"A government serves its people and voting in politics matters."

That's not how the death penalty works. If anything, threatening with a death penalty will just cause rapists to kill their rape victims to make sure that they are never caught. And then there's this class of militant feminists that would abuse the hell out of such a law.

Probably why they're trying to switch over to renewables. At least they understand their problem when it comes to Economics, even if they don't seem to care about their cultural issues.

I believe it does. If I recall correctly Asia and Europe were rolling out together in Q1 (before the Money 20/20 event).

There were very obvious red flags about this project that made it a 99% chance of scam and 1% chance of completely incompetent kids riding the crypto hype. I don't want to give out the exact details at this point since this project evaporated anyways and I don't want to give hints to future scammers on how to refine their tactics.

Sorry for your loss.
In the future I'd recommend reading the Whitepaper carefully and looking for how many problems and solutions it addresses rather than spamming buzzwords with no content. Learn to do this now and you'll be happy with your performance in the future.

The number of profitable ICOs will decrease as the months and years go by since the market will mature. The only question that should be of relevance to any serious investor is whether or not they can mature faster than the rest of the market.

From what I've gathered, Lancer would replace Linker as soon as volume picks up on ED. In either case, it shouldn't be a problem because Linker is dead. Their website is stuck on "1st KYC: 12/29 ~ 1/21 (In Progress)", which should've been completed around a month ago. So on any exchange that does manual listings Lancer will be getting the LNC ticker, and on ED it will get LNC instead of LNC1 once volume gets higher than that of Linker (which shouldn't take long).

We technically have enough food for the entire planet, it just doesn't get to certain places. And in my opinion it shouldn't (for free). If we see hundreds of millions of people dying in our lifetime it will most likely be in places like Africa, since they're still playing tribal games in their most primitive form instead of focusing on progress. Don't really see billions vanishing though.

I have this eerie feeling that such measures will not lead to the fall of the likes of XRP and ETH. People don't seem to care, or be too ignorant to understand the implications.

I've been on and off this forum for quite a bit longer than that, but never really stepped into it because it was too fringe for my situation.

A lot has changed though, and I've ended up going balls deep with my student loan and scholarship when it was bottoming out, since I've figured I'd have plenty of time to cover my losses anyways and knew that I could easily score a 6 figure job after graduation thanks to busting my ass at university.

Let's just say that the aspiration has changed to a B rather than an M as denominated in USD. I'm not quite sure if a million Bitcoins will be doable since I expect those to be worth hundreds of billions to just over a trillion at some point, and I'm not sure how much I'll care about collecting money just for the sake of collecting it. I'd need to thoroughly enjoy running ventures of my own as well as investing in the type of research that nobody wants to throw money at because of a lack of predictable profits (the kind of shit that Musk does for example, I fucking love insane people - the good kind of insane).

But for now I'm trying to make sure that I won't have to take up a dayjob at any point in my life while simultaneously not having to worry about my spending habbits (which are still extremely frugal beyond the occasional splurge on a good Scotch or food).

It might be worth noting that I've been checking out equity markets since my high school days because I just couldn't see myself working into my 60s. I've also used to do statistical analysis in MMORPG markets before I even knew what statistics were (using pen&paper and excel) and tried to estimate other aspects of the game quantitatively to increase my own performace. So I guess I've been pretty much predisposed to end up in Bitcoin at one point or another anyways.

To be precise, Sia and SONM are decentralized storage and computing respectively. Cloud storage/computing are centralized entities providing their resources.

Back to sub 10k. Time to buy silver?

Nice in theory, not happening in practice. Who would they forfeit their rights anyways? That sounds like it would create a whole lot of other problems.

You're making literally no sense and keep acting like a cornered animal.

Criminalizing drugs leads to all of the demand for illicit substances to shift into unregulated black markets. As the global demand exceeds $500 Billion USD yearly there's an inherent incentive for organized crime and industry scale drug trafficking organizations. These go hand in hand with extortion and gun violence (even towards innocent relatives of drug addicts or dealers) as well as use of toxic (potentially deadly) substances to spike drugs with to increase profitability.

Legalizing and regulating drugs would increase purity and thus lower the risks of consumption for ever user. It would also shrink the potential black market to a point where gun crime would no longer be economically viable. Would some kids still find ways to access drugs? Obviously. That will never change and that should not matter to regulators. Appeal to emotion is no more than a dishonest strategy employed to use retards like yourself in the human chess game that is politics. Fact is, even the kids that would still seek out drugs (and find them) if they were legalized would have a substantially lower risk of getting killed or extorted by a dealer on top of being much less likely to gain impure substances that carry additional and unpredictable risks.

If you actually read my post you'd have the answers to your questions. Legalized drugs = better than unlegalized drugs for the exact reasons I've outlined already. I also haven't stated that "one problem = one solution" in any way, I'm talking about overall effects here, which you clearly are not competent enough to grasp despite me formulating them out for you.

You're welcome! If there's anything else that you would like to know shoot away and I'll try to respond.


Thank you for your kind words!

I don't think it's being fair to Charles Manson to draw that comparison.


It's not really a relevant metric, especially if you consider the overwhelming quantity of altcoins in circulation.

I used to think that while growing up. But as I've grown older and gotten into contact with a lot of different people from all branches of life (including Professors) I've come to realize that people in general just tend to be stupid (which wouldn't be a problem if they were aware of their shortcomings and saw them as opportunities to grow).

It seems like an extension of the education system to me, which drills obedience and repetition of blund and meaningless tasks. It also (at the very least implicitly) insists that there is only one right and a lot of wrong ways to go about things and it punishes people for not going the predefined "correct" path to a solution. This appears to creep into the general mentality of humans and seems to trigger extreme levels of caution and appeal to authority, both of which drastically stunt growth in every sense of the word (intellectual, emotional, spiritual).

If drugs were legal the black market value of drugs would evaporate to virtually nothing, since adults would be able to freely access their recreational substance of choice. With little to no profits there would be no incentive for organized and industrial scale drug crime.

So if you believe that children, and humans in general, would be safer with illegal drugs you understand neither how drugs function, nor basic Economics.

Psychological round number nonsense.

Rewinding on those things was such a nuisance.