Remember that Craig Wright is a person who has repeatedly tried to fool the world into believing he is the actual Satoshi. ~
I don't think binging up Wright is even relevant in this context and I doubt he would use Twitter to run his scam through an account called Satoshi. Twitter is too centralized for him to do this, specially since Musk (as the owner of Twitter) could easily make a statement saying "this account has changed hands/was sold". That would shut down his claim very quickly. This is exactly what happened. This images from X should put paid to this confusion. Yet we're still here talking about it |
|
|
|
|
Remember that Craig Wright is a person who has repeatedly tried to fool the world into believing he is the actual Satoshi. Due to the nuance related to crypto sometimes people not very familiar with Bitcoin's history tend to believe him. But he has never provided any material proof that he actually is Satoshi.
On the other hand he has leveraged his claim that he is Satoshi to try and gather fame and money through various schemes. One being him creating a fork of bitcoin. And other attempts to pressure companies and other parties to provide him access to coins he doesn't own because as he says, he is Satoshi. It's a whole lot of nonsense.
|
|
|
|
Isn't it a bit ridiculous that the EU is supposedly an Ally of Armenia and even has sent strongly worded warnings to Azeri leadership over their advances in Nagorno Karabakh, but yet still buy azeri gas? The hypocrisy of the EU goes much further though. Just a short time after the 2020 Azerbaijan - Armenia war ended, the TANAP pipeline was opened, passing just a few miles off Nagorno Karabakh borders. Image of pipelines: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/0a/TAP_TANAP_SCP_Schah_Denis.pngSo as much as the EU would like to pretend to care about human life, as much as they'd like to pretend to be against conflict... The EU is directly responsible for funding Azerbaijan's participation in this bloody conflict. If this teaches is anything, is that the powers that be will never care about the human factor. All that matters is money and conserving the status quo. Just to follow NATO's direction of sanctions to Russia the EU directly funded another war which resulted in the displacement of people. |
|
|
|
As a parent mate, we need to be more watchful on our kids and what I see on your insights that's the best mindset to consider. Because most people these days doesn't value this kind of parenting, they'll making their kids more liberated without knowing the bad effects on their future lives. Gambling is good when times of winning entertainment but it's a stressful thing once you're drowned in debt so it's very important that our kids will be educated with positive and bad sides of it.
The idea of young people being exposed to vices in order for the to understand better isn't something new. It's been around for ages. But gambling online is an incredible nuance. Many parents didn't even have the chance to experience it to know what it's like. And it's often hard to make the distinction between game and gambling. Oftentimes the casinos make it deliberately ambiguous. And it's also oftentimes very hard for parents to spot the difference unless they're actively involved. I think bitcoin has some legitimate market uses even for children. But if giving bitcoin to a child is risking making them addicted to gambling then it's also a bad look for the currency itself. |
|
|
|
Today I watched a very convincing video on how the following years are crucial for the future of humanity. Scientists agree that for humanity to survive global warming without catastrophic consequences on a global level, then global warming should be limited between 1.5 to 2 degrees Celsius. Current models show that any plan to reach this goal according to current trends should be very rapid. Fossil fuels on the majority of factories and cars should be replaced within the following four years or the damage will be irreversible and global. The U.S. has the technology to do it, it's the world's biggest economy. It's time to decarbonize and lead the world once again. Are you going to stand by watching idly? I say us bitcoiners should take a stance. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QfAXbGInwno |
|
|
|
I think this is true, our environment changes dramatically, but I'm still not sure to what degree it's anthropogenic and how much of it is naturally occuring process. The best stance about the issue I've stumbled upon was given by Jordan B Peterson: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y564PsKvNZsHonestly Peterson these days has a position on everything. Sometimes he should accept that things are beyond his area of expertise. |
|
|
|
This is a risk for all parents, we can't blame the gambling site or all platform who related to gambling. This is because the technology has been changing everyday, indeed in one side the development of the technology is really help for us. We can do anything with an easy way because the technology has helped us. But in another side, there is a bad affect that will arise because the development of technology. Like gambling and I just think that playing games (PUBG, Fourtnite and etc) are also bad for the children. They will be addicted in it, remember all the addicted thing is wrong right? So, this is about how parents take care and educate their children, if they do well the children will never fall to the bad thing and it is otherwise.
Gambling sites in my opinion can perfectly well be held liable for targeting an underage demographic knowingly. Don't get me wrong, I do still believe that sites for gambling on video games and betting eSports should exist. They have a right to do so and if governments don't want to allow them there's still bitcoin to act as an alternative. But the issue comes when legislators see young people excessively suing these sites. These stories can easily reach the ears of those in power, and their 'think of the kids' mindset could effect the entire industry if new regulations are brought forth. Such swift action against gambling platforms was moved by a boom that had many youtubers advertising gambling with CSGO skins for instance. It was obvious that these youtubers had a very young audience so the targeting of that audience couldn't have been but deliberate. Long story short in my opinion, best for eSport gambling sites to stay a bit under the radar, at least for the time being. That's for the sake of the entire industry, because even a few sites after quick profit could spoil the bunch. |
|
|
|
What's your proposed plan SuchMoon? Single Payer? Medicare for All? Government Option? etc?
