Right. But you strongly support having the largest military budget is the world by an order of magnitude yeah?
I'm against any standing army. I'm not even american, but its 2nd amendment is the last hope to not end all in a planetary gulag. The US Government has already regulated arms to such an extent that the citizens have only a glimmer of hope. How are some semi-automatic weapons going to fare against the full weaponry of the US Military? The only hope is that the citizens become well organized and are able to train a large militia. I'm not confident that is realistic. How would we train mass amounts of people without the federal government taking notice and crushing it? This isn't gonna work unless we allow recreational use of tanks and nukes. Nothing over blasting some recreational nukes on NYE. |
|
|
|
Not sure how relevant this is to anything, as I am only now 5 minutes in, but the guy makes fun of swedes and makes a case for chimps being smarter than the average human, so: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_tdzuHFwbBUEdit: Do we have any swedes around here? Just out of curiosity. Google the IQ of Koko the Gorilla and then Google the average IQ in the Congo. I know. There are places in africa where people have an IQ of... fucking 60... Harambe died for our sins! I would've guessed 80ish. When I actually found out I couldn't stop laughing for a few minutes. |
|
|
|
Not sure how relevant this is to anything, as I am only now 5 minutes in, but the guy makes fun of swedes and makes a case for chimps being smarter than the average human, so: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_tdzuHFwbBUEdit: Do we have any swedes around here? Just out of curiosity. Google the IQ of Koko the Gorilla and then Google the average IQ in the Congo. |
|
|
|
so we now play spot the fake news It's the commies. It's always the commies. Which also means that the right tells the truth in proportion to how often the left lies. There are exceptions in both camps. CHOOSE WISELY.The thing is, the alt-right is so full of the most ridiculous mind blowing bullshit on the simplest of subjects, but expects their scientific analysis of climate change to be taken seriously. They are such a pack of idiots all you can do is laugh. I find the left more laughable right now. The right has its fair share of idiots, just like literally every single sufficiently large random sample of any population. But there currently is an overwhelming tilt of stupid to the left. And I agree with quite a few of left principles, such as a UBI and at least some levels of universal health care. But not for the same reasons as the left generally would. I think that being taken care of for free corrupts people into complacency and misery. But at the same time there's a correlation between violent revolution and extreme levels of income inequality. And while I strongly believe that everybody who has access to the internet gets exactly what they deserve from life, I don't want to eventually have some retards trying to kill me because I've been smart enough to move myself into a future that I'd consider desirable. I hope that we don't have to even start arguing over the current state of the mainstream media, which is a complete fucking joke and with an obvious left-bias. It's blatantly obvious that they are not trying to argue policies but just making up excuses to attack the right like a cornered animal (the leftist media is the animal). |
|
|
|
I'd be quite happy with lower temperatures. Winter is more enjoyable with proper powder snow, and summer wouldn't make me stay inside 24/7 if it didn't cause me to sweat all fucking day.
On that note, I've read about an upcoming mini ice age a few times. Is there any recent update on that that confirms or rejects it?
