Latest edit (October 27th, 2020): the wish of The Grand Prophet of the Cult of Lauda has been fulfilled. The gang has been moved to the Defunct section and the OP was updated accordingly. Edit 2: the gang was disbanded and moved to the Defunct section, as per Grand Prophet's request. For more information about how to cherish the memory of Lauda please contact nullius, The Grand Prophet of the Cult of Lauda, or visit the appropriate Laudatory Lore, in memoriam topic. The Grand Prophet will guide all the gang members feeling lost after their leader retired. Thank you, Gazeta! By the power vested in me as Grand Prophet, in accord with the final decree of the Divine Catbat— After this post, "Lauda" will cease to exist. —I have been worshipping sacred ikons of nonexistent cats:Am I not known for tech posts? This was the best tech post that I have made in awhile! But it was subtle—a sort of sly ninja tech post inserted into the topic. Take a closer look. My latest homage to Lauda is made by kitty AI: The style-based GAN architecture (StyleGAN) yields state-of-the-art results in data-driven unconditional generative image modeling. [...] I recommend reading the paper. There are also three explanatory Youtube video links, plus two Github repositories, referenced by the website that totally doxes my photo ID.Thanks to Last of the V8s for his comment that inspired me. (The flood of nonexistent catpics was not caused by somebody else’s complaint about the one and only non-catbat cat photo that I had previously posted to that thread; some people should get over themselves.) I don’t want to ruin the magic by explaining it on that thread. The nonexistent-cat photo meme is intended to be a work of forum art; and thereby, the Catbat’s arcana shall remain a mystery to all who do not read with care. 😼
I have also been accused of being part of "Lauda's Gang" on at least a couple of occasions; a good thing that comes from this dissolution is now idiot scammers who get busted can't readily blame being busted on Lauda. I'm sure that they will continue the tradition anyway because they are, after all, pretty dumb, and that's why they are scammers. It is true, they are not exactly what one could call “trusted sources”—unless one ideates a conspiracy theory expanding Lauda gang membership to both Quickseller and PrimeNumber7. Sure the deal lauda and quicksellout 7 did Given the irrefutable evidence of laudas scamming in the other thread you posted in lauda should have a flag.
Nutildah should probably have one too Of course, they are hallucinating. |
|
|
|
Bottom line up front: And btw, they are right on their assessment of ACB. Ah! That is the principal information that I sought. For you see, I used my bet-related question about the NCLA as a sly excuse to slip in some substantive information about Amy Coney Barrett, the topic of this thread. I hope that blurb and especially, those PDFs are useful to someone here. An originalists view of the constitution is the only interpretation that protects civil liberties and ACB fits that category. A true “originalist” would need to chuck stare decisis out the window, and run a wrecking ball through—I think probably most SCOTUS decisions, Federal legislation, and Federal regulations since the Roosevelt era. To start with. Just for instance: Do you seriously expect for ACB, or anyone else nowadays to return the Commerce Clause to the interpretation that it had before the 1930s? (Let alone an “original” interpretation.) Anyway—I am glad to know about this. If some of my political posts seem odd, it may be because in my study of Americanism, I have studied more about history (including modern political history) than current events. I didn’t know much at all about ACB. Now, I know a bit more. Thanks. I like the NCLA and they'd be a fine group to donate to. Thanks. Good to know. At this point, theymos’ suggestion is looking so good that I almost hope to lose the bet. —Except it would mean that your president would be Biden! That would be perhaps about 2–3% worse than Trump; and in the long term, the difference will be negligible. Eh. More importantly, it would not make liberals cry. So, I hope that I win the bet. ;-) |
|
|
|
The top line is, you’re a gent, eddie! Of course, it is up to theymos whether or not he accepts your local direct help to people for the purposes of the bet. I myself would, but I’m not him; and I am not betting against you—unless you want to hedge with me on the Biden anti-Trump side? ;-) I’m not sure if I could afford to risk another 0.01 BTC... Maybe you should change the OP title to something like "theymos bets YOU for charity".. Edit: Topic title tweaked per your suggestion. Thanks. Me, I'm not so much for charities TBH.. I'm not wealthy, Copying what I said on the other thread: I'm not much for charity, no matter how well it presents itself.. Nor am I. (Largely because nonprofit organizations are usually corrupt as hell.) The way I see it: If I were to bet against theymos and lose, then he could donate the money if he wants. Now, if I lose, I will instead donate to something suggested by him, and acceptable to me; whereas if I win, he will donate to something that I probably do not disagree with. Either way, it is much better than risking that I may give my money to a liberal! I'm not wealthy enough to be in a giving position really.. Nor am I. It is an open secret that I’m poor. 0.01 BTC is significant to me—I can afford to risk it, but barely so. I wouldn’t want to make a fuss about it. Moreover, there is no practical difference between sending the money to theymos, and sending it to the NCLA: Either way, I am out 0.01 BTC if Trump loses.
and feel I have been forced to give far too much of my hard earned income to "charity" via taxes already.. I've even paid nonconsensual charity on Bitcoin dealings.. Damn straight. But it would be a pleasant change to give to something that you agree with, yes? My posts here have largely been for libertarian charity, so their is that too.. Same here. I have said many times (too lazy/hasty to dig for self-quotes now): Whatever time and effort I spend advocating for Bitcoin is given not for free, but for freedom.Ok fine.. I'll do it for 1mm Satoshis IF theymos can sign it right VS me the first time and not fuck it up..