Honestly I have no idea what Medicare for all actually is, because there have been too many different ideas under that name. Aside from that, any option that relies on people purchasing insurance (I guess that's what government option would be) is doomed. It needs to be a tax, it needs to replace all that insurance garbage that wastes 20-30% of our healthcare spending on beaurocracy, and it needs to cover absolutely everyone with no exceptions. Having small copays is ok if it can prevent wasteful use of healthcare resources but beyond that money should not enter healthcare decisions. And of course whatever entity would be managing this, it should be able to negotiate pricing with private providers and vendors unlike the current restrictions on Medicare/Medicaid where the government is paying some average market price or some shit like that... totally backwards, an incentive for drug companies etc to jack up their "market" prices. You make some good points, but universal healthcare under a single payer system isn't a backwards system. It's proven to work in most EU countries. But it's exactly due to the points that you bring up that many supporters of this system are absolutists. You either go all the way with how you structure the system, or you risk your state involvement becoming corporate welfare ending up in for profit "healthcare providers". |
|
|
|
The ancient Chinese had the right idea - doctors were paid for the healthy people on their books, and if one became ill, then they lost the money for him. Modern doctors are paid to make people ill, and thus increase their work load.
Surprisingly, that's close to a public system. Everyone pays the same amount every month, regardless of health status, and in the end the economy of scale takes care of many things. Increased bargaining rights put pharmaceutical corporations in their place. They'd rather give a good price than lose a market of millions. Countries can use the patent policies in their own benefit too. Even the libertarian party has this position acknowledging collective bargaining. |
|
|
|
The U.S. has become the biggest incubator for the virus as a single country. Even countries with much larger populations have a hard time surpassing it. Oddly enough the only "competitors" are Brazil and India, who are also ruled by extreme right wing presidents friendly to trump.  The difference in these countries is that they both had some form of socialized healthcare provided. The US right now is paying a lot of money to private and for profit hospitals to keep its population alive. Yet it's not doing all that well. The country already hit 200k deaths, so much for saving the economy when a 9/11 happens in deaths every few days. And it also turns out that a health system built for profit wouldn't do much to save your country even if shit hit the fan. I didn't hear of one private hospital denying government cash to treat patients during this time. And what's funnier is that Trump even took a very socialist approach to providing healthcare for coronavirus patients. Basically cut a black check to whoever gets the virus and let the taxpayers worry about it int he next administration. I think that by this point even republican officials know that private healthcare makes little sense. The state pays more, people get the same or worse services, have a reduced real income as a direct effect due to how expensive and variable costs are and the system is basically never designed to handle crises. Meanwhile EU countries have the same wait times for hospitals, same wait times, better survival rates and costs are cut down very dramatically. The benefits of collective bargaining and unionizing shine in their full glory for health and medicine. Now the biggest Grassroots campaign for the presidential race (Bernie Sanders) was talking about a fully socialized health care system. Bernie won't run again, and Biden sure as hell isn't for a fully socialized health system, but he also adopted many measures leaning more to the social side for health care. And with all the suffering Americans had to go through thanks to Trump's gross mishandling of the pandemic, it's no wonder that all nationwide polls give Biden a steady lead. If one thing changes in this election, it'll be how Americans perceive health. More people are now open to a more social system. By the next administration after this election, who knows, people might demand to make it fully socialized too. |
|
|
|
Nobody here allows kids to gamble. It's the kids' decision to do that and none can stop them taking into account their stubborn nature. Control is in the hands of parents and so, they can decide where to stop their kids from entering. If parents are caring and they do have a watch on their kids, it is not possible for such kids to give any time to gambling. Yes, eSports does have underaged kids playing games like CS:GO, DOTA2 and the craze that's immensely rising these days is for PUBG. Speaking very frankly, I never played PUBG and I think I'll not play that game till my last breath. It is better to stop kids from playing these games so to give their valuable time in nurturing themselves through education and learning.
Indeed. No parents would allow their children to gamble because no parent would let their child to have a bad future or make them addicted in gambling, that is why it is a parents fault if they are irresponsible for letting their child gamble or any bad habit. But I don't think games like CS:Go, DOTA2, LOL, and other violent games would result a bad habit to an underaged child, as long their parents would limit them from using or playing these computer games. So they could not forget their studies and social life. I agree, no parent would allow their children to gamble. But that would be a different conversation when we are talking about the parents not knowing their children they're gambling. There are a lot of children that are addicted to these games, and their parents wouldn't know most of them and they are even letting their children buy these loot boxes thatmaight make them want gambling more. It's true that loot boxes are currently viewed as a gateway to addiction and compulsive gambling. Many countries have banned them or are considering banning them. If there's a second wave of gambling among kids, even outside of games. Regulations might not be as relaxed this time. I'd argue that certain gambling sites catering to gamers are even more accessible nowdays than what microtransactions in games used to be like for. Back in the day you had to buy prepaid balance cards for games. Nowdays you can just deposit on gambling sites via debit card in seconds, and it's the same with crypto sites, they just integrate a payment processor that accepts cards. |
|
|
|
|
Obviously it's quite unacceptable for a scientist to not publish the data. As is the case with all the YouTube "scholars" that parrot conspiracy theories that global warming is a hoax etc. Always without citing credible sources and without being lead to this conclusion based on acceptable evidence.