Vast question. - climate is whether over 30 years. So it's too soon to tell. - There was a global warming during the last 100 years of about 0.1°C/10years - No more warming since 1998, once you remove El Nino/LaNina effects (which cancel each other in time) - Sun is probably having a period of low activity, that doesn't change much the energy it sends to us, but less activity (= less spots) means less magnetic field, means more cosmic rays reaching our atmosphere, meaning more seeded clouds, thus more albedo and then cold coming in... but this is still a theory - look here for the latest temps : https://moyhu.blogspot.fr/p/latest-ice-and-temperature-data.html#NCAR- best site ever for these questions : https://wattsupwiththat.com/- last but not least : cold kills; warm weather makes our life easier. Keeping in mind of course that things like math is still a theory. Hypothesis may be a better term. Also also keeping in mind that it's the left that are going on about the weather. All of science and anything empirical is ultimately a hypothesis. No amount confirmations (that turns things into theories and laws in academia) can guarantee with certainty that we've figured something out, rather than just witnessing an infinitely unlikely event. Nonetheless, I wouldn't be surprised in the least if industrialization had an impact on global weather patterns. In chaotic system even the tiniest perturbation can trigger massive macroscopical changes. However, I'm not quite convinced yet about us having any significant impact either for two reasons. Namely, I haven't studied the papers so I can't possibly know if there are any systematic errors, and I see too much bullshit going on in the media to not be heavily sceptical. I do lean towards human emissions of CO2 causing changes in climate, mostly because I've worked with people who study precisely that, but even if that turned out true I wouldn't be all that worried about it. Capitalism will come to the rescue and figure out a way to keep us nice and cozy regardless of weather conditions. With nuclear fusion pretty much around the corner energy won't be a concern and with that sorted out the overall state of the planet should be irrelevant. Things might change drastically (e.g. underground, on- and/or underwater or shielded off cities with indoor farming), but I don't see humans disappearing unless we nuke ourselves to hell or get wiped out by some rogue asteroid. We were burning forests way before we burned coal and oil. In fact, any living creature affects the weather. I understand that at least one american state has legislation regarding cow farts. But more importantly, co2 is not a pollutant. On the contrary, it's plant food. Which is food for everything else. The more co2, the more oxygen, the more life. It might just be a good thing.
I don't deny the possibility of that, since it would make sense. But our ecosystem is way more complex and has more knobs and dials that interact with each other than just CO2 and oxygen. I'm not sure how familiar you are with population models, but there could very well be a point beyond which everything tips and triggers a reaction in the opposite direction. E.g. more CO2 = more life, then at some point there's too much CO2 = less life, be it due to primary (an upper limit on how much can be held or used) or due to side effects (effects of increased CO2 on other parts of the ecosystem) of the increase in CO2 in the atmosphere. Humans can easily die from drinking too much water at once, so "more oxygen" might not be an unequivocally good thing either (too much of it would eventually increase the pressure which can be fatal even without any other effects on the ecosystem). You would have to explain how the proposed hypothesis works. For starters, there isn't enough physical space available to sustain an infinite expansion of trees and whatnot, so eventually there would be surplus of CO2 that could not be turned into further oxygen. And too much CO2 is harmful to humans and animals. If that was not the case however, and oxygen increased indefinitely, pressure would increase, again due to spatial limitations. That would increase the partial pressure of oxygen, which can lead to oxygen poisoning and by extension to death. Of course there's still fucktons of space to go around on earth, but there's definitely a limit beyond which things could turn bad very quickly. And that's just the most apparent potential consequences that too much CO2 or O2 could have. Regardless of whether or not these are accurate and what the quantitative thresholds would look like, there are a lot more intricate effects to take into account in a dynamic system that is as closely interlinked as life on earth. Neither of us have numbers, so let's just stick to what is known. We know that oil and coal are essentially condensed co2. We also know that animals used to be way the fuck bigger, not just dinosaurs but also mammals and insects. It therefore seems reasonable to conclude that not only was there more co2 in the past, but also more oxygen, not just because co2 turns into oxygen but also because higher levels of oxygen are likely to allow for larger animals, as muscles require oxygen to function. So it seems that the atmosphere was denser in the past. And as co2 is deposited in the underground, it must become less dense over time, which means less able to support life. So what is better? That we get less oxygen by way of less plants due to less co2, or that we get more? Like I said, there's a limit. I don't disagree with more oxygen being better, but that can't go on indefinitely. I'm just disputing the overly simplistic stance that more CO2 = more O2 = always good. |
|
|
|
Yes..however I only keep a very small amount on any of these hardware wallets. I believe any decent size amount of bitcoin should be placed in paper wallets
Paper wallets also carry some risks. It takes quite an elaborate setup to be fully safe. And at that point one would also have to consider how to pass on one's crypto holdings to their family in case of unexpected death, which makes a safe setup even trickier. Makes me wonder how many Bitcoins will actually be accessible by the time the last block is mined. |
|
|
|
Guys get the fuck back to discussing price action, some of you are really making a fool out of yourselves. You don't want to be remembered like this.