Write a decent contract and sign it.. ^^^ THIS! Thank you. I should have stipulated that as a condition myself. (I did in my original offer, but not to theymos’ counter-offer.) And I'll put the funds towards practice ammo for one of the the first-time-gun-buyers I convince and drag into the gun store, for them to learn.. I've sold many guns for Jay's this year, mostly to my female friends, convincing them to buy their first pistols, and have burnt up wayyy too much of my own stash teaching them proper operation.. Not even considering time accompanying, advising, and teaching.. If I lose, some young girl will better learn how to handle their first pistol, no [middlemen, no bureaucracy, no bullshit (charity)].. And I'll prove the purchase and spending with a pic (empty box, girl, and target).. If I win, I'll be doing/spending it anyway, and I'll send it wherever you want.. Buy a first-time-gun-buyer a box or 2 of practice ammo.. American gun rights organization
gun-rights-related
Good enough? I like how you do it. But theymos will have to make the call here. (It goes without saying, any photos including other people should not be identifiable in any way...) Glad I was able to spark some friendly forum betting though.. It is indeed to your credit. Thanks. This is fun! |
|
|
|
I'm not much for charity, no matter how well it presents itself.. Nor am I. (Largely because nonprofit organizations are usually corrupt as hell.) The way I see it: If I were to bet against theymos and lose, then he could donate the money if he wants. Now, if I lose, I will instead donate to something suggested by him, and acceptable to me; whereas if I win, he will donate to something that I probably do not disagree with. Either way, it is much better than risking that I may give my money to a liberal! I'm not wealthy enough to be in a giving position really.. Nor am I. It is an open secret that I’m poor. 0.01 BTC is significant to me—I can afford to risk it, but barely so. I wouldn’t want to make a fuss about it. Moreover, there is no practical difference between sending the money to theymos, and sending it to the NCLA: Either way, I am out 0.01 BTC if Trump loses. Haven't decided how to phrase a reply of "no thanks" to that yet.. Awww. Spoilsport. :-( |
|
|
|
ACLU?
Yuck..
theymos had suggested the NCLA to me. I think that was the target of suchmoon’s misguided grandstanding. Upon a brief review of the NCLA’s website, three things jumped out at me:- The NCLA’s endorsement of Amy Coney Barrett’s record of quashing administrative law tyranny.
- The NCLA’s defence of Bitcoiners against privacy violations by the IRS.
- Gun rights!
Please let me know what you think.
just watch out for those sensor ships and don't say anything unpleasant about the nutcase OP. Quoted for the next time somebody complains about your own self-mod actions. I notice that you consistently ban quite a list of users from your threads. My name was not on the list for the thread where I posted, or any previous list of yours that I have seen. You were banned by name in the OP’s local rules of the thread where you posted. Stop whining like such a lunatic. |
|
|
|
Is the NCLA’s below-quoted evaluation of Barrett correct? To be clear, I am trying to evaluate the NCLA’s suitability for my charity bet with theymos. theymos suggested the NCLA to me; it looks good, at a glance. Unfortunately, I am much more pessimistic than you folks. I think that you were long ago doomed and foredoomed, no matter who gets onto the SCOTUS now: Horses, barn door... I can’t be arsed to read the NCLA’s below-linked PDFs just to see if they are really good enough to receive 0.01 BTC from me if Trump loses. Thanks in advance for any advice about the NCLA’s evaluation of Amy Coney Barrett! “Administrative law” tyranny:... A president could for example wield the administrative state in such a way as to make it very difficult to use Bitcoin without existing in the shadows, and a Biden administration is probably more likely to move in this direction than a Trump administration. ... ... “administrative law” tyranny. I think that most American consider the U.S. Code to be “Federal law”; well, what about that other conjoined-twin body of Federal law, the C.F.R.? ... NCLA Applauds Supreme Court Nominee Judge Amy Coney Barrett’s Record on Administrative PowerWashington, DC (September 26, 2020) — The New Civil Liberties Alliance commends President Trump’s nomination of the Honorable Amy Coney Barrett to fill the U.S. Supreme Court seat of the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. NCLA, a nonpartisan, nonprofit civil rights group devoted to protecting constitutional freedoms from violations by the Administrative State, analyzed Judge Barrett’s interpretation of administrative power issues, including any record of questioning judicial deference or bias in favor of agencies in a white paper of prospective nominees released this week. NCLA strongly believes we need federal judges who are willing to protect the civil liberties of individual Americans from unlawful administrative power. If courts will not check administrative abuses when they occur and force federal agencies to stick to constitutional pathways, then the government will run amok and civil liberties will be lost. |
|
|
|
Damn sensor ships... where are the social media regulations that Trump promised. I tried betting on a Trump win and: A reply of yours, quoted below, was deleted by the starter of a self-moderated topic. There are no rules of self-moderation, so this deletion cannot be appealed. Do not continue posting in this topic if the topic-starter has requested that you leave. What censorship? Before I deleted your post, I appended it to the end of mine with an appropriate note:
I'm in... and since I'm gonna lose anyway I went ahead and donated the money already. Thanks for playing!  Please read the local rules before posting. Local Rules: Effective immediately, suchmoon is categorically banned from all of my self-moderated threads (unless I make an accusation against her, in which she will be accorded a fair right of reply). The post to which I replied has the same subject matter, i.e. offering a wager to theymos. It has not been deleted; therefore, I draw the obvious inference. What’s good for the goose is good for the gander. Per its OP, that whole thread only got started because you deleted my reply to eddie13’s offer to theymos. You didn’t delete that—nor did you delete some other talk about wagering. The only reasonable explanation is that you deleted my post out of petty personal dislike for its author. And now you whine because I have stated upfront that you are categorically banned from my self-mod threads *?  * Except if I were to bring an accusation against you; per what I stated, the accused shall always have a fair right of reply in my self-moderated threads.<snip>This was in response to: If anyone else trustworthy wants to join in, I'd be up for making the same charity-bet several more times.
