The Supreme Court of the United States disagrees with your statement. They have upheld the constitutionality of the draft many times in the 1900's during each of the major wars the draft was used.  

Under what basis do you believe the draft is not constitutional?

The Democrats appear to believe they will win the 2020 Presidential election, no matter who is nominated (similar to how they thought Clinton would win in 2016, but we know how that turned out). As a result, they are competing with each other to move as far left as they can to appeal to the Democrat base who will donate and vote in larger numbers during the Primaries.

Gabbard is probably too moderate to have a realistic chance of getting the nomination. Her lack of playing the hysteria game on topics Democrat party elders want discussed is making it difficult for her to fundraise.

I cannot see Democrats nominating a candidate with a moderate enough platform that has any realistic chance of not getting blown out in the electoral college, let alone win the presidency. Proposals such as the Green New Deal will flip traditional Democrat strongholds such as the "Rust Belt" into Republican strongholds in 2020, and possibly for decades.

Yes, I think one reason why Trump got elected was because he has been so good at exposing the media bias, and in doing so, he removed much of their credibility in their criticism of him.

I saw that. Zucker getting that award is ridiculous. I am not a fan of Alex Jones and personally recommend people to not listen to him, but Zucker is a large reason why Alex Jones is effectively unable to speak publicly despite having an audience.

---

The tweet was designed to create more media hysteria, IMO, and to highlight the idiocy of The Democrat/MSM claim that the Trump campaign colluded with the Russians. I don't think he has any intention of using the FEC and FCC to investigate SNL.....he is not Obama.

I believe this was only a district court judge that made this ruling, who is not even an appellate judge. Ultimately the US Supreme Court is who can make the final decision on the constitutionality of the draft.

I agree we will probably not see a draft again, because modern wars are fought more efficiently in terms of manpower, and "boots on the ground" than either of the World Wars or Vietnam.

One could even say that Wars are no longer fought with guns and bombs anymore, but rather with economic weapons such as Sanctions, and cyber warfare such as hacking an enemies power grid and military networks. 

If you go to an IRL casino with a Poker room/table, the casino will take some amount per hand, even though the players are all playing against each other, and the casino is not risking their own money.

I applaud the PvP model, and think this kind of betting is more fun than playing vs the house.

I do believe it is appropriate to charge users some fee for using your casino, but this may be much less than what "traditions" bitcoin casinos charge. If you have enough volume, a .1% of 0.01% "edge" might result in you turning a profit.

There is a reason many in this thread have pointed out that relying on donations to fund your business is not realistic. Because this is not a viable business model. The "zero edge" will also make players suspicious.

Good Luck!

If you are offering "0% Fees" how are you planning on making money?

If your casino is offering PvP games, it would make sense to have lower fees than "traditional" bitcoin casinos because players are not playing against you, but some fees would still be appropriate because you are providing a service and venue.

I got a kick out of a couple of Tweets that the US President tweeted earlier this morning and waned to share:

I found it hilarious that he is claiming SNL is colluding with Russia, which is obviously not true. He is clearly making fun of the conspiracy theory being pushed by mainstream media outlets that he and his campaign colluded with Russia to win the 2016 election.

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1107253742271901696
source^

Most frequently, in most forums, mods will give forum members many warnings before handing out bans, especially permanent bans unless they are doing something especially damaging or egregious (such as spreading malware, or unfortunately seems to be a problem here, plagiarism).

You can send him a PM if you have concerns about him using automatic translations with a source that it is against the rules, and if you continue seeing him do this, you can complain about him.

Neither of the cited posts are plagiarism, at least not the portions of which he is talking about those books because he is at least making an attempt to cite the author as the source. If there is another writing not by the author that makes similar comments, it would be plagiarism.

It is possible he took his 10 day ban as a warning to put more effort into his posts.

I don't hate the Browns being favored, in fact, it would be nice for a somewhat local team to win it all for a change. I just think the odds for the Browns is taking too much hype into account.

I think the Browns do have a decent chance to win it all, but not enough to make them the favorite. KC and the Rams IMO were an anomaly last year, KC probably won't make the AFC championship and the Rams may not make the playoffs without Gurley. The Pats will continue being the Pats.

I would refer you to Merriam Webster:
Nothing in any of the posts cited in the OP are claiming to be anything other than the authors original words. No additional rules are necessary.

You guys are listing the Cleveland Browns as favorites to win the AFC Championship and the Super Bowl. Do you guys really think trading for OBJ is going to have that big of an impact on their play?

Who is your odds provider?

Your exchange appears to work nearly identically to how ShapeShift used to work until they started requiring users to create an account and complete KYC to use their services.

The lack of storing customer funds makes using your service somewhat more safe than other exchanges, although the costs, including the bid/ask spread is much higher than other major exchanges. If transaction fees ever go back to late 2017 levels, using your service will become even more expensive.