Suchmoon says it's a bad idea to discuss bitcoin in this thread.
I think it's bad karma to talk about Bitcoin in this thread.
Bitcoin is also considered off-topic in these regions. |
|
|
|
No way, just because bitcoin is making upgrades doesn't mean alts will go anywhere. Granted, a lot will probably die off, but there are still better options than btc.
Yes, for now, and only for niche settings. And this is bound to rapidly change with LN, RS, and other implementations. That's what this thread is about. Ethereum also announced many changes that will raise its value in the near future. There are other altcoins that will definitely live in the coming years. What is Ethereum supposed to get other than faster transactions and POS? |
|
|
|
too simplistic. The truth is always simple. And the truth is that lefties are liars. If you don't have anything factual, that can be communicated in three sentences or less, that can be checked by anyone with access to google within 30 seconds, it doesn't matter. you get no argument from me re CO2 level. It might be irrelevant, and most likely is. However, the rest of my post shows that we DID change this planet already. This is not a political statement-it is a fact. This is pretty much my position on the matter. It sucks that politics literally ruins any objective discourse on such issues. Science shouldn't be a matter of politics or government, but unfortunately increasingly is, and getting anything funded that doesn't further some moneygrabbing agenda is virtually impossible these days. Nonetheless, there is no denying that we're fucking over wildlife. |
|
|
|
too simplistic. The truth is always simple. And the truth is that lefties are liars. If you don't have anything factual, that can be communicated in three sentences or less, that can be checked by anyone with access to google within 30 seconds, it doesn't matter. Life isn't as simple as checking Google, which you surely understand to be heavily biased for political reasons to begin with. I literally left academia because it wasn't rigorous enough due to the ways that it's funded, and I'm not even talking about the joke that is the social sciences. |
|
|
|
I'd be quite happy with lower temperatures. Winter is more enjoyable with proper powder snow, and summer wouldn't make me stay inside 24/7 if it didn't cause me to sweat all fucking day.
On that note, I've read about an upcoming mini ice age a few times. Is there any recent update on that that confirms or rejects it?
Vast question. - climate is whether over 30 years. So it's too soon to tell. - There was a global warming during the last 100 years of about 0.1°C/10years - No more warming since 1998, once you remove El Nino/LaNina effects (which cancel each other in time) - Sun is probably having a period of low activity, that doesn't change much the energy it sends to us, but less activity (= less spots) means less magnetic field, means more cosmic rays reaching our atmosphere, meaning more seeded clouds, thus more albedo and then cold coming in... but this is still a theory - look here for the latest temps : https://moyhu.blogspot.fr/p/latest-ice-and-temperature-data.html#NCAR- best site ever for these questions : https://wattsupwiththat.com/- last but not least : cold kills; warm weather makes our life easier. Keeping in mind of course that things like math is still a theory. Hypothesis may be a better term. Also also keeping in mind that it's the left that are going on about the weather. All of science and anything empirical is ultimately a hypothesis. No amount confirmations (that turns things into theories and laws in academia) can guarantee with certainty that we've figured something out, rather than just witnessing an infinitely unlikely event. Nonetheless, I wouldn't be surprised in the least if industrialization had an impact on global weather patterns. In chaotic system even the tiniest perturbation can trigger massive macroscopical changes. However, I'm not quite convinced yet about us having any significant impact either for two reasons. Namely, I haven't studied the papers so I can't possibly know if there are any systematic errors, and I see too much bullshit going on in the media to not be heavily sceptical. I do lean towards human emissions of CO2 causing changes in climate, mostly because I've worked with people who study precisely that, but even if that turned out true I wouldn't be all that worried about it. Capitalism will come to the rescue and figure out a way to keep us nice and cozy regardless of weather conditions. With nuclear fusion pretty much around the corner energy won't be a concern and with that sorted out the overall state of the planet should be irrelevant. Things might change drastically (e.g. underground, on- and/or underwater or shielded off cities with indoor farming), but I don't see humans disappearing unless we nuke ourselves to hell or get wiped out by some rogue asteroid. We were burning forests way before we burned coal and oil. In fact, any living creature affects the weather. I understand that at least one american state has legislation regarding cow farts. But more importantly, co2 is not a pollutant. On the contrary, it's plant food. Which is food for everything else. The more co2, the more oxygen, the more life. It might just be a good thing.
