~
Yes we should get more and more people into becoming entrepreneurs -- but not everyone can be the boss.
I think it's not only about your abilities, but also about your initial capital. The most party of those "self made entrepreneurs" were millionaires from the very beginning. Reading stories of their lives you can see that they are almost never successful with their first project. Mostly it goes like this. They start a company, lose $1 million, start another one and lose another million and so on. Then, after several attempts, they eventually succeed. Most of us simply can't afford this kind of entrepreneurship, and that's why I think that working for a good paying company is much better than starting your own business. Could be true. But I think a large amount of the stories that we hear about, such as Steve Jobs starting apple from his garage or Zuckerberg starting facebook as a private media venture at Harvard (I think) These are smart people that were going to do well regardless of their company. They had the brains to be able to do well, they just took it to the next level with owning a large amount of shares of a company that 'took off' |
|
|
|
|
But lets be real : This sort of thing is not for everyone. Plus, when you're saying that the reason that the vast majority of people become uber wealthy is due to the fact that they've started their own companies -- that's true, but it doesn't look at everything.
Do you know the amount of people who try to start their own company and fail and lose their savings, their homes, their retirements, and so on and so forth. For every single Bill Gates and Zuckerberg in the world there is 1 million people who lost it all trying to become them.
No one ever went broke working day in and day out -- but there have been many going broke trying to to start their own thing.
Yes we should get more and more people into becoming entrepreneurs -- but not everyone can be the boss.
|
|
|
|
I've been seeing this in recent days. Democrats have now been shifting the narrative on Trump. Instead of continuing to push the false narrative that Trump is a Russian asset and a Russian spy (and whatever else they attempt to spew) -- which has been debunked by the Mueller report.
They're now going back to what lost them the presidential race, they're back to calling Trump a racist and a xenophobe and whatever other buzzword here. They've failed to note that their last plan didn't work, and that they're alienating a vital part of the electorate with those statements.
I'd love to hear what others thing about the subject area.
There's also been a subtle change in the definition of "racism" in the last two years. Subtle, the sarcasm here is great. Racism has evolved from a true term of value, one that would really mean something when it would be said to another person to something that people simply gloss over because they know it now means "Someone that I don't agree with" Horrible what people are doing to this country and around the world. |
|
|
|
First the stuff that everyone thinks is horrible is removed and there's no problem there, but when advertisers come in and want other things removed or the site is going to have to shut down people usually change their minds pretty quickly.
Well that really is an issue, I think even with some sort of community guideline etched in stone. Maybe they can just design the site so that the ads can differ depending on the post, like how in Youtube you can choose which videos you like your ad to show up? Maybe like the ad is some sort of signature that you only see when you expand that person's posts, like when clicking "Read more". IMHO I think one way to make it really community-based is if it's funded by the community instead but I don't know how that would work since people these days expect everything to be free. Yes but with this sort of site, with no real moderation allowing for some pretty horrible stuff to be posted -- they're going to not be able to fit the advertisers needs too well. Companies that are advertising on a site like this aren't going to pay too well, as it's going to be riddled with the bottom of the barrel ads -- such as investing tips, groups, scams, porn, etc. This isn't going to be enough to support the network at all, and it's unfair to think that it will. Sadly this isn't truly possible if you want the network to scale into the levels of Instagram, Reddit, etc. |
|
|
|
Seems like an inside job. Everything about this reeks of foul play. They said he tried committing suicide and yet he was taken of the watch. What a very convenient coincidence that just as they've moved him, their cams malfunctioned.
If this is indeed a hit, that's just disgusting (even though Epstein himself is). Brazen. They just don't care about public opinion anymore.
Imagine how desperate you have to be, to make a move so obvious to the people. This was a hit. Epstein was going to start singing about all of the other pedos in the world, and the cabal wanted him to dead. Now he is dead. Crazy world we live in, and I truly pray that the prosecutors investigating his case don't allow this to go away now that he's gone. |
|
|
|
|
Just saw this come up on the WSJ -- though they haven't stated that it was a suicide yet.