Maybe I'm not trustworthy enough. Anyway, I lost fair and square, so sad. Among other things, hypocrisy is untrustworthy. |
|
|
|
If anyone else trustworthy wants to join in, I'd be up for making the same charity-bet several more times. Topic title set accordingly. Anyone else want to bet against theymos, for the benefit of good causes? By the way, from your earlier post: To be clear: I'm not at all certain that Trump will lose, and although I don't like or support him, I'd prefer that he win over Biden. I do suppose that you may marginally prefer Kerensky over Lenin. Thus, we still concur. Wow, theymos. You know how to pick them! My only question is if The Giving Block works reliably through Tor. I am still open to other suggestions. Before I write my PGP-signed commitment to this, I must consider a backup plan in case I need to donate, and I run into... problems. (Experience hereby speaks.) On a brief perusal of NCLA’s press releases, I see these issues pop up: “Administrative law” tyranny:... A president could for example wield the administrative state in such a way as to make it very difficult to use Bitcoin without existing in the shadows, and a Biden administration is probably more likely to move in this direction than a Trump administration. ... ... “administrative law” tyranny. I think that most American consider the U.S. Code to be “Federal law”; well, what about that other conjoined-twin body of Federal law, the C.F.R.? ... NCLA Applauds Supreme Court Nominee Judge Amy Coney Barrett’s Record on Administrative PowerWashington, DC (September 26, 2020) — The New Civil Liberties Alliance commends President Trump’s nomination of the Honorable Amy Coney Barrett to fill the U.S. Supreme Court seat of the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. NCLA, a nonpartisan, nonprofit civil rights group devoted to protecting constitutional freedoms from violations by the Administrative State, analyzed Judge Barrett’s interpretation of administrative power issues, including any record of questioning judicial deference or bias in favor of agencies in a white paper of prospective nominees released this week. NCLA strongly believes we need federal judges who are willing to protect the civil liberties of individual Americans from unlawful administrative power. If courts will not check administrative abuses when they occur and force federal agencies to stick to constitutional pathways, then the government will run amok and civil liberties will be lost. An issue that should be of grave concern to every Bitcoiner in the United States:NCLA Now Accepts Cryptocurrencies to Enhance Charitable Giving Opportunities for DonorsAug 18, 2020 [...] ( https://nclalegal.org/donate-crypto/) [...] NCLA was inspired to open donations to the crypto community after learning more about digital donations through our recently launched case, James Harper v. Charles P. Rettig, et al., currently before the U.S. District Court for the District of New Hampshire. The lawsuit argues that the IRS has acquired the unbridled power to demand and seize Americans’ private financial information from third parties without any judicial process. Although the digital virtual currency exchanges that facilitated his transactions had contractually promised Mr. Harper to protect his private information, the IRS somehow obtained his records without a valid subpoena, court order, or judicial warrant based on probable cause. [...] Gun rights, too:NCLA Wages Legal Battle Against ATF’s Unlawful Bump Stock Final Rule in Texas and Utah
Washington, DC (October 6, 2020) —The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) is substantively rewriting federal criminal law with its Final Rule on bump stock-type devices, concluded the New Civil Liberties Alliance in two recent court filings against the ATF in lawsuits originally filed in Texas and Utah. For the purposes of this bet, it is will suffice for my part. As I said, though, I am still open to other suggestions.
I'm in... and since I'm gonna lose anyway I went ahead and donated the money already. Thanks for playing! Please read the local rules before posting. |
|
|
|
I don't do "real" betting. I'd do a modified bet (with you and/or eddie13 and/or other reputable forum members) where the loser has to donate 0.01 BTC to a charity of his choice. I will take you up on that! For my part, consistently with the theme of my above statements about liberals: Would any Americans care to suggest a nondenominational, nonpartisan American gun rights organization that (a) does not block Tor at their website, and (b) accepts anonymous Bitcoin donations at a publicly known address? (Too bad about blockchain privacy; payment of the bet must be verifiable somehow.) Not the NRA—a principled organization. A few suggestions would be welcome, so that I can choose something that I feel comfortable supporting. I am picky. If I am provided appropriate links so that I can see if I approve the organization, and I can verify their Bitcoin address, then I will produce a fresh PGP-signed statement committing to this from my side. If no suitable suggestions are offered, then in the interest of free expression and free thought in learning environments, I will instead need to figure out how these folks botched a native Segwit address that, it seems, nobody has ever tried: FIRE’s donation receipt addresses:
Bitcoin: qqqfaujpa4m66axd9h4y66538pk7yk4rguzt3wm7r3
To be clear: I'm not at all certain that Trump will lose, and although I don't like or support him, I'd prefer that he win over Biden. But AFAICT his chance of winning isn't even 25%, so taking a bet at even odds makes sense. Of course. The wager would not be exciting, if the outcome were certain. :-)
By the way, a clarification: The problem with that is that I deeply despise liberals—even moreso than the cat did; much more... How much more? I have been calling Trump a Communist for about the past five years. I tossed out that thing about the history of Antifa while I was working on a cartoon about Orange Dolt Kerensky (R) versus Senile Dementia Lenin (D). (To be posted, after I finish the accompanying text.) That much more.