I don't deny the possibility of that, since it would make sense. But our ecosystem is way more complex and has more knobs and dials that interact with each other than just CO2 and oxygen. I'm not sure how familiar you are with population models, but there could very well be a point beyond which everything tips and triggers a reaction in the opposite direction. E.g. more CO2 = more life, then at some point there's too much CO2 = less life, be it due to primary (an upper limit on how much can be held or used) or due to side effects (effects of increased CO2 on other parts of the ecosystem) of the increase in CO2 in the atmosphere. Humans can easily die from drinking too much water at once, so "more oxygen" might not be an unequivocally good thing either (too much of it would eventually increase the pressure which can be fatal even without any other effects on the ecosystem). You would have to explain how the proposed hypothesis works. For starters, there isn't enough physical space available to sustain an infinite expansion of trees and whatnot, so eventually there would be surplus of CO2 that could not be turned into further oxygen. And too much CO2 is harmful to humans and animals. If that was not the case however, and oxygen increased indefinitely, pressure would increase, again due to spatial limitations. That would increase the partial pressure of oxygen, which can lead to oxygen poisoning and by extension to death. Of course there's still fucktons of space to go around on earth, but there's definitely a limit beyond which things could turn bad very quickly. And that's just the most apparent potential consequences that too much CO2 or O2 could have. Regardless of whether or not these are accurate and what the quantitative thresholds would look like, there are a lot more intricate effects to take into account in a dynamic system that is as closely interlinked as life on earth. |
|
|
|
I'd be quite happy with lower temperatures. Winter is more enjoyable with proper powder snow, and summer wouldn't make me stay inside 24/7 if it didn't cause me to sweat all fucking day.
On that note, I've read about an upcoming mini ice age a few times. Is there any recent update on that that confirms or rejects it?
Vast question. - climate is whether over 30 years. So it's too soon to tell. - There was a global warming during the last 100 years of about 0.1°C/10years - No more warming since 1998, once you remove El Nino/LaNina effects (which cancel each other in time) - Sun is probably having a period of low activity, that doesn't change much the energy it sends to us, but less activity (= less spots) means less magnetic field, means more cosmic rays reaching our atmosphere, meaning more seeded clouds, thus more albedo and then cold coming in... but this is still a theory - look here for the latest temps : https://moyhu.blogspot.fr/p/latest-ice-and-temperature-data.html#NCAR- best site ever for these questions : https://wattsupwiththat.com/- last but not least : cold kills; warm weather makes our life easier. Keeping in mind of course that things like math is still a theory. Hypothesis may be a better term. Also also keeping in mind that it's the left that are going on about the weather. All of science and anything empirical is ultimately a hypothesis. No amount confirmations (that turns things into theories and laws in academia) can guarantee with certainty that we've figured something out, rather than just witnessing an infinitely unlikely event. Nonetheless, I wouldn't be surprised in the least if industrialization had an impact on global weather patterns. In chaotic system even the tiniest perturbation can trigger massive macroscopical changes. However, I'm not quite convinced yet about us having any significant impact either for two reasons. Namely, I haven't studied the papers so I can't possibly know if there are any systematic errors, and I see too much bullshit going on in the media to not be heavily sceptical. I do lean towards human emissions of CO2 causing changes in climate, mostly because I've worked with people who study precisely that, but even if that turned out true I wouldn't be all that worried about it. Capitalism will come to the rescue and figure out a way to keep us nice and cozy regardless of weather conditions. With nuclear fusion pretty much around the corner energy won't be a concern and with that sorted out the overall state of the planet should be irrelevant. Things might change drastically (e.g. underground, on- and/or underwater or shielded off cities with indoor farming), but I don't see humans disappearing unless we nuke ourselves to hell or get wiped out by some rogue asteroid. We were burning forests way before we burned coal and oil. In fact, any living creature affects the weather. I understand that at least one american state has legislation regarding cow farts. But more importantly, co2 is not a pollutant. On the contrary, it's plant food. Which is food for everything else. The more co2, the more oxygen, the more life. It might just be a good thing.
