thus no more junk spam = no more junk spam/..
as for you caring about moving ownership of junk spam.. it is never proven in blockchain data that junk belongs to particular output.. never has.. thus its never been a NFT or a ownership thing..
the junk spam data has just always been dead data added to witness area and just sits there as dead data.
I think that I, you, the developers of the core, and any user of the bitcoin network, have the right to have a private opinion whether the pictures of frogs uploaded to the network are useless garbage or malicious spam, and even have the right to express this opinion publicly (but for the developers of the core, it is in their own interests best to be as careful as possible). But we can't ban it just because we don't like it. Because the owner of the picture with the frog will say that bitcoin is a scam, promised to keep its value and did not fulfill the promise - and we will have nothing to object to him. Who in their right mind would entrust their value to a network that, over time, could change the rules of the game and declare that value invalid garbage? Well if there's a double spend bug and some users manage to double their Bitcoin holdings using the loophole, tell me, when the bug is fixed, can these users keep their doubled stashes?  You're trying to put it in such a way to make people think these NFT actually have value (which they don't). So how can they lose value if they don't have any value? And another thing: Bitcoin doesn't promise anything to anyone. It doesn't promise you will earn anything or even keep the money you invested. Theoretically, Bitcoin can go to 0 any moment. So, saying Bitcoin should keep some promise to the NFT owners is simply laughable. And I really think that Bitcoin devs are not stopping this madness because somebody on the internet forum may think they're abusing their power or freedom is threatened but just because for some reason they don't consider it a threat to Bitcoin and it's health (yet). You seem to underestimate this weird meme economy and the size of the meme community. When Coinbase recently stated that Pepe frogs are “co-opted as a hate symbol by alt-right groups”, it caused such a flurry of indignation that they had to publicly apologize. Or take the same doge, this is initially an absolutely useless coin created as a joke and mined for change from litecoin, however, it has a huge army of fans, a stable place in the top 10 and a capitalization of $ 10 billion. I also find this strange, but I would be careful not to underestimate the power of a mob of idiots. Everyone has different value systems. I think for 90% the general public, bitcoin is considered a kind of ponzi scheme, for them, bitcoin is garbage, and not just garbage, but environmentally harmful garbage that burns electricity in vain and does nothing useful, so moderate your meme snobbery, for most people lovers of meme tokens and bitcoin-maximalists are the same idiots. |
|
|
|
Now I will tell you that the budget deficit in Russia is very good. It sounds paradoxical, but if you understand economics at least a little deeper than at a primitive philistine level, then you will agree with me. In general, it is not clear how the Russian economy demonstrated GDP growth in past years, given the very tight monetary policy of the Central Bank of Russia and the savings model of the Government's behavior. Now last year’s surge in inflation after the imposition of sanctions has been curbed, the current inflation rate in Russia has been below the Central Bank’s target level of 4% for two months already (and lower than in any of the EU countries and in the United States), and the Central Bank has significantly softened its rhetoric and monetary policy, in other words stopped raising the key rate, began to give signals about its possible reduction and began to increase the money supply. For Russia, which lives in conditions of a chronic shortage of the money supply, this is like life-giving rain after a drought! The existing global metric for calculating nominal GDP is designed in such a way that GDP growth is possible almost only with a budget deficit. This is a feature of the Western paradigm of the advanced consumption society and the debt-based economy - if you do not have a budget deficit, you have nothing else to grow on. This is a bit exaggerated, but economic indicators fit this paradigm. I mean, there is nothing surprising in the fact that every quarter the world forecasts for the Russian economy are revised upwards. And it will not be surprising if in a year or two the Russian economy makes an impressive jump to double digits precisely against the background of the current anomalously large budget deficit for Russia, which has already become accustomed to a sustained budget surplus. For reference: The National Wealth Fund of Russia allows you to completely close the budget deficit of 20% within three years without external or internal borrowing. |
|
|
|
It seems like the MCU does nothing but connect the screen/buttons to the secure elements, and the applications are actually installed ON the secure element itself where the firmware resids. This means the claim that " you will have to physically press a button to sign a transaction" which they have always promoted is also a lie. It's also mentioned on their websiteIn order to accomplish this, we attached an additional STM32 microcontroller (the MCU) to the Secure Element (the SE) which acts as a “dumb router” between the Secure Element and the peripherals. The microcontroller doesn’t perform any application logic and it doesn’t store any of the cryptographic secrets used by BOLOS, it simply manages the peripherals and notifies the Secure Element whenever new data is ready to be received. BOLOS applications are executed entirely on the Secure Element. In this section, we’ll take a look at the hardware architecture to better embrace the hardware related constraints before analyzing their software implications.