Edit: Minor clarifications. |
|
|
|
I halfway expect for theymos to decline or to ignore this. Perhaps he just doesn’t want to bet. On the other hand, he thinks that Biden will win “by a landslide”, as a practical matter—even though he doesn’t seem to be a Biden supporter; so why not bet? On the flipside, as aforesaid, I despise Trump; but I think that he will win. It is a good match for a wager. @nullius before I begin I would like to state that I have been supporting Trump since quiet a while now, and personally I feel that @theymos will not accept this bet. I think that I should explain a bit more about why I offered this to theymos, specifically. I enjoy gambling (reflink), at least in theory—although I don’t do much of it. It’s an exciting entertainment! And I think that from some of my remarks on the eddie13 vs. suchmoon thread, it’s obvious that I was hinting at a desire to get in on the action here: Like betting on cockfights or football games: The whole concept of this thread adequately sums the value of democracy. It is entertainment. If I wanted to bet, I would be a contrarian, and bet on Trump. For the reason that you state, I would probably want better than even odds.
I say this even though I despise Trump much more than the TDS crowd does. (For totally different reasons.) The problem with that is that I deeply despise liberals—even moreso than the cat did; much more... Liberalism is a disease. Merited by Lauda (29)Anyone considering to vote for Biden should read the lyrics of her song WEX and consider if you want to vote for someone who is associating with someone like Cardi B. If I were a Trump man, then I would just put my money where my mouth is. Stand up for my side. But why should I take a risk on Trump of potentially giving my money to a freaking TDS liberal? Trump is not “my side”, and I am not playing this game: A deeper point is that this is a plebiscite on Trump:How do you feel about Trump?- ☐ I LOVE TRUMP!!! 🤩
- ☐ I HATE TRUMP!!! 😡
That is not very good for Biden, in and of itself. Biden supporter Trump-hater?The answer hit me when I saw eddie13’s offer to theymos, as I quoted and (originally) replied to: I'm thinking that Biden is going to win by a landslide.
Wanna bet me another 0.01? Or? theymos seems to concur with me, albeit perhaps coming from a somewhat different direction: I feel bad for all of the people who have tied themselves up personally with this election, as if Trump or Biden actually cared about them, or as if their election will actually matter much to the voters personally. A wager between us would be a perfect match!However if he does accept then this bet will be one of the most epic bet ever placed on Bitcointalk (call me biased about the epic ness of this, bet but this is what I personally feel). Indeed. Epic. A moment for the forum’s historic annals. If I do say so myself, I think that the only question is whether theymos wants to bet with anybody at all. ;-) My only regret in offering this is that I cannot in prudence go higher. Think of what 0.01 BTC will be worth someday! I’m a Scrooge with the sats. HoDL, HoDL, HoDL. Whereas I think it’s safe to say that theymos is a hardcore Bitcoiner; if he accepts the bet and I lose, then he should HoDL in good health. |
|
|
|
Original OP (a term approved by the Department of Redundancy Department)I didn’t want to make a whole topic for this, but my offer was deleted by a Biden supporter—whereas I am not even a Trump supporter! A reply of yours, quoted below, was deleted by the starter of a self-moderated topic. There are no rules of self-moderation, so this deletion cannot be appealed. Do not continue posting in this topic if the topic-starter has requested that you leave.
You can create a new topic if you are unsatisfied with this one. If the topic-starter is scamming, post about it in Scam Accusations.
I'm thinking that Biden is going to win by a landslide.
Wanna bet me another 0.01? Or? Let’s make this interesting. Why should you make all of the money if Trump wins? Nully vs. theymos! :-) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512
I, the person identified by the PGP key signing this message, do hereby
offer theymos (bitcointalk.org adminstrator, u=35) the following wager,
subject to theymos’ acceptance hereof with a digitally signed message
from one of his well-known keys (PGP or Bitcoin):
My 0.01 BTC bet on even odds that Donald J. Trump will win the 2020
U.S. Presidential Election.
Reference number:
db4b57d9dd5779b04988bd4520de55f44f84d76fd7d594a6ea53f49bb8ce380e
# Terms:
0. This bet shall NOT be construed as my political or moral endorsement of
Trump in any way. For the record, I despise the man (for reasons quite
different than those of the TDS crowd). But I predict that he will win,
and I will wager accordingly.
1. If the election results are officially contested in any way, then
the bet will be resolved by waiting to see who actually takes office
for the next U.S. presidential term.
Otherwise, the loser of the bet shall pay it promptly after the election
results are announced, and the losing candidate concedes or otherwise
indicates acceptance thereof. For reference: The election is scheduled
for 2020-11-03.
2. If theymos does not accept this offer within 48 hours from the PGP
signature time hereof, then this wager is null and void.
3. If Trump himself is removed from the running before the end of
2020-11-03 due to death, incapacity, or any other reason, then this
wager is null and void. Note: This wager is about whether or not
Trump wins. If Biden is removed from the running, then the wager will
remain in effect.
4. If theymos accepts this wager, then I will provide to him a PGP
signed message with a Bitcoin address (native Segwit) that he shall use
for payment if I win. For blockchain privacy reasons, I will request,
but not require, that he not publicize this address unless any dispute
arises over the wager.
