Democrats also demand loyalty, but the difference between Trump and Obama is that Obama was able to get loyalty from his staff, while Trumps staff has learned that it is more profitable to turn into “anti-Trump” even if this means fabricating things (Bolton).

Look at former AG Holder who describes his role as being Obama’s “wing man”. Look at how infrequently the liberal SC justices vote differently from the rest, look at how liberal Senators and congresspeople vote, they almost always vote as a unanimous block. Look at how the left wing MSM describes various current events on the sane day, they use the same talking points.   

The captcha was added in August 2017, while the accounts you cited were created on October 21, 2015 and the following day. I think my above explication would still apply.

I don't believe that google reCaptcha can be bypassed via the use of a machine learning model (or ensemble of models). There may be some services that employ people from third world countries to solve reCaptcha's for next to nothing, but this is a cost.

One other solution might be to put people in a modified newbie jail after say 7 posts unless they have been whitelisted. The mods (and maybe also merit sources, and maybe others) would review all newbie posts, and whitelist the account the post makes a sufficiently good post. Ideally, most new users would make posts at a slow enough pace (and mods will review posts quickly enough) so that users who are not posting junk will be able to make 8 posts without ever being in newbie jail. Those in modified newbie jail could buy a premium account (maybe at a cost that is less than a Copper Membership), or wait to get whitelisted (which may require they make additional posts in a subset of subs).

The captcha will probably prevent this many accounts from being created that quickly, especially if you include the time required to login for the first tine.

A solution to many junk/spam accounts might be to require a captcha for some of the first x posts at random unless the account is whitelisted.

I am also not sure what type of accounts you are concerned about. If someone is creating boatloads of accounts to farm/spam low quality posts with, they would still need to wait 6 minutes between posts initially.

Trump is trying to make it as difficult politically as possible for states to allow widespread mail in voting, and is setting up for any lawsuit about the election after widespread voter fraud by democrats.

I have lived in several different locations throughout my life, and I have always received mail addressed to multiple prior what I assume are residences. A few weeks ago I also received a bill in the mail from over a year ago that was addressed to an old address of mine and was marked return to sender. I can only imagine the accuracy of voter registration roles with regards to voter addresses, but my guess is that it is not as high as it should be and is certainly well above the margin of victory that most candidates get.

Bitcointalk profile link: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2561166
Current amount of posts (including this one): 1311
Amount of merit EARNED in the last 120 days: 100+
SegWit BTC Address for Payouts: bc1qtkny50veyhllexl0ux2hem6shjs7mktujvkyp3

The elections are run by the states. The president has nothing to do with running the election.

I don't think it is necessary to use a particular format when reporting a post that deserves merit, just post a link to the post and state why you believe the post deserves merit.

I understand that many merit sources monitor the thread and will give merit to deserving posts as reported.

The medium article you cited is short on citations, however, this is one very good example as to why rash decisions or actions are wrong before all the facts are available. It is also why the mayors and governors allowing the lawlessness to continue should be condemned in the strongest way possible.

I would be willing to bet the officers will be found not guilty because of who is prosecuting the case, Keith Ellison. This is someone who allegedly beat his girlfriend, and there is evidence to support this. I also believe him to be corrupt, and would not be surprised if he threw the case for political benefit.

If Floyd has > the OD dose of multiple drugs when he died, I would have serious doubt as to how much Chauvin's actions contributed to Floyd's death. I also have concerns about overcharging the officers, for political purposes.

I read your paper, and I don't think it would eliminate mining pools, but it probably would change how mining pools operate. A mining pool may have some miners calculate the first phase of the PoW, send the result to the mining pool, which in turn sends the result to other miners, who attempt to calculate the second phase of the PoW, and once solved will send the solved calculate back to the pool. Or individual miners calculate both phases of the PoW, sends the solution to the pool, which distributes the mining rewards to each miner.

I would also firmly reject the notion that one individual should be the only person who has contributed to finding a block. In the current implementation of bitcoin, there are 144 blocks found per day, and by some estimates, there are 400k daily users of bitcoin. This is far too few people controlling the confirmation of transactions for many people.

I don’t disagree with you, but the actions of the mob are unacceptable. Period.

I have seen variations of this BLM propaganda recently, and it is very misleading.

The propaganda you posted relies on the assumption that racist police are killing black people all the time, and this is simply not true. When controlling for the number of arrests, black people are killed at a far lower rate than white people are by police. Looking at interracial murder rates, a white person is far more likely to be killed by a black person than vice versa.

This is wrong. The phrase "BLM" implies that Black lives matter more. In a country of 300 million people, there are plenty of non-black people who are killed under bad circumstances, and none of the BLM activisists racists even bat an eye.

I would suspect that any DOJ lawsuit against Bolton would be dropped if Biden were to win. Likewise for any criminal charges.