Obviously, sending money to your exchange will involve trusting that you will not take their money and run.

The attacker(s) will be prosecuted, as they should be because this attack is wrong on many levels. This is very common for anti-Muslim attackers in the western world.

In the middle east, Christian killings based on religion is common in many areas, and is sometimes sanctioned by the state. These killings, when not sanctioned by the state are often not prosecuted/punished.

When there is a mass shooting in the States, it is frequently advocated that stricter gun laws are necessary. The gun laws are already very strict in New Zealand, including the requirement to hold a license to be in possession of a gun, Gun sellers must be licensed, and background checks are mandatory for everyone applying for a license (you must pass a background check before the first time you buy a gun), and licenses can be revoked easily by the police.

Of course they know what they are doing is against the rules, that is why they are taking the extra step of translating the content before plagiarizing it. If they didn't know what they are doing is against the rules, they would post the content in its original published language.

You are mistaken. The relevant portion of the definition of plagiarism is passing someone else's writing off as your own. These people are not passing off this writing as being published by someone else, they are passing it off as if they wrote it themselves. There needs to be something within the post disclosing it is not original content, or that it is translated content.

It is not new that people are using google translate to post in sections of languages they cannot speak/read/write, this happens frequently in forums with communities spanning multiple countries, but it is new for someone to copy content that is not their own and pass it off as their own after translating it.

If they had to find content related to a specific post, they might as well write content themselves. This is the point. This kind of rule would also make threads more interesting and less hard to read because there would be fewer posts that add zero to the conversation.
Once they are banned, any signature they had is removed. I can only speculate as to what he is doing. Some of these people might be participating in FaceBook, Instagram and whatnot advertising campaigns, while hoping to rank up with plagiarized posts in order to eventually participate in a signature campaign or otherwise earn additional money with the higher rank.

Two of those posts are merited by foserfox (the third is not viewable to me). The administration should look into if foserfox is also any of those three people, and ban him if so. I would be surprised if the evidence does not show they are not all the same.

I don't think playing "whack-a-mole" is the best way to deal with the plagiarism problem, I think the incentives to plagiarize should be removed, or the risks of plagiarizing increased, or a combination of the two.

One solution might be to require people pay a small fee for one, or a combination of the below:

• Rank up above "newbie" status
• To have any kind of signature
• To be eligible to receive merit
• To post outside of certain sections

I also looked at a few random pages of the two threads I can see, and it looks like there is little discussion among the thread participants in both of those threads, which helps allow plagiarized content to not stand out as much (it would be difficult to plagiarize content that is part of a conversation). A solution might be to disallow/lock threads in which it is apparent there is not much conversation between thread participants.

That guy is banned.

When you see that kind of thread, you can really just report it to the moderators and it will be taken care of.

Some of the unspent outputs represent coins held in cold storage by exchanges, and other crypto businesses ("Websites").

When a Website receives a withdrawal request, they will first check if their hot wallet can process the request, and if so, will process the withdrawal via the hot wallet. This is regardless of if the customer has had coins on the Website for a day, a month or a year, or longer. Being that there are risks involved anytime cold storage is accessed, many Websites will have ample coins in their hot wallets so that it is not necessary to access their cold storage very frequently.

The above means that the UTXO that are "old" will be artificially high.

The LN protocol (and similar protocols) will also cause many UTXOs to "age" because LN channels do not ever need to close, and may stay open for years at a time, even if coins move between the parties many times.

It might be a good idea to only have a small percentage of tweets that are advertising something. I suspect most people who participate in ICO twitter campaigns have followers who mostly are other spammers and this kind of advertising isn't very effective.

Anyone who is tweeting something they are compensated for, should either used the #ad hashtag, or otherwise indicate there is a sponsorship. I see this almost never happen.

The mining the fictional characters did in the The Big Bang Theory episode, was done on a regular laptop computer (using a laptop to mine can actually be harmful to the internal components), and used a negligible amount of electricity, potentially the same amount as would otherwise have been consumed (some seti contributors temporarily stopped giving their resources to the SETI at home program and used their computer's resources to mine). The value of the mined coins, at the time they were mined were likely not even enough to to pay for the characters' time to setup the mining program.

In Bitcoin's early days, mining was profitable because technology to create more efficient ASIC chips quickly advanced, and the slow rate of filling orders for ASICs. In many cases, an ASIC manufacturer would have designed a new ASIC miner, offer it for sale at a price at which the buyer would earn the entire purchase price back within a week, but by the time it is delivered, difficulty went up by so much that profitability would take months after factoring in the purchase price.

The price of BTC was going up so quickly in its early days that it was often more profitable to purchase BTC than it was to purchase a miner because the miner would not generate as much BTC as you could have purchased when you paid for the miner.