5. If this wager is accepted and I lose it, then I will pay 0.01 BTC
either to an address provided to me by theymos for that purpose in a
digitally signed message, or to 1NXYoJ5xU91Jp83XfVMHwwTUyZFK64BoAD,
in that order of preference.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
iHUEARYKAB0WIQSNOMR84IlYpr/EF5vEJ5MVn575SQUCX5dpmgAKCRDEJ5MVn575
SdWAAP9bdMHSSMoKQRL/TKE1XYOzsssBhvTZyAUXH9na7h7PBwD9HYr9J1RW8eya
9G/OIRMBrE5tUrOfUh13KiSCVebuKQc=
=WTZM
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
I halfway expect for theymos to decline or to ignore this. Perhaps he just doesn’t want to bet. On the other hand, he thinks that Biden will win “by a landslide”, as a practical matter—even though he doesn’t seem to be a Biden supporter; so why not bet? On the flipside, as aforesaid, I despise Trump; but I think that he will win. It is a good match for a wager. I would not place this bet with a Biden supporter, because I don’t want to give a Biden supporter any of my money if Trump loses.theymos seems to concur with me, albeit for different reasons. I would not mind paying him if my prediction is incorrect.
Local Rules: Effective immediately, suchmoon is categorically banned from all of my self-moderated threads (unless I make an accusation against her, in which she will be accorded a fair right of reply). The post to which I replied has the same subject matter, i.e. offering a wager to theymos. It has not been deleted; therefore, I draw the obvious inference. What’s good for the goose is good for the gander. Others will be moderated according to my sound discretion. Please stay on topic.
|
|
|
|
Original OP has been moved to Post #2. 2020-10-31: Posted my PGP commitment. — And, theymos posted his PGP commitment! The epic bet is on!Are you a trusted forum member? Do you want to bet against theymos, for the benefit of charity? Read this thread for details, and ask theymos if he will take your bet. I don't do "real" betting. I'd do a modified bet (with you and/or eddie13 and/or other reputable forum members) where the loser has to donate 0.01 BTC to a charity of his choice. If anyone else trustworthy wants to join in, I'd be up for making the same charity-bet several more times. The bet is 0.01 BTC on even odds that Trump will win, and theymos’ prediction is incorrect: I'm thinking that Biden is going to win by a landslide.
To be clear, these bets should not be taken as moral or political endorsements of the candidates.To be clear: I'm not at all certain that Trump will lose, and although I don't like or support him, I'd prefer that he win over Biden. If I were a Trump man, then I would just put my money where my mouth is. Stand up for my side. But why should I take a risk on Trump of potentially giving my money to a freaking TDS liberal? Trump is not “my side”... I despise Trump much more than the TDS crowd does. (For totally different reasons.) Active bets:- nullius vs. theymos: We’re on!
I just need to decide on details about how to handle the charity, write a PGP-signed statement, and request same from theymos. Will update when this is done. Done. - eddie13 vs. theymos: Pending theymos’ acceptance of eddie’s proposal.
- Any others? You, dear reader? Do you have the reputation for it? If so, don’t be shy! I am guessing that there are a quite limited number of these bets available, so speak up now.
However if he does accept then this bet will be one of the most epic bet ever placed on Bitcointalk (call me biased about the epic ness of this, bet but this is what I personally feel). Agreed!
Credit to eddie13 for inspiring this bet, and for the current topic title: Maybe you should change the OP title to something like "theymos bets YOU for charity"..
Local Rules: Effective immediately, suchmoon is categorically banned from all of my self-moderated threads (unless I make an accusation against her, in which she will be accorded a fair right of reply). The post to which I replied has the same subject matter, i.e. offering a wager to theymos. It has not been deleted; therefore, I draw the obvious inference. What’s good for the goose is good for the gander. Others will be moderated according to my sound discretion. Please stay on topic. |
|
|
|
For someone that is usually so pragmatic This is new. Usually, I am accused of being an idealistic dreamer. ;-) ...I'm surprised to see you going down the poll-denier path. I’m not sure why you are arguing about the media polls with me, when your own statement was that Trump was an underdog in the betting markets. The final 2016 betting markets and most models had Trump between a 2-1 and 3-1 underdog to become president. A part of my point was that if PN7’s numbers are correct (probably—haven’t checked—don’t really care), Trump is less of an underdog now than he was in 2016. And—guess who became U.S. president in 2016. This is probably not the best time to be getting into an even money bet for Trump to win. The betting markets are pricing a ~2/3 chance that Biden will win. A deeper point is that this is a plebiscite on Trump:How do you feel about Trump?- ☐ I LOVE TRUMP!!! 🤩
- ☐ I HATE TRUMP!!! 😡
That is not very good for Biden, in and of itself. Trump has fans. A large number of Americans perceive him as an awe-inspiring hero. I think that that’s ridiculous; but it is an objective fact that large numbers of people see him that way. Trump has haters. A large number of Americans perceive him as the devil. I think that that’s also ridiculous; but... Does anybody perceive Biden as a hero? I mean, seriously. LOL. Does anybody perceive Biden, personally, as the devil? Of course, there are many Americans who see the Democratic Party as the devil. (Same as for the Republican Party.) But the Democratic Party is not Biden. A political party does not move people as personality does—not in either direction. Objectively, the candidates are not so different. The followers of Pepsi-Lenin (D) scream that Coke-Kerensky (R) is a “right-wing extremist”, and the followers of Coke-Kerensky (R) scream that Pepsi-Lenin (D) has betrayed the revolution. The practical difference between them is negligible. But that is not how votaries voters perceive it; and the above sums up how most Americans are evaluating their choice for this vote. biden anti-trump betters
Well said. All of this is consistent with my point: Many Americans were disillusioned—literally, they stopped seeing the illusion of importance in the vote. Trump got them re-engaged with the system. Good job! |
|
|
|
The conversation was about signing a staked address for identity verification purposes, signing a contract, which somehow seemed to confuse 100% of biden anti-trump betters thus far...