So this means, funds were always "movable" without having to physically initiate an order from buttons that control only the MCU, so not only the firmware had access to the private keys, even the various applications including all of those shitcoins applications that were available to download from Ledger had access to your funds, so for all we know, you could install a shitcoin application on the secure element, which could have access to your BTC private keys or the whole seed phrase. I'm not quite sure I can agree with this conclusion. Having the firmware and applications reside on the same chip as the seed does by itself not necessarily mean that the firmware or applications can access it. You can still have an architecture where part of the flash storage is accessible (ie. for firmware updates and installing apps) and some isn't (ie. for securely storing the seed). Additionally it should also be possible to have some parts of memory be accessible by the firmware, but not by applications. So it's highly speculative whether the other applications can in theory access the whole seed phrase as well.However, given what we now know and the closed source nature of the code... it's also highly speculative whether the apps can't. (but we do know that at least the firmware can access the seed phrase, if only due to them admitting to it) The function to explicitly export the seed phrase from the monero ledger application has been around for a long time. This means that there are no fundamental restrictions for any ledger application to be able to read the seed phrase. It is reasonable in my opinion to consider any activated ledger hardware wallet already compromised (and any security model based on a "black box" is inherently weak), in order to avoid unnecessary frustration. |
|
|
|
it is integrated into the block chain, and from an ordinary digital picture it becomes a unique digital entity, which cannot be copied, but can be transferred to another owner by making a new transaction. In this case, it is no longer garbage, regardless of the content of the picture and your attitude towards it. Well, or all bitcoin is garbage.
appearing in the blockchain is one thing... that is called DEAD DATA however the "transfer" part. is not proven in blockdata. because the data is in witness of the inputs signature association.. but it does not tag to which output deserves the transfer there actually is a way to prove it. .. BUT they are not using a true proof of transfer. thus there is no transfer proof. take this concept.. you write a contract on paper the contract says Bill has 1000 sats he pays 100 to Chris he pays 400 to Dave and 500 is lost to the contract notary for confirming the contract its signed by bill and then bill puts a smiley face next to his signature no where on the contract has the contract stated that the smiley face belongs to chris or dave or the notary yet bill vocally says on his website(separate thing) that he thinks this month chris should own the smiley face even if the smiley face is not put against chris's part of the contract. not is the smiley face written to be chrises within the contract itself yes its on the piece of paper below the signature. but its not beside chrises part of the contract so no proof the smiley face belongs to chris specifically.. .. its just a random smiley face beside the signature that can mean anything to anyone next month Bill can decide without changing the contract.. that actually dave owned it all along. even though still. to all outsiders and rational people.. .. its just a random smiley face beside the signature that can mean anything to anyone Are you saying that if I want to transfer ownership of a picture of a frog uploaded to the bitcoin blockchain, then I do not have to physically move this picture to the address of the new owner? That the change of ownership will not be reflected in the bitcoin blockchain in any way and the picture with the frog will remain at my address, where I originally uploaded it, and only the entry on some external site will change? If so, then this is really some kind of shit and I need to learn more about the brс-20 token protocol. |
|
|
|
most of the "NFT market" and the fee .. is actually not real cost..
