speech", and avoiding any suppression of misinformation.

Just gonna point out the obvious - this "tribal lifestyle" you speak of would be amazing... for about 1% of the population that would be happy with a subsistence agrarian lifestyle.

For the other 99% of us it would create more problems than it solves. How do you have any form of technology whatsoever without organisation, which requires regulation, and regulators, which we call government.

Who will do all the things though? ChatGPT can't clean my toilet or wash my dishes.

Also, what is the point of being wealthy and powerful if there's no one to rule over?

I'm not debating the law and how it's supposed to work.

I'm agreeing that the law is only relevant if you collectively agree to enforce it.

Sadly, in a recent election polling the entire nation, Americans collectively agreed to disregard the law in this instance.

LOL.

Why on earth would they want to join the US?

Their sovereignty is an invaluable asset and to give it up would be an atrocity.

Yeah correlation is not causation.

These couples might both work more than the control cohort. Any number of explanations.

Yeah mine takes forever to boot.

Sadly, it doesn't matter.

I'm grieving right along with you.

My point is, when someone is democratically elected in a free and fair election then the rules don't really matter because they're supposed to be derived from the will of the people anyway.

Using the law to undermine a democratic process is not the way.

With great sadness I'll remind you that a majority of voters elected Trump.

At this point it just doesn't really matter what the rules are. It hasn't mattered before now. It certainly isn't going to matter just a few weeks after the citizens expressed their desire that he be president.

Yeah I agree. Biden was the only person who could enable a second Trump presidency.

Australia's freedom score is better than the US.

There are a myriad of social issues faced by First Australians (Aboriginals) including police brutality. Any summation I would try to give would be reductive given the complex history and various mitigation strategies that have occurred.

However, as I pointed out earlier it's the prevalence of misbehavior amongst officers that determines whether it's possible to be a police officer without passively condoning that sort of behavior.

Perhaps the behavior of Australian Police warrants the ACAB label in your view, it doesn't in mine.

"Take away a year of your life" is hyperbole.

It's not like you're dropped into 70s Vietnamese jungle with a garrot wire and some amphetamines.

It's more like a year long summer camp. Learn basic soldiering, learn some kind of speciality whether it's catering, logistics, or mechanics, and earn a good salary.

Most people go backpacking for a few years afterwards to spend the money they earned.

If you'd rather play games instead it's pretty easy to get an exemption.

The US has ever been a fickle bed fellow.