|
i speculate on its price and swap it to dollars, cuz today, sadly, there are not much places where u can pay with ur bitcoins, but, when aliexpress will start using bitcoin payment(2020), i wil pay with bitcoin for everything except food and my flat house
|
|
|
|
|
i would rather try to get info who he is
|
|
|
|
|
пишите в этом треде ваше мнение о том, что нужно сделать в россии, чтобы все стало хорошо.
каждое мнение имеет право на жизнь, каждый имеет право на критику каждого мнения
---
пожалуйста, пишите крупные сообщения, а не сообщения типа "нужно сменить власть" - ну сменится власть, что дальше?, распишите всё
|
|
|
|
Well Obama won the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize so they don't have much credibility. For those that know what kind of operations that Obama was behind they know how evil that man truly is just like most people in positions of power. But hey maybe they will now give it to trump for avoiding war with Iran, lol.
yeah, all the near-scientists are left atm, while obama is also left |
|
|
|
America is the worst of both worlds, has all the negatives of capitalism with the side benefit of not even being a totally free market, it is very restrictive to anyone in poverty because everything needs a license, degree, or some type of certification which requires money and keeps people poor.
its supposed to achieve 2 tings, first, make poor people available as proletarians to the capitalist rich, support huge established structures. it has benefits and negatives. equity can also be obtained through stocks. it sucks however to capitalists who want to overthrow the system and controll the currency on their own leftist logic: yeah-yeah, market produces monopolies which is bad cuz it centralizes a lot of power in one hangs. LET'S CENTRALIZE EVERYTHING TO THE OFFICIALS HANDS! |
|
|
|
>pro-right-wing yeah, cultural marxism is so right wing --- threat to a democracy is an existence of democracy |
|
|
|
Holly crap! I was browsing OneHash and just found it LOL  It turns out these days Noble prize became a joke? Sorry, I am not into politics but I can not really find a category where Trump gets nomination for Noble Prize. Is this guy trying to buy the honer? why you dont being mad of the lil girl who is nominating for being a conspiracy theorist, for believing in global warming? |
|
|
|
|
even if facebook is a leftist shithole, even if their cryptocurrency is centralized shit, we should resist the tries of government to intervene into the crypto-sphere the way they are trying to do this
|
|
|
|
Please discuss the Russia hoax elsewhere. That is off topic here. im not left, im right as fuck, but:
if u are talking about ethical part of google's actions, i think intervening to the google's servers and deciding how they would work, while not being an owner of these servers, is much less ethical than giving google a right to decide what rules are ok on the servers they own.
if you want to make google feel worse, but you dont want to do unethical actions, you can do the way i did: i just stopped using google, because of their actions. atm the only search engines i use are duckduckgo(for international search) and yandex(for local cis search on russian language), so you can switch to duckduckgo.
if its really essential for ppl to have free speech google, a lot of ppl would stop using google. and google will see, that their income has decreased a lot, and after that they will change their policy. if you really want to make world better: stop using google.
This is the classic Libertarian view. I usually am in favor of free markets, but not with the major tech companies. I don’t think these companies are doing business fairly in an objective sense. They earn money via advertising for the most part and mostly do not charge their users. In an open and free market, I would expect to see companies compete with google and other tech companies by paying customers to use their services but we are not seeing that. More importantly, google and other tech companies have special protection from the government from legal liability for libel. In exchange for receiving this protection, it should not be unreasonable to expect these companies to be neutral, at least towards mainstream ideas. well im not a libertarian you mean but my ethics views are libertarian any info about prorection they receive from the government? im not trolling, ive never heard it before. if they receive they should just stop receiving it lol. i know, that big tech companies dont pay taxes not because of laws but because they can, which shows how useless progressive taxation is how bad they are, but you should punish them for not paying taxes, not for banning trump supporters The protection I am referring to is the protection from libel lawsuits under section 230 of the DCMA. If a tech company displays content that is libelous to a third party, written by another third party, it cannot be sued for libel by the defamed party, even if they are aware of the defamation. This protection from defamation lawsuits is a key part of tech companies business models because they do not have to validate truth to what they display. The idea behind this protection is it promotes open and free speech, and debate. Project Veritas has shown google to removing a portion of free and open debate and speech, while keeping the low costs and positive user experience associated with not having to moderate content for truth. Taxation is an entirely different issue. All corporations do their best to pay as little taxes as they can while following the law. If they paid more taxes than the law requires, they would be short-charging their shareholders. Taxing corporations in the first place is a form of double taxation because owners of corporations will pay taxes on dividends or capital gains, in addition to the corporation paying taxes on its income. yeah, thats bad, but, as i said, i would deny section 230 of the DCMA, and force tech companies to pay taxes. forcing them to pay taxes is much more usable |
|
|
|
My position is generally very left-wing, I am strongly in favour of equality of opportunity and a much lower level of inequality both within societies and across the world. Equally I find the excesses of capitalism abhorrent, the multi-billionaires who don't pay any tax whilst the poorest often have to work several jobs just to stay alive.