I suspect the Democrats had ~all of the evidence and testimony ahead of time before they started the impeachment inquiry. This is based on Mr. Vinmen meeting with Shift's office before testifying, Pelosi saying publicly that she will not support impeachment without bipartisan support ~two weeks before announcing the impeachment inquiry, and the rules that heavily favored Democrats. This would not be the case with a Bolton impeachment, Bolton would have credibility issues, and there is the risk that Bolton could recant his testimony in the middle of a trial or inquiry, which might lead to a strong bipartisan vote against impeachment, or congress voting to impeach based on literally zero evidence. I think Democrats voting to impeach is just too risky for Democrats.

Trump is also very good at 4-D chess. When Bolton tweeted about being locked out of his Twitter account after impeachment, I had suspected at the time it was a ploy to get Democrats to call Bolton to testify.

I would say a 2nd Trump term would have a decent chance of an armed conflict with China, while a Biden administration would probably mean going back to allowing China to steal US IP, and possibly China exporting computer HW to the US in masse, which would only lead to spying on the US. Being a warmonger, Bolton should favor the former.

Do you think this possibly has something to do with him hoping to sell more copies of his new book? Do you think this possibly has something to do with if he can present himself as a political enemy of Trump, it will be politically difficult to prosecute Bolton for disseminating classified information via the publishing of his book?

I have seen a number of high profile Republicans become "never Trump Republicans" solely business/income purposes (as far as I can tell). The "mooch" is another that comes to mind.

There is a major difference between tearing down a statue of someone who is currently imposing tyranny (or was just forcibly stopped from continuing doing so) upon a group of people, and a statute of a historical figure. The former is a sign that the tyrant's reign has stopped, and the former is destroying history. I actually suspect the intention of tearing down historical statues is going to lead to eventually (not long from now) rewriting history.
The obvious solution would be to increase charter schools in poor areas.

Ineffective public schools have lead to horribly math and reading proficiency scores in poor areas of the country. Charter schools have consistently done a better job at educating students. In New York City, there were 28 classes in which charter schools shared buildings with public schools. Roughly 10% of public school students were proficient on statewide tests, while between 81 and 100% of students at charter schools received proficient scores on the same tests.

It would be difficult to do both. It would probably be a good idea to rethink the approach to the drug war. Leniency should be given to very low-level offenders first several offenses, but those who sell drugs should be punished. Drug dealers profit off of people getting addicted to the drugs they are selling, which causes real harm to both their customers and society as a whole. Due to the high-profit margins from selling drugs, drug dealers can afford to extend high-risk credit to their buyers and offer deep discounts to those who cannot afford to pay the full price, which makes it difficult to break addictions.

Wait, your side is perpetuating political violence (which right now would be the most likely reason for the election to be delayed), and you are hoping to profit from it? That doesn't sound fair.

I also don't see how you can unilaterally change the terms:

It is the prosecutor who brings cases before grand juries. It is also very easy to get a grand jury to hand down an indictment.

Even ignoring the above, her fingerprints being on the case are damaging to her politically. This is especially true for the base of the voters on the left.

Klobuchar was out not long after Floyd was killed. Specifically when it was revealed that she declined to prosecute the dirty cop who killed Floyd. If she has been previously selected, she probably would have been replaced.

I think it is pretty disgusting to be saying she is dropping out for identity politics.

In early 2019, there was a Buzzfeed article that was quickly refuted by all possible sources to the article, and days later, they announced layoffs. My conclusion at the time was that a reporter had been tipped off about the layoffs ahead of time and was trying to either stop the layoffs or to save his own job via generating extra clicks on what can be described as a made-up story. This is an extreme example, but there are many other examples of stories that have proven to be false, and others that are so outrageous that they are not fit to get published in a tabloid, yet somehow make their way into major newspapers. Do you seriously think the President of the United States, who is worth $11 billion really eats big macs in bed?

As with any other outrageous claim, I would say that Bolten needs to provide proof of shut up. Similarly, as with other outrageous claims about Trump, many on the left likely believes the claim before hearing about them.

As a FYI, books don't need to be published to get reviewed. The reporting that has been done was done specifically because the media was given copies of the book before it was available to the public.

Trump looked the other way with Kim in an effort to prevent possible nuclear war. This is similar to the tradeoffs made when deciding to drop nukes on Japon during WW2.

All foreign policy decisions are ultimately political. Presidents have campaigned over the years on being tough on foreign adversaries, and on ending wars. Presidents need congress to declare war and needs the consent of the Senate to ratify any peace treaty to end a war, both of which are political entities.

I created a thread at the time those documents were published. Yes, China is trying to "re-educate" Muslims, but who knows what else they are doing while they are in the concentration camps.

This is not a valid assumption. In bitcoin's early days, Satoshi likely controlled nearly all of bitcoin's mining. As Satoshi's dominance waned, there were likely others who controlled large percentages of total bitcoin mining. This was when there was virtually zero commerce on the blockchain, so this really did not matter. There were probably a small number of entities that controlled large percentages of the total blocks mined when GPU started to be used for mining, and in the early ASIC days.

All that "unknown" means is that your source does not know who was mining the blocks during that time period. It could be a single entity mining all the "unknown" blocks, it could be a different entity for each "unknown" block mined, or it could be (most likely) something in between.