the NFT market is not real millions of people randomly buying junk.. its a small group colluding and collaborating together.. you can spot this becasue if it was random people. then the movements would be constant. however any simple analysis can see that the memes dropped nearly all precisely on the same day. and suddenly the new scam(brc) started a couple days later. which means unless millions of people just randomly all decided at the same time to throw memes off a cliff and jump onto BRC .. then thats a miracle. however instead it was a small group of the meme creators selling and posting fake priced and trading to themselves to cause a fake market hoping to dupe idiots..
luckily not many idiots bought into it which is why it died off a cliff so quick
now with the brc crap. its again not some massive market of millions of people. its a small group of idiot creators again spamming to each other to fake a market demand. ..
though these scams will die out when idiots wise up.. the problem remains.. keeping the security gates open just means new spam wil start. new rounds of different spam different junk different scams . all pretending to offer value. while all they are actually doing is bloating the blocks with dead useless data.
Perhaps our common problem and the reason for the misunderstanding is that neither you nor I have uploaded a single picture with frogs to the Bitcoin blockchain (I certainly have not). But if I understand correctly, the main difference from NFT on Ethereum is that it is not links to an external image that are loaded, but the image itself - it gets into the block, it is integrated into the block chain, and from an ordinary digital picture it becomes a unique digital entity, which cannot be copied, but can be transferred to another owner by making a new transaction. In this case, it is no longer garbage, regardless of the content of the picture and your attitude towards it. Well, or all bitcoin is garbage. |
|
|
|
thus no more junk spam = no more junk spam/..
as for you caring about moving ownership of junk spam.. it is never proven in blockchain data that junk belongs to particular output.. never has.. thus its never been a NFT or a ownership thing..
the junk spam data has just always been dead data added to witness area and just sits there as dead data.
I think that I, you, the developers of the core, and any user of the bitcoin network, have the right to have a private opinion whether the pictures of frogs uploaded to the network are useless garbage or malicious spam, and even have the right to express this opinion publicly (but for the developers of the core, it is in their own interests best to be as careful as possible). But we can't ban it just because we don't like it. Because the owner of the picture with the frog will say that bitcoin is a scam, promised to keep its value and did not fulfill the promise - and we will have nothing to object to him. Who in their right mind would entrust their value to a network that, over time, could change the rules of the game and declare that value invalid garbage? |
|
|
|
well the solution is not "put up with it or f**k off to another network"
that false solution is the idiot brigades thoughts on their only option to present
many topics talk about actual solutions
the main one that does not break bitcoin is tat from block 7XX,XXX opcodes need to show formatting conditions, expectations of data used with an opcode. and defined lengths of expected data.
this will make transaction byte data efficient and purposeful something that can be validated and verified. like it previously did
as for generating new opcode. well thats simple too. full nodes are suppose to validate all data. this includes the fullnodes mining pools use to manage block templates and what the network then validates to fit active rules to be an accepted block of accepted data.
so when a new opcode is desired devs PROPOSE an opcode and code it. and while in review the network users can download a copy fo also self review and when they flag they are ready to use it. that flag then shows consensus readiness that its at a safe enough level of network readiness to activate the opcode. and the opcode goes live knowing enough of the network is ready to validate the new feature. as what is suppose to happen.
yep full nodes are suppose to be ready to validate things. thats their point. they are not suppose to have blind bypasses of just calling things non standard and treat as valid without check just becasue someone called it a validation pass.
having opcodes that are tested. reviewed and have node readiness is a security feature.. bypasses allowing trojan data is an exploit/bug
I didn’t understand shit from what you propose to solve this issue, so I’ll ask differently. Suppose a conditional idiot uploaded a picture with his favorite meme to the bitcoin blockchain and paid for this transaction at the market price, it was confirmed. As a result of what you propose to do, will he still be able to transfer this picture to another owner, again paying for the transaction at the market price? I put the question in this aspect, because the problem that has arisen is not entirely of a technical nature. If the downloaded image has lost its value over time, this is acceptable, a common investment risk. If an evil hacker hacked into a hardware wallet, took possession of private keys and transferred the picture to his address, this is also acceptable, a common information security risk. But if you change the consensus rules to tighten them up and a valid entry in the blockchain becomes invalid, this is unacceptable. |
|
|
|
so now windfury is denying the existing of these meme bloat.. and denying that core devs are devs..