The purpose is to eliminate the "I was hacked when my account agreed to that" excuse.. Guess who is going to chime in here. Bitcoin is cypherpunk crypto-money. Do people want to use crypto, or just talk about it while masturbating over their Coinbase accounts, waiting for Number To Go Up? All financial agreements for nontrivial (non-“dust”) amounts conducted on the forum should always require signed statements! Anyway, this last sentence (bolded) will serve as confirmation for me that the bet is on, as apparently it did to you all these months. Colour me unsurprised at nutildah’s ignorance about the proper use of practical cryptography. No more BS, Use crypto. No excuses. Who knows if he will pay up if Trump wins, considering he apparently has forgotten that he placed his bet. SM probably will.
This is probably not the best time to be getting into an even money bet for Trump to win. The betting markets are pricing a ~2/3 chance that Biden will win. Hmmm. What were the odds called by the mass-media (and the betting markets) that Hillary would win, in late October of 2016? If I wanted to bet, I would be a contrarian, and bet on Trump. For the reason that you state, I would probably want better than even odds. I say this even though I despise Trump much more than the TDS crowd does. (For totally different reasons.)
October 26, 2020, 09:45:02 PM Summary - eddie13 | Bitcoin address: | 1vvSrTFiQY7akwbsv3iYPPe9mR3DsEbff |
To be updated when I find his stake...Signed message today..
1vvSrTFiQY7akwbsv3iYPPe9mR3DsEbff
This is eddie13 on 8/19/2018 updating my Bitcointalk staked address
IIgvyxWXnHtM6veHdfdP+zvxb5mVC6XsGa/K2fieDj6yX/cHBVL73Z14KQnRu8ydIUugmK3AKtvee9FelXl41KU=
The question hereby is to establish his address (significantly) prior to today’s date; in the circumstance, I don’t feel a need to reach back further. Considerable research effort is sometimes required... The forum should have a better way to handle these things.OK I agree.. [quote author=nutildah link=topic=5208356.msg55459030#msg55459030 date=1603740694] Anyway, this last sentence (bolded) will serve as confirmation for me that [u]the bet is on[/u], as apparently it did to you all these months.[/quote]
H4Es74/VDqCuDxS9PJYMZMqFOkQs6mxp2J2QwFFUykTnSWfll7Isx3EVIdCQmYFyn9XUpzu8sZQ3WgPDLJ27DoA= No more BS, you guys are fucked now when trump wins and that`s that.. Quoted for reference. I am against saying that I verified it; people should do that for themselves! No “somebody verified it”, and no Gavin-style “I saw this verified by somebody”. |
|
|
|
[...] Whatever. The next stupid answer I get from you will make me ignore you forever. So think well before quoting me next time. Why do some people see this as some sort of a threat? —Especially against me, of all people? Oh noes, I am so terrified that you may ignore me. Yes, please! Place me on your ignore list. Forever. It is your loss, and I do not want for you to read my posts. Thank you.If you are not reading it, then it is not for you.
Anybody who has a problem with me, who is not ignore-listing me, is requested to take it up with me elsewhere. Although at this point, I may just ignore it. Maybe. Thank you. Boldface is in the original:I request that persons posting to this topic avoid flame-warring. Thank you.
[...]
This is her thread. I know that she would not want fighting here. I request that this thread be kept the way that she would want it. It is about her.
We now return to this thread’s topic, as stated by OP: A toast to nonexistent cats! Here’s to you, Kitty. |
|
|
|
I need a new topic title! Sorry, Loyce: Some AI researchers already beat you to the most logically applicable name. |
|
|
|
[This space is to be edited with some brief first-week statistics.] ...and nobody’s photo ID is doxed somewhere here...catpics on the Wall to end all Walls I think that Lauda must have had a kitty robot to herd cat photos to her realm. (Or a catbat catbot?) Queen of Cats. 😺 Now, I will apply the Zen of Nullianity to thiscatdoesnotexist.com. Why, it is a conspiracy of a generative adversarial network of nonexistent cats! After this post, "Lauda" will cease to exist.  The nature of Lauda’s existence is now a problem more baffling to the human mind than Schrödinger’s cat. Here are 0x10 other cats who do not exist:Anyway I ramble, just popped by to say good luck to all the cat people. I prefer dogs, but dog people - meh. What about lone wolves? So as for cats and lone wolves. I will admit that Lauda converted me to be a cat wolf. 😸
Opened a megaspam drama thread, got herself banned A nocoiner wants to backstab Lauda in this thread, just to stir otherwise nonexistent drama here. OK. —LOLWUT, “drama”? On the Internet, that usually means flamewars. Whereas this thread has been almost unanimously positive! Most of the people who have long-term grudges against Lauda have just ignored it, as you are also free to do. Aside from some blatant trolling that was deleted by the moderators, and a few backhanded compliments, the only naysayer here is you.This nonexistent cat disdains your opinion: and now nullius can spam the shit out of this forum forever with cat photos. Hey, did you not know that the Internet was invented for the purpose of cat photos? 😹 We got her point, I think it is time to lock this thread. First of all, Lauda has been gone for all of one week (!). For the newcomers here: Back in the day, I was caught up in the maelstrom of a thread attacking Lauda, which reached 24 pages within its first week— and just kept going... For only one example. Some of those threads were not locked until a certain topic starter eventually made peace with Lauda. Some were never locked at all. I don’t think that any of them were mod-locked—though I am not sure who locked some of the threads specifically pertaining to forum issues. This grumpy kitty does not exist: A thread with some positive talk about Lauda sort of balances out the hundreds (maybe thousands?) of pages of forum threads attacking her over the years. 😾 It is as if the universe is bringing itself to order. Zeroth of all, I do not think that this thread should be locked at all; and it probably won’t be. Why would the forum admins and staff do that? They liked Lauda well enough, despite some occasional problems with her. ;-) And it is a (generally) shining example of a drama-free positive discussion, without personal attacks. Amazing for the Reputation forum!