I don't deny the possibility of that, since it would make sense. But our ecosystem is way more complex and has more knobs and dials that interact with each other than just CO2 and oxygen. I'm not sure how familiar you are with population models, but there could very well be a point beyond which everything tips and triggers a reaction in the opposite direction. E.g. more CO2 = more life, then at some point there's too much CO2 = less life, be it due to primary (an upper limit on how much can be held or used) or due to side effects (effects of increased CO2 on other parts of the ecosystem) of the increase in CO2 in the atmosphere. Humans can easily die from drinking too much water at once, so "more oxygen" might not be an unequivocally good thing either (too much of it would eventually increase the pressure which can be fatal even without any other effects on the ecosystem). |
|
|
|
Sorry Torgue...I disagree. I alluded to this awhile ago. You can feel the difference in market dynamics compared to pre-2017. Where as before we used to see huge volatility in the hourly charts now the price moves are very methodical. Cushioned is the word I think I used. The sure sign of deep pocket money accumulating on low volume imo.
Well I kinda implied that accumulation may be happening on the dl, but that doesn't mean that we're going to hit a new ATH in a month or two like people are expecting. They could accumulate like this for 6-8 months, hell even a year+. And we might see nothing but a sideways movement with a slight upward drift during that whole time. I don't really expect any ATH until mid to late summer. Wouldn't really mind it much later either though. The longer BTC stays low the easier it is to collect more, and with prices heading into the 6 to 7 digits I'd prefer stocking up on more coins than having a larger fiat holding a lot earlier. |
|
|
|
I'd be quite happy with lower temperatures. Winter is more enjoyable with proper powder snow, and summer wouldn't make me stay inside 24/7 if it didn't cause me to sweat all fucking day.
On that note, I've read about an upcoming mini ice age a few times. Is there any recent update on that that confirms or rejects it?