soo who is mis informing??
core are bitcoin devs that softened consensus and even your forum daddy admits core done it. he loves promoting their role in it.
so if you are denying it. then you are denying your daddy. again you sway in one direction when the scripts written for you say A then you change to script B denying A when the script changes
how about look at code. look at block data instead of your silly influencer social drama of trusting people.
LOOK AT THE DATA. do your research.
Okay, you're right. The developers of the core have been quite consistent in easing the initially tight restrictions of bitcoin, this has had its consequences, both positive and negative. With this we figured out, to the question "who is to blame?" the correct answer is found, now let's move on to the question "what to do?". Because it's easy and fun to loosen restrictions - it entails promising prospects in terms of scaling and rapid success in terms of breadth of adoption. But there is a nuance, once a weakened restriction can no longer be strengthened back without at least a partial loss of backward compatibility. Someone will inevitably suffer in this case - simply because yesterday it was still possible, but today it has become impossible. What do you propose to do about it, other than pointless grumbling on the forum? |
|
|
|
I do not agree. Ukraine is now fighting at the maximum of its military potential, for Ukraine it is a matter of life and death. Russia has used its military potential, I think by 15%, for Russia this is a military special operation.
Here's what they were saying 2 months ago: Russia’s army is estimated to have lost nearly 40% of its prewar fleet of tanks after nine months of fighting in Ukraine, according to a count by the specialist thinktank the International Institute of Strategic Studies (IISS).
That rises to as much as 50% for some of the key tanks used in combat, forcing Russia to reach into its still sizeable cold war-era stocks. Ukraine’s tank numbers are estimated to have increased because of the number it has captured and supplies of Soviet-era tanks from its western allies.
Its headline count is that Russia’s number of tanks in its army have reduced by 38% from 2,927 to 1,800, while there have been particularly heavy losses of its workhorse T-72B3, an upgrade first delivered to its army in 2013.
Heavy losses on the battlefield have meant that Russia had lost “around 50% of its pre invasion fleet” of the tank and a related variant
Ukraine could fight better with more NATO military support, but firstly, NATO military support for Ukraine already has unprecedented volumes, and secondly, it is not profitable for NATO to inflate the conflict too much so that it does not get out of control.https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/feb/15/russian-army-has-lost-up-to-half-of-key-battle-tanks-analysts-estimate-ukraineAt the beginning of its full-scale invasion in Feb., Russia had around 3,330 operational tanks (2,840 with the ground forces, 330 with its naval infantry, and 160 with its airborne forces), according to the Military Balance 2021 database.
The database includes all tank types currently employed by Russia’s military, notably T-72s, T-80s, and T-90s, and their modifications.
According to Oryx, an online investigative project documenting equipment losses in Russia’s war, Russia has lost at least 994 tanks as of Sept. 1.
The estimated total Russian loss of 1,300 machines in Ukraine roughly corresponds to 14 full-fledged armored brigades or 42 battalion tactical groups (BTGs). This amounts to more tank fleets than the U.K., France, Germany, and Italy combined.