This is without a doubt a breaking and developing story, so we'll see what comes out of this VERY SHORTLY.
Edit: 'Suicide' but I think this was a hit. This guy was going to sing like a canary and anyone who is in power wanted him to die. This is a major slap in the face to all of his victims who are never going to see justice for him.
Not only did he take (or was forced) to go the easy way out. But his co conspirators ALSO took the easy way out.
|
|
|
|
LOL. The stock market will drop 80% if this moron gets elected.
Capital will flee to Asia. USD will collapse. Gold will be re-priced, north of 3K. US military complex will be undermined which will lead to major changes to the world's political map.
China, Russia will exert their might, annex few countries, control Africa and the Middle East. South America will turn socialist and follow in the footsteps of Venezuela.
You better hope Bernie is not elected. His election would lead to structural economic and political changes that will not be easy to reverse.
People were saying the exact same things about Trump - maybe even worse - and what actually happened? Nothing. Nothing happened. There's a lot of butt hurt people walking around moaning about how awful he is but really nothing has changed. The presidency is more of a figurehead position. The tide will likely turn against Trump in 2020, but will the machinations of the government actually change, regardless of who replaces him? Slightly, at best. This is without a doubt true, and for a person to say this they're fear mongering. We have to be honest about the true power of the presidency, and the fact that they don't have almighty power to do as they please all they want for whatever reason they want. The President is tamed by their advisers, congress, and the courts -- they're unable to just do whatever they want just because that's what makes them happy. Also -- no one fucking knows what the market is going to do at any given moment. But we're sure it can go up, down, or stay the same. Simple. |
|
|
|
Joe is a waste of podcast time, no real value.
Au contraire. If it wasn't for Joe Rogan I probably would have never gotten interested in bitcoin. It wasn't thanks to him so much as Andreas Antonopoulos appearing on his podcast. He's been on 3 times as far as I know, and each time is awesome. There is not a clearer, more well spoken ambassador to the world for bitcoin than Andreas. I first heard about bitcoin on an NPR podcast in 2011, but they were so dry and boring about it, all I could think was that it was "nerd money." Who cared? I sure didn't. Rogan's podcast has become so huge, its now a force to be reckoned with. Its pretty much become a form of mainstream media, despite still being "just a podcast." Him being a nice guy doesn't detract from the quality of his podcast. If it had no value, millions of people wouldn't watch/listen to it every week. I mean, the same can be argued for Alex Jones, who I find to be an utter shitstain of a person, yet my opinion doesn't take away from the value that other people find in him. Maybe I was a little too strong on it having no value, as that's unfair to him. I just fail to see the point in an interviewer agreeing with everyone that comes on the show. I'd love to see him argue with both sides to get some real information -- instead of people just using him as an avenue to promote themselves and get free advertisement to the millions of people that watch him. He's a great part of the podcast world yes, but he doesn't challenge any ideas, which is something I don't really like. |
|
|
|
|
I mean something like this could happen initially and it could work for the first portion of time. People would be happy to know that there's no central authrity and they're free to spread their opinion. All of that sounds great on paper.
But what about censoring child porn, illegal activities, and other items like this? You need a central authority for this. If the whole community was really decentralized, they would slowly agree to put someone in power to combat this activity.
First the stuff that everyone thinks is horrible is removed and there's no problem there, but when advertisers come in and want other things removed or the site is going to have to shut down people usually change their minds pretty quickly.
|
|
|
|
Joe is a waste of podcast time, no real value.