Vast question. - climate is whether over 30 years. So it's too soon to tell. - There was a global warming during the last 100 years of about 0.1°C/10years - No more warming since 1998, once you remove El Nino/LaNina effects (which cancel each other in time) - Sun is probably having a period of low activity, that doesn't change much the energy it sends to us, but less activity (= less spots) means less magnetic field, means more cosmic rays reaching our atmosphere, meaning more seeded clouds, thus more albedo and then cold coming in... but this is still a theory - look here for the latest temps : https://moyhu.blogspot.fr/p/latest-ice-and-temperature-data.html#NCAR- best site ever for these questions : https://wattsupwiththat.com/- last but not least : cold kills; warm weather makes our life easier. Keeping in mind of course that things like math is still a theory. Hypothesis may be a better term. Also also keeping in mind that it's the left that are going on about the weather. All of science and anything empirical is ultimately a hypothesis. No amount confirmations (that turns things into theories and laws in academia) can guarantee with certainty that we've figured something out, rather than just witnessing an infinitely unlikely event. Nonetheless, I wouldn't be surprised in the least if industrialization had an impact on global weather patterns. In chaotic system even the tiniest perturbation can trigger massive macroscopical changes. However, I'm not quite convinced yet about us having any significant impact either for two reasons. Namely, I haven't studied the papers so I can't possibly know if there are any systematic errors, and I see too much bullshit going on in the media to not be heavily sceptical. I do lean towards human emissions of CO2 causing changes in climate, mostly because I've worked with people who study precisely that, but even if that turned out true I wouldn't be all that worried about it. Capitalism will come to the rescue and figure out a way to keep us nice and cozy regardless of weather conditions. With nuclear fusion pretty much around the corner energy won't be a concern and with that sorted out the overall state of the planet should be irrelevant. Things might change drastically (e.g. underground, on- and/or underwater or shielded off cities with indoor farming), but I don't see humans disappearing unless we nuke ourselves to hell or get wiped out by some rogue asteroid. |
|
|
|
Hello guys, I have a friend who told me about BITCOIN MINING. What do you think? Is it worth it ? Buying Hardwares / Mining Rigs and plus the TIME to be consume. I'm not even familiar with it , so I'm probably asking for advice on for those old miners. Electricity here in PH is so expensive. Do you have some tips and tricks? Thanks in advance guys !  If electricity is expensive, don't bother. The lowest electricity rates around the world are around 3 USD cents and less per KWH, so that's your target when performing a cost analysis and will determine your profitability. There's also further discounts for large industry scale operations on the hardware itself. So unless you have very cheap access to electricity you won't be competitive in the long run and will eventually, not immediately, go out of business. Unless you have a lot of Bitcoins already and want to hedge by mining I wouldn't personally bother with it. And even then, you would have to make sure to either have cheap electricity or otherwise find a cheap colocation (which carries some counterparety risks that need to be considered). |
|
|
|
|
You don't know when the Bitfinex/Tether bubble will pop.
If they go insolvent, get hacked, decide to print too many Tethers out of thin air, or do anything else that would tip trust into it over the edge Tether could low all of its volume nearly over night.
If you want to use it make sure not to keep any significant amounts of Tether for prolonged periods of time.
|
|
|
|
|
The ponzi bubble will pop once the "free airdrop" (which is neither free nor an airdrop) is over, possibly a bit earlier or later. Expect some wash trading from the devs to artificially inflate the price so that they can dump their load easier.
|
|
|
|
|
I'd be quite happy with lower temperatures. Winter is more enjoyable with proper powder snow, and summer wouldn't make me stay inside 24/7 if it didn't cause me to sweat all fucking day.
On that note, I've read about an upcoming mini ice age a few times. Is there any recent update on that that confirms or rejects it?
|
|
|
|
Is anyone else just fucking DONE with wintry weather? Can't fucking wait till the sailing season starts.
I actually prefer winter over summer. At some point you just run out of layers of clothes to take off and at that point you're still getting fucked by the sun when going outside. I'm so glad humanity has nearly perfected staying home. The good thing about hot weather is that it encourages ladies and/or gentlemen, depending on your persuasion, to wear less clothing. I was on vacation in South Beach a few weeks ago...hot girls in thongs everywhere.  I live in a small university city, so you can hardly look anywhere without seeing some skin. But I'm not sure it's really worth it given how tedious it is to be outside in such weather. At least grabbing food and groceries is more interesting I guess. |
|
|
|
I’m not scared im here to proof you wrongp
But you don’t understand that if you IQ is so low
You have been in this group for a few weeks to tryna get the price down to buy as cheap as possible probably
You're not proving anything here and the facts are overwhelmingly stacked against you. I would be interested to know if you are the holder of these tokens and if so - how much (understand why you are fighting), and if not - what did you even forget? I don't buy into tokens that seem fishy in any way. And this one did from the very beginning. Prying further made this project appear even more shady, and in the end I was proven right: this is a scam. So no, I do not hold any CL tokens and I've been trying to warn people for a long time. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