https://kyivindependent.com/how-many-tanks-does-russia-really-have/Saying that Russia has used 15% of its potential is an understatement, unless you count all the scrap tanks from the 50s and 60s, like Russian propagandists do, but most of these tanks will never be restored. Russia is a strange country where on paper there's 10k tanks in reserves, but in reality half of these have been in storage for over 50 years. They don't run, cannot be restored, and even if they are somehow restored, are useless on the modern battlefield. The reality is, Russia has used maybe 20% of its total tank reserves (on paper), but more than 50% of working, fairly modern tanks. I say fairly modern because t72 has been in use since the 70s and Russians just can't let it go. They're just adding more electronics and reactive armor and calling it a modern tank because it's cheaper than making a new one. So, it's possible a grandfather was using a T72 in the Soviet Union, and now his grandson is using it in Ukraine  It's really easy to prove that they're running out of tanks, since they've started to deploy T-62s. These are tanks that were used by Russia in Afghanistan and were already outdated in the 80s. https://mil.in.ua/en/news/ukrainian-military-captured-first-russian-t-62-tank/ These Russians have a sense of humor. Look at the name of the tank "fury" written on the barrel. Also the state of the tank, as it's a version with no reactive armor. I don’t understand why you drag this rotten shit from Ukrainian propaganda here? This is not a tank conflict. The superiority in tanks could have been decisive, but it was not - thanks in large part to the large number of hand-held anti-tank grenade launchers in early NATO deliveries to Ukraine. A couple of hundred Western tanks from late NATO deliveries will not help Ukraine much either. Russia's superiority in artillery, aviation and missiles plays a much larger role at the current stage of the operation. In the autumn of last year, a temporary superiority in numbers played well into the hands of Ukraine, due to this, it was possible to achieve success near Izyum. Now Ukraine has no significant advantage in any aspect. |
|
|
|
Тут ключевое слово - "прогнозирует".
А также - Уганда.
Африка - она разная. Вот тот же Египет, например, он РЕАЛЬНО делает спутники. И запускает их с помощью сторонних ракет. Хоть что-то.
А что вы можете рассказать про спутники Уганды? Хоть как-то кем-то запущенные? Хотя бы один?
Первый спутник Уганды называется PearlAfricaSat-1 и он был успешно запущен на орбиту в декабре прошлого года. Занятно, что на этом эпизоде история космической программы Уганды не исчерпывается. |
|
|
|
Да хрен с ним, с этим говнокомандувачем, тут повеселее новости подкатывают: Радиоактивное облако после детонации боеприпасов НАТО движется в Европу из Украины радиоактивное облако, образовавшееся в результате детонации снарядов с обедненным ураном, движется в сторону Западной Европы.
До этого британский замминистра обороны Джеймс Хиппи заявлял, что Королевство не обязано участвовать в решении проблем, связанных с применением переданных Украине боеприпасов Чё там, злые русские опять по климатическому оружию подкрутили розу ветров? Негодяи, мерзавцы, подлецы! Вот онлайн-монитор радиоактивности в воздухе в Люблине, виден небольшой всплеск висмута, это я так понял как раз характерный продукт полураспада обеднённого урана из британских снарядов, в принципе ничего страшного. Всего через 4.5 миллиарда лет всё окончательно рассосётся будто ничего и не было, так что переживать решительно не о чем. |
|
|
|
Насколько я в курске, это была хорошо спланированная атака на киевских Патриотов в рамках масштабной "охоты на ведьм" по уничтожению украинских систем ПВО. В стиле сначала массовый налёт ложными целями, чтобы заставить Патриоты среагировать, затем удар Кинжалами по выявленным целям. МО РФ отчиталось об успешном поражении пяти пусковых установок Патриот и одной РЛС. Судя по слитым в сеть видосам минимум одну пусковую установку точно накрыло. Тратить гиперзвуковую ракету за мильярд денег на такую распиаренную хуету конечно жалко, но нанести серьёзный имиджевый ущерб США - бесценно.