But... I think that Socialism is becoming irrelevant as a concept. The whole thing is based upon the power of the workers. Unionise, strike for better conditions etc. Technology is rapidly superseding that. We hear a lot about automation. The tech revolutions we've had already have meant huge job losses in one sector, but new opportunities somewhere else. Industrialisation meant we needed far fewer farm workers - but more factory workers. The computer revolution meant we need fewer factory workers but more jobs appeared in the service sector. The thing with the current wave of automation (with AI playing an increasing role as well) is that there is nowhere left to go, no new sectors will arise where humans can perform the work better than machines can. This will lead to the complete disempowerment of the working class, and the loss of the big bargaining chip of Socialism.
Not sure what the outcome will be, probably some form of UBI, but the fact is that whether we like it or not, Socialism as a concept is becoming rapidly outdated.
yeah, leftism is irrelevant classical leftism is dead, if you are the leftist, who is not gonna get all to the gulags, and give as many taxes as fuck, you should require panarchy for ppl who dont want to live under socialist hell your government would be able to exit your tyrany leadership note: i mean panarchy(focj, polystate), not anarchy |
|
|
|
America is the worst of both worlds, has all the negatives of capitalism with the side benefit of not even being a totally free market, it is very restrictive to anyone in poverty because everything needs a license, degree, or some type of certification which requires money and keeps people poor.
there's a different word for that, it's called: __________ (i.e. US and the west are NOT particularly capitalist at all) My attitude is that socialism can work; on a VERY small scale. Your house. Because you can trust the people you live with to subsidise each other, the practical reality is you have little choice. And if even that goes awry, the impact is contained and small. As soon as you expand the scope of socialism, the exact same parasites that we have abusing an ostensibly capitalist system will commandeer positions of power, simply look at how that happened everywhere socialism is attempted. But it sounds like you need to have it proven to you before you abandon the concept. There's already a problem; if you're using Bitcoin, you're already a capitalist, as you own individualistic capital. Why didn't you split all your BTC with your comrades? You could do it like this: open a multi-sig wallet, where a majority of the holders is the spending threshold. Why aren't you doing it? It's because you're not a socialist, however else you're deluding yourself. it can work in that small scale only cuz of voluntary being in that small scale fraction. if you are the real not retarded socialist, who wants ppl to live good under his leadership(all the people tbh), you should require panarchy, cuz its the only way your socialist goverment would survive |
|
|
|
Думаю, что рубль вообще обесцениться со временем, а Россия введет национальную криптовалюту. В этом году ожидаю курс 200 рублей за доллар.
криптовалюту? они не смогут, да и не надо оно им, благосостояние наше. ожидаешь 200р за доллар? а я биткоин по 99999999999999999 долларов к концу года жду |
|
|
|
America is the worst of both worlds, has all the negatives of capitalism with the side benefit of not even being a totally free market, it is very restrictive to anyone in poverty because everything needs a license, degree, or some type of certification which requires money and keeps people poor.
trump, remove copyright |
|
|
|
 Текущая тема в последнее время становится как никогда актуальной. Биткойн вышел на вертикальную стадию параболического роста. Вчера цены на главный криптоактив доходили до 13700 долларов. Сейчас немного откатилось до 12К+. Большинство индикаторов с экстремальными значениями. Индекс жадности достиг абсолютных исторических значений - 95. https://alternative.me/crypto/fear-and-greed-index/
Доминация битка доходила вчера до 63%. https://coinmarketcap.com/charts/#dominance-percentage
Биткойн постепенно превращается в значительно переоценённый актив. Трудно отделаться от впечатления, глядя на график, что мы повторяем историю конца 2017 года. Из топовых альтов риппл по прежнему самый недооценённый. Он, как и большинство альтов продолжает стремительно падать в цене к битку. Почти так же, как и в 2017 году, перед своим пампом. Посмотрим, будет ли на этот раз стадия перелива битка в альты или биток сразу пойдёт корректироваться к доллару без этой промежуточной стадии). боже, хоть бы упал, вчера перед сном продал по 14, если упадет до 6-8, что вполне возможно, визжать от радости как сучка буду |
|
|
|
Please discuss the Russia hoax elsewhere. That is off topic here. im not left, im right as fuck, but:
if u are talking about ethical part of google's actions, i think intervening to the google's servers and deciding how they would work, while not being an owner of these servers, is much less ethical than giving google a right to decide what rules are ok on the servers they own.
if you want to make google feel worse, but you dont want to do unethical actions, you can do the way i did: i just stopped using google, because of their actions. atm the only search engines i use are duckduckgo(for international search) and yandex(for local cis search on russian language), so you can switch to duckduckgo.
if its really essential for ppl to have free speech google, a lot of ppl would stop using google. and google will see, that their income has decreased a lot, and after that they will change their policy. if you really want to make world better: stop using google.