You learn quite a bit from the speakers tho, I`ve watched every episode. I mean yes, I suppose that could be the value portion of it. But Joe doesn't want to make waves because he wants everyone to come onto his show, so it's not like he grills everyone that comes onto his show as a way to get them to answer the tough questions. The guy lobs softballs at everyone and then agrees with them, which is one of the BIG reasons everyone goes onto his shows. |
|
|
|
Joe Rogan seems to think he can get ANY guest on, and agree with ANYTHING they say, even if it's the complete opposite of what Joe was agreeing with on a different podcast last week  You know what they say about people that just agree with everyone and anything, right? Thank god someone else notices that Joe does this. He doesn't have any real views of his own, he just agrees with anyone else on the podcast and that makes the other person look really good as well. Obviously this went 'viral' by the way, Joe Rogan alone gets millions of views rather quickly but when you put one of the Democratic frontrunners on the show as well OBVIOUSLY he's going to go 'viral' Joe is a waste of podcast time, no real value. |
|
|
|
But what about when it reaches the stage when Robots and Technology are providing what we need to survive and there is no longer as much of a need for human work. Do those people not deserve to get some of the production from the robots? I'm already seeing it happen.
It is going to take a large amount of time to it to get to the point that all jobs in the world are automted and that robots are going around doing everything. People have been in mass hysteria for decades about robots taking their jobs, and it's not even close to the estimates that people have been freaking out about. But people have to remember if robots are doing everything: How are people even making money now? Who's controlling the robots and rolling them out to work. Someone must be making money here to ensure that society is 'worth it' Robots aren't just going to get peoples food for free, do random things for free, and so on and so forth -- People who put up the massive capital and ongoing payments to ensure that these robots are maintained, updated, repaired, and even the R&D before all of this aren't doing it for nothing. Payment has to be coming from some place. But with everyone having no worries and robots taking over I can't see people being able to make money anymore. |
|
|
|
It is fair to say? What the fuck are you talking about? What is all of this?
Fair to say was in reference to Antifa not commiting any major terrorist activity on US soil, this is more in reference to saying that they haven't shot at Americans, nor have they used suicide bombers, and so on and so forth. That's not me saying that their conduct is okay. But it'd be unfair to compare them to a group like ISIS or something along those lines if you understand what I mean. |
|
|
|
Racism is silly. Why? Because, prove that the racist hurt someone. The whole idea of turning racism into an important issue, is to take the focus off the strength that men and women have, and turn it onto paperwork strength. Who cares what people say? The only time their words hurt you is when they talk so loud that the decibels rupture your eardrums. If a commander in battle orders the death of the enemy, it wasn't his words that killed. Rather, it was the doing of the soldiers who followed his orders. He got what he wanted... a bunch of slaves that followed his will. Racism is absolutely nothing. Rather, it is the harming of people that is something. And the harm only comes by someone harming someone else. The sounds of the words being spoken does nothing.  I mean I don't think I can agree with all of this. I think it's fair to say that while there is Racism in the world it is okay. It's not okay for people to hate other people due to the color of their skin, nor anything else relating to this. Racism is a problem. So we shouldn't discount it in the world. The problem is when we call everything racist, that's a disservice to actual racists in this world. We're going to hurt people who are actually exposed to real racism by labeling EVERYTHING racist. |
|
|
|
|
I've been seeing this in recent days. Democrats have now been shifting the narrative on Trump. Instead of continuing to push the false narrative that Trump is a Russian asset and a Russian spy (and whatever else they attempt to spew) -- which has been debunked by the Mueller report.
They're now going back to what lost them the presidential race, they're back to calling Trump a racist and a xenophobe and whatever other buzzword here. They've failed to note that their last plan didn't work, and that they're alienating a vital part of the electorate with those statements.
I'd love to hear what others thing about the subject area.
|
|
|
|
I've been using Bitcoinwisdom.io and cryptowat.ch for quite some time for charting, though I still mostly use Tradingview as a charting solution because there's a wide variety of indicators on the site, but the two sites I mentioned work just fine for basic charting. Pretty good amount of customization as well on both sites, and plenty of pairs as well for whatever you want to look at.
If you just want to use Tradingview for charting, you can also just bookmark your chart page and click on that link to go directly to charts without looking at anything else on Tradingview as well.