Все так. От себя добавлю что это каксается всех видов вооружений поставляемых натой. Репутационный урон в перспективе колоссальный. Меня даже наверно больше радует, что такую операцию вообще смогли провернуть без слива данных из Генштаба. Репутационный урон Патриоту с ракетами предыдущего поколения нанесли ещё саудиты со своими самодельными пепелацами из обрезков водопроводных труб. А здесь судя по фоткам из Киева ракеты новейшей модификации и тоже отстрелялись в молоко. Неудивительно что на ближнем востоке все дружно в очереди стоят за с-400, а на Патриоты по миллиарду баксов за комплекс смотрят как на говно. Ещё интересный вопрос, изначально целились по пусковой установке на основе оперативных разведданных или по ходу операции запеленговали характерное излучение РЛС? Если первое то ну молодцы хуле, если второе то вообще пиздец котёнку. Уж месяц назад или более слышал, что кинжалы стали делать массово ,то есть в серийное производство в 3 смены Так что ракет много ,а калибры так вообще штампуют давно на полную мощь каждый день божий Да неужели, на Украине завалили ебало по поводу что у России вот-вот все ракеты закончатся? Это что-то новенькое. |
|
|
|
Говорят Залужного ракетным ударом ёбнули, прямо в штабе ВСУ вместе со свитой - вот и откладывается опять контрнаступ. Врут поди.
Однозначно - врут. Ждём подтверждения или опровержения, уже наверно с месяц его на публике не видно, даже по видеосвязи. Сырского впрочем тоже. Сырский кстати вроде шевелится ещё, а Залужного то так и нету. Что интересно - тема с его исчезновением никак не педалируется ни в России, ни на Украине, ни на Западе, просто был человек и нету. Никакого уважения к верному почитателю академических трудов Герасимова по военной науке. Были вроде сообщения о том что головнокомандувач кому то там интервью давал. В общем в этой информационной каше хер разберешься порой. Ага, видел одно сообщение про якобы свежее интервью Залужного, но не смог найти никаких подробностей - кому где как и в каком виде. И присутствовал ли при этом интервью собственно сам Залужный, лично или по видеосвязи. |
|
|
|
Говорят Залужного ракетным ударом ёбнули, прямо в штабе ВСУ вместе со свитой - вот и откладывается опять контрнаступ. Врут поди.
Однозначно - врут. Ждём подтверждения или опровержения, уже наверно с месяц его на публике не видно, даже по видеосвязи. Сырского впрочем тоже. Сырский кстати вроде шевелится ещё, а Залужного то так и нету. Что интересно - тема с его исчезновением никак не педалируется ни в России, ни на Украине, ни на Западе, просто был человек и нету. Никакого уважения к верному почитателю академических трудов Герасимова по военной науке. |
|
|
|
Насколько я в курске, это была хорошо спланированная атака на киевских Патриотов в рамках масштабной "охоты на ведьм" по уничтожению украинских систем ПВО. В стиле сначала массовый налёт ложными целями, чтобы заставить Патриоты среагировать, затем удар Кинжалами по выявленным целям.
Да, так и было, судя по всему. Снова "развели" рукожопых захисников Дурдоины, как котят В итоге они сначала дали "салют" за 150 мультов баксов по бесполезным целям, а потом эпично слили свою "салютную установку" от мурикосов, и теперь пытаются сделать для своих настоящих хозяев вид, что "всё заебись!" и это вовсе не очередная какашка от них (=они снова обосрались), а "хорошо замаскированная пироженное-картошка". Но их пиндоские хозяева им сейчас не особо верят почему-то Тратить гиперзвуковую ракету за мильярд денег на такую распиаренную хуету конечно жалко, но нанести серьёзный имиджевый ущерб США - бесценно.
Верно. Пусть весь мир сейчас увидит истинную "ценность" распиаренных муриканских миллиардных Пэтриотов, которые можно легко отпиздить одним-другим Кинжалами! Прикол в том, что в случае хорошо организованной атаки на "переполнение стека", гиперзвук в завершающей фазе особо и не нужен. Просто запускаются десятки ложных целей (какая-нибудь ржавая х-55 с чугуниевой болванкой вместо боеголовки), Патриот в завидном темпе расстреливает весь боекомплект, а затем получает по кумполу хоть Кинжалом, хоть Калибром, хоть обычным Искандером. Наверное могли бы в знак особого цинизма и Геранью зарядить. Так что вопрос "а был ли мальчик?" в принципе конечно интересный. |
|
|
|
The US debt ceiling is $31.4 trillion, and the US external debt is