Lauda has been gone for seven days, after having been a forum fixture for seven years. Some people are just now noticing this— I just noticed this thread... —some still haven’t. I myself do not intend to bump it every single day for the rest of eternity. These things tend to run a certain course; it will probably wind down eventually, then get bumped again, then wind down again, and so forth... There is no reason other than sheer spite for Lauda to pop up suddenly demanding that people stop talking about her, on her own final thread. But if you really want, please feel free to create a meta reeeee thread bringing to the administration’s attention the dire threat to the forum of nullius coping with his grief by spamming cat photos in Lauda’s goodbye thread. 😼 Just PM me a link, so that I can fairly reply. I’m not following much on the forum now. Kitty gone—Nully mourning. 😿
I just noticed this thread... I usually try to stay away from emotional farewell-like threads, but in this case i'd like to make an exception since Lauda's choice of words leads me to believe he/she is still lurking anonymously, and i truly hope he/she gets some closure from reading the posts in this thread. Thank you. I would not assume that she is reading. I dearly hope that she is! Her last communication to me was even more forceful than OP here in expressing a desire for a clean break. 🙀 But I hope that she is seeing this. I know that she would appreciate the kind words of a tech/SE legendary with serious Bitcoin/LN skills. I have had some minor communication with Lauda over the years, and during the exchange of PM's I always perceived Lauda as an honest, caring person with high regards to his/her privacy. Upon his/her request, I've always deleted any PM we exchanged, every key used, every txid sent in any form and I truely hope the other members he/she had dealings with did the same (if requested) so he/she at least has the piece of mind no other identifying information might be floating around. Thank you for your respect for privacy. It is meritorious. 😻 I myself always kept things purged, as you noted; and a week ago, I securely deleted... such other Lauda-related stuff (except for cat photos ;-)... as may have remained. A cypherpunk goodbye, and goodbye for real.
I have no idea if she is watching this or not. I hope so. :-/ I find it odd that somebody apparently got the drop on him/her, but i guess everybody makes mistakes sooner or later. She was indeed quite careful. I don’t know what all that was about; but even in the cloak-and-dagger worst-case hypothetical scenario, in the small probability that somebody were to find me and to give me the proverbial “drug him and beat him with a $5 wrench” treatment, I could not say even if she was really male or female—let alone any useful information about her. Now, that’s opsec! A policy of information on a “need to know” basis protects everybody.
Eventough i didn't have the honour of being a member of the cult of Lauda, I truely respect this member, and i think him/her leaving this forum is a sad event. A generative adversarial network of nonexistent cats thanks you and salutes you:
Edit 0: More more nonexistent cat photos! |
|
|
|
|
I request that persons posting to this topic avoid flame-warring. Thank you.
Lauda’s personality was quite different than mine.
One of my principal criticisms of her was that I think that she was too kind and gentle. Yes, seriously.
One of her principal criticisms of me was the approximate inverse of that. Not that she thought I was wrong; to the contrary. As to the many fights that I tend to get into, she usually (not always) thought that I was in the right. Nonetheless, she feared that the stress of conflict, hostility, anger, and negativity would be injurious to me. She was worried about me.
This is actually one of the reasons why I suspect that she was female. She engaged in conflict only because she was courageous, and she would stand up for right over wrong—if necessary. She was strong—willful—but she disliked conflict. There was a peculiarly feminine quality to her attitude about that.
Perforce, I don’t see it the same way. I am unmoved by conflict. It does not distress me emotionally. The only question to me is if it’s a waste of my time.
This is her thread. I know that she would not want fighting here. I request that this thread be kept the way that she would want it. It is about her.
|
|
|
|
Blacks who vote for Omnibus Crime Bill Biden and Kamala-the-Cop are equal in stupidity to whites who fancy that Trump will save them from brown people. I suppose that they are all just Americans. Hey, Biden-lovers, isn’t The Nation one of your favourite left-wing rags? In the progressive modern world of Twitter-tier attention spans, nobody has a long enough memory to see these cheap political jobbers for what they are: Tyrants of the lowest order, each and all, who only tell their fans what they want to hear for long enough to get the power to betray them.
I’ve lost track of this thread—well, I never kept track of it; but I do owe some brief replies here. (Some of which I began to prepare a few days ago.)
Roosevelt’s Court Packing SchemeHow do you suppose that he got away with instant tyranny, as much as he wanted? (For pedantic correctness: Off the top of my head, I don’t know if the Roosevelt gold ban was one of the issues directly impacted by the court-stacking threat; but I do know that the Commerce Clause abuse that is nowadays institutionalized to Federalize everything did start with Roosevelt, for exactly that reason. And your Supreme Court should have, and otherwise would have promptly torn up everything from Socialist Insecurity, to quotas imposed on how much farmers could grow, etc., etc.) A president can't just pack the courts though. His only real power is to stop them from being packed. For the number of judges to change, you need enough of the 400+ members of the House that represent the entire country and are elected every 2 years to make it happen. So, not really tyranny. Why do you speak as if I were proposing some weird theory? Roosevelt’s court packing scheme is so infamous that it is currently a Wikipedia redirect from “Court packing”! (Just making a point; n.b. that I do not recommend “learning” about history or politics from Wikipedia. (article))  Oh, also: So, not really tyranny. Do you suggest that if a democratic government follows some procedures, it cannot be tyranny? (!) Vide: Democracy in action! (!)