This is the classic Libertarian view. I usually am in favor of free markets, but not with the major tech companies. I don’t think these companies are doing business fairly in an objective sense. They earn money via advertising for the most part and mostly do not charge their users. In an open and free market, I would expect to see companies compete with google and other tech companies by paying customers to use their services but we are not seeing that. More importantly, google and other tech companies have special protection from the government from legal liability for libel. In exchange for receiving this protection, it should not be unreasonable to expect these companies to be neutral, at least towards mainstream ideas. well im not a libertarian you mean but my ethics views are libertarian any info about prorection they receive from the government? im not trolling, ive never heard it before. if they receive they should just stop receiving it lol. i know, that big tech companies dont pay taxes not because of laws but because they can, which shows how useless progressive taxation is how bad they are, but you should punish them for not paying taxes, not for banning trump supporters |
|
|
|
...
freedom of speech and freedom of association cant exist without each other. while blocking google on banning ppl they want to ban on their servers they own you are being a threat to their freedom of association, which, btw, was in your law list till, if im not mistaking, 60s
ive already said, that laws are not the criteria of anything
What you are really saying is (blah-blah-blah) it's okay for Google to dictate the results of the next election. And no, it's not. they dont dictate, they just express their opinion while not touching anyone who is not using google. you can express your opinion even if u are big and wealthy even if smb like u may think that big and wealthy should be punished for expressing their opinions |
|
|
|
im not left, im right as fuck, but:
if u are talking about ethical part of google's actions, i think intervening to the google's servers and deciding how they would work, while not being an owner of these servers, is much less ethical than giving google a right to decide what rules are ok on the servers they own.
if you want to make google feel worse, but you dont want to do unethical actions, you can do the way i did: i just stopped using google, because of their actions. atm the only search engines i use are duckduckgo(for international search) and yandex(for local cis search on russian language), so you can switch to duckduckgo.
if its really essential for ppl to have free speech google, a lot of ppl would stop using google. and google will see, that their income has decreased a lot, and after that they will change their policy. if you really want to make world better: stop using google.
As Quickseller already stated, they are in violation of existing laws. They have to either be a public commons and allow all legal posts, or a publisher which can curate posts as they please but are also responsible for what is posted. They can't be both. I agree with your premise of not using their services, but realistically that is nearly impossible unless you are Amish. as i said, i was talking about ethics. laws are not the truth or ethics criteria Well a lot of people would argue it is at minimum unethical if not illegal for them to try to manipulate free elections. yeah, its unethical, but forbidding them doing this is much less ethical, ive already wrote my first reply in this thread about this Nobody is forbidding them to break existing law. There are simply clear consequences if they do, and they have. Nobody is going to prevent them from doing things that cause them to do significant jail time. freedom of speech and freedom of association cant exist without each other. while blocking google on banning ppl they want to ban on their servers they own you are being a threat to their freedom of association, which, btw, was in your law list till, if im not mistaking, 60s ive already said, that laws are not the criteria of anything |
|
|
|
Who would have thought that giving too much power to companies without regulating them is a bad idea?
Incredible no?
corporation called google has too much power? lets give enough power to corporation called america to destroy it. lol |
|
|
|
"As per 2019 Happiness Report, Finland is the happiest country in the world,"
Capitalism is working out real great America, maybe you should take a look at the homeless population in USA and the ridiculous healthcare/education costs.
america is not laissez-faire since 1860s lol |
|
|
|
What about the environmental
fun fact: if the lake is private, you wont be able to pollute this lake, cuz the owner of this lake would destroy you for that. and health disasters
do any socialist countries solve the healthcare problem? - maybe soviet union? - nah, 30% of the chambers in 1980s in soviet union had no access to water supply - maybe cuba? - yeah, cuba's healthcare is that great, that ppl from cuba swim on rafts to florida to get a surgery/stomatology for even american prices - vietnam, china? - both countries are not socialist(despite their healthcare is still shit), china has succeed market reforms in 90s, vietnam has succeed market reforms in 00s - north korea, cambodia? - lol - how about sweden/norway/finland? - the only thing which connects socialism and scandinavian countries are huge taxes I still hold the opinion that socialism is the superior system for mankind.
yeah, you've got proofs, you've got historical experience, but u still hold your opinion, very nice, bernie sanders 2020 |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