This is going to be the best thing you'd be able to do. Tradingview without a doubt is going to have the best charts in the business, you're just going to have to disregard the ideas and other peoples BS charting. Literally just bookmark the chart and then use that link over and over. Any other site is going to be poorly managed / maintained or it's going to cost money. Tradingview has large amounts of volume from traditional stocks and is able to innovate due to revenues from there. |
|
|
|
https://youtu.be/2O-iLk1G_ng?t=2250 here is a timestamp where they talk about gun contorl. So Bernie the solution is pretty simple, you need to auth via KYC your fingerprint in order for the gun to shoot. No it does not need to be set up to a central server so the "government can turn everyone's guns off at once" I think I know how I could make all guns exactly the same, other than the fact that they will need to scan their fingerprint in order for it to shoot, and that fingerprint would have to be properly registered. So become can keep their fast shooting rifles They don`t like it being called " ASSAULT RIFLE" because there is nothing assault about it unless used that way. Ugh. What if there is a glitch within the fingerprint system of the firearm? Is this sort of thing foolproof? Are you fine with a cop or a citizen that is defending themselves dying because their gun won't recognize them? Where are all of the fingerprints going anyway? How are we going to ensure that all of this information is safeguarded and ensuring that it isn't abused by government to infringe on the rights of those. |
|
|
|
This is an interesting narrative. Funny when I go on youtube and put in the words " ANTIFA ATTACKS" I am treated to endless hours of footage of these leftist groups engaged in violence and general criminal activity. Some how I can't seem to find the same for this invisible scourge of this right wing terrorist uprising. Just a week ago some one who was a self proclaimed member of ANTIFA armed with a rifle attacked an ICE facility with maltov cocktails before being shot to death. How long ago was that fake bomb guy and you are still screaming from the mountain tops about it? Leftist violence is regular, full of actual injuries, and under reported. "right wing" violence is sporadic, blown out of proportion, and over reported. Leftist violence has been a regular occurrence since at least 2016. If you are against political violence just perhaps we should look at groups like ANTIFA which actively and openly are engaged in criminal activity, assaults, attempted murders, attacks on government facilities, etc. Nah, lets ignore that because they found some wing bat a year ago with a Trump hat. False flag operations by right-wing shills, as well as fake videos and fake news sites  As opposed to these far right wing radicals literally committing mass murders which are documented heavily. But you know that, being a state agent, don't you Mr. Techshare, the spam-a-lot king While yes, it's fair to say that people in Antifa aren't going out and shooting people up, or blowing people up, or any other sort of murderous terrorist activities. But I would still call attacking people terrorist activities without a doubt. I don't think it's fair to say that far right wing extremism is the reason behind terrorism without saying that there are people on both sides that commit these atrocious acts. I don't think there's a particular political group that wants these things to happen -- these are loonies in every portion of the political spectrum doing these things. Once we say that the left or the right is the only group behind these activities, all we're doing is further dividing ourselves. |
|
|
|
|
Relatively speaking: I would assume yes. There are most likely more people accepting bitcoin this year then people that were accepting bitcoin last year, so if that's the metric we're going off of then we're good, yes.
But if we're going off the amount of merchant volume on the platform: I would think this number is pretty low. Because while there are many merchants accepting crypto, most people would just rather just a credit card with the protections and rewards, a debit card, etc -- instead of using crypto which incurs them a fee on their side.
Merchants really should attempt to give the customer some incentive to using crypto -- because they could save a good deal of money on transactions due to having a lower processing fee through a company like bitpay. But that's not the case. People don't like fees and passing them onto the customer isn't going to work.
|
|
|
|
They take 10 percent from the interest generated for the pool. So if the pool is able to make some profits from this with just ensuring that the code is up to date and non exploitable.
This is the line ive been searching for where they do took 10% from interest.No loss gambling is definitely out of my perception. lol. Typical lottery even its a traditional or smart contract,there would always be lossers yet money to be won doesnt poof out from nowhere. But then again, this 10 percent taken from the growth of the interest is still more then you would've gotten if you were to just loan out the money yourself. Just like a traditional lottery would do, so it's not surprising in the least. No one loses money man, YOU GET YOUR PRINCIPAL BACK IF YOU DON'T WIN THE INTEREST. In a regular lottery --> If you lose, YOU LOSE. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