|
|
|
|
conclusions are worthless
And why exactly is that? This is the core of my question. Hypothetically speaking, if a 100% neutral and insensitive AI was doing all the data collection, the would have been very much the same. Yet you seem to disregard any and all proof of man made global warming for political reasons(?) because according to supporters of such theories scientists are politicized/controlled yadda yadda and therefore should not be trusted for their conclusion... So I'm just asking, who is to be trusted for stating the objective truth in that case? The outliers go against the overwhelming majority you might say. But are they really more credible than the entire scientific consensus? |
|
|
|
Heya OP, as you might be aware, as per the rules of this board invites can be sold under certain restrictions: Selling invites is allowed, but there are some restrictions in order to prevent people from selling accounts and invites obtained through hacking. In order to sell invites or accounts to invite-only sites, you must:
- Have some history here, with more history being required for trades of invites/accounts in bulk. Or,
- Have substantial history on reputable invite trading forums such as torrentinvites.org which prohibit selling hacked accounts. Or,
- Be vouched for by someone from one of the above two categories.
I could vouch for this service of yours if you'd like. Let me know if interested. |
|
|
|
|
So why isn't the overwhelming evidence published by established academics and institutions fit for your standards to confirm climate change is real and man made?
|
|
|
|
|
Currently the U.S. is too distopian with its wealth inequality. The less fortunate, those born with disabilities or in an impoverished or torn apart family have very little chance to rise out of poverty and live a comfortable life. Basic amends like water are too expensive and even that alone can put someone in debt. Property taxes put a burden on poorer families even if they have zero income in most cases. Health care and medical expenses are the worst in the whole world. And moreover, the only credit line poor people can have is predatory loans. The U.S. has huge wealth inequality, with a lot of money accumulation at the very top, while big parts of the population suffer from a housing and health crisis.
Now even republican leaders are starting to notice the need for welfare. Past the failure of Trump's "corporate welfare" measures, even he himself enacted regulations on that spectrum, allowing the national debt to go way up. U.S. too, one of the last bastions among countries actively avoiding social policies, is also going down the one way road of socialized programs. Even they are realizing that this is the only way to level the playing field and help the vast majority of the population benefit.
|
|
|
|
No parents would allow their children to gamble because no parent would let their child to have a bad future or make them addicted in gambling, that is why it is a parents fault if they are irresponsible for letting their child gamble or any bad habit.
there are parents that are irresponsbile but there are kids that dont have an interest on gambling or computer games , these parent are lucky and they dont judge but others . there are also parents that are responsible but thier kids are uncontrollable and will still make a way to gamble . these parent are also falsely being judge by others . But I don't think games like CS:Go, DOTA2, LOL, and other violent games would result a bad habit to an underaged child, as long their parents would limit them from using or playing these computer games. So they could not forget their studies and social life.
if its a violent game , it can affect the childs attitude . this is the reason why theres a number or age recomendation on every game title . we can allow our kids as long as the games are kid friendly too Actually, it hasn't been proven that violent video games lead to violence. This has actually been a notion pushed by conservatives and Christian lobbyists for some reason. This is the reason that age ratings on video games can be restrictive. Lobbyists being successful doesn't also mean that what they claim is true. In terms of gambling though, it's not always as apparent to parents what the kids are doing. Most websites that allow underage persons in also take care of their payment methods being more covert. For example, when gambling was allowed with CSGO skins, parents would have had no idea their kids were gambling. It's just not visible in their receipts. All they would see was Valve software. Then the skins would be transfered to some shady unregulated websites with no reputation. In this case, if regulation is required to be more effective, it'd need more than a simple rating but enactment of more preventative measures. That's why I'm saying that if regulators start seeing this as a problem then all sites might start having problems. |
|
|
|
|
Crypto, as with many industries, requires some prerequisites if you're after making money with it. Since it's involving online and market activity, on occasion luck can be a factor to account for on some cases, although that can't be reliable. Expertise is what's important. If someone can develop a skill related to crypto, then it's much easier to earn an income through the space. This is valid for any field really, but since the question is about crypto, then I'd say that it applies doubly here. Wanna earn coins? Know more about coins. Learn skills that tie in well with the space and provide services to related projects. Sometimes it's really a time investment other than initial capital. Such investment can also pay well in the long run if you play your cards right.
|
|
|
|
|
Since it's all in a DB, it would be possible to associate a user with all of the addresses they've posted, no? I see the opposite being available and I can't help but think of also searching by user.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