Yeah... What kind of goofball would think that the Supreme Court should lean towards constitutional conservatism?
Must’a been dropped on his head..
Needs some Marxist sympathizers on it to counter the libertarian principles that have been there, oh, since it’s formation roundabouts..
Better just take the system so it’s “fair” and all.. Vide: Democracy in action!
Democracy DefinedAnd if you're threatening to change the number of justices on the court to use as a bargaining chip, that's literally undemocratic. How is it literally undemocratic to pass a law that changes the number of justices on the supreme court? How is it that “democratic” is implicitly equated with “good and justified”? Democracy is the “ideal” that the lunatics should run the asylum. But they can’t—which means that the most corrupt mass-manipulators rule over The Peeeeeeople. So as for “government by the people”. I agree with this: Nietzsche may have been right, therefore he may be unsuccessful. [...] ...the driving power behind democracy is not a political one, it is religious—it is Christianity.
[...]
There [Napoleon] was another victim of democracy... The mighty sword in the beginning and the mighty pen at the end of the last century [1800s] were alike impotent against—Fate.
The Oppression of “Gender”By mental illness I’m not referring to physical ailments as mentioned above. I’m talking about the crazy gender neutral creatures I see who are offended by pronouns. I am more offended by the bastardization of the English language. I win at taking offence. The liberals can never compete with my incontestable superiority at being offended by them. (And nobody can compete with me for literary insults.) Also, a message to Orwellian “liberals”: Stop oppressing me.Boldface is in the original:This is why I initially refused on principle to set my “gender” in my forum profile. I don’t have a “gender”, in the ridiculous postmodern meaning which has been quite artfully constructed for that word. I have a sex, and it is an innate, naturally unalterable part of who I am which I refuse to devalue by calling it a “gender”.
I find the term “gender” highly offensive!
...a thought-control exercise in the power of he who defines which I find deeply oppressive. Think about it: This is real oppression! (And yes "they" is grammatically correct for referring to the singular, or so I've heard.) No, it is not correct—outside the fantasies of the Newspeak Dictionary, Tenth Edition (or is it the Eleventh now?). [...] Back in the day— when people spoke English, in contradistinction to the bastardized postmodern cant used by degenerate anthropoids with pickled brains.[...] “Back in the day”, women customarily signed their letters with a parenthesized title so that others would know whether to apply “Mrs.” or “Miss”. E.g., “Sincerely, Alice Smith (Mrs.)”. Just sayin’...
Warning: Users of hallucinogenic substances are nuts!Much though I despise you, I wouldn’t want to see anyone caught up in arguing seriously against someone who thinks that tripping on LSD is an experience comparable to taking a trip to France (!). (+4 from suchmoon.) In my experience, I have found that users of hallucinogens always have something subtly broken with their internal logic—even years later, and regardless of general intelligence or educational attainment. Their judgment is irreparably compromised. I would not waste my time discussing with them any fixed ideas that they may form, although I must occasionally correct some of their grossly wrong statements for other reasons. I don’t necessarily dislike such people. For a contrary example, one of my past girlfriends was an earnestly devoted woman, plus one of the most highly literate people of either sex whom I have ever yet had the pleasure of knowing. She had dropped acid when she was a university student. Despite her profound intellect and her sincere intentions, I found that in any matter that required incisively distinguishing reality from illusions, I could not trust her thought process. Sadly. Our intercourse on poetry and literature was amazing—as was “intercourse”. But alas, I could never rely on her judgment. I do suppose that if you drop enough acid, you can see as many “genders” as you want.
Neological AbortionsTransphobia today is what Homophobia was 20 years ago. Both of these words are propaganda deflection terms.. Yes. And both are also etymologically ridiculous. “Homophobia” literally means ‘fear of sameness’, or perhaps ‘same fear’. “Transphobia” means ‘across fear’, and is a bastardized hybrid mutt-word. These neological abortions are typical of the calibre of minds that also produce such chimeras as “polyamory” and “sexology”—although both of these latter words identify real concepts, for which older, better words exist. I will be cruel and leave the crowd in suspense, so as to avoid casting more pearls here. Disclaimer: Whereas Nietzsche was a doctor of philology, I am but an amateur. Everywhere that slave-morality gains the ascendancy, language shows a tendency to approximate the significations of the words “good” and “stupid.” Like him, I am not nice. I will admit that all that “gender” stuff is a nice theory, in the old-fashioned sense. nice (adj.)
late 13c., "foolish, ignorant, frivolous, senseless," from Old French nice (12c.) "careless, clumsy; weak; poor, needy; simple, stupid, silly, foolish," from Latin nescius "ignorant, unaware," literally "not-knowing," from ne- "not" (from PIE root *ne- "not") + stem of scire "to know" (see science).
|
|
|
|
Once upon a time, I needed an image of a sad cat for a forum post that I never made. For convenience, what would I do but to ask—the cat? There is more of an on-topic story behind this one; but written out, it just seems overly sentimental. Anyway, the picture will suffice in lieu of a thousand words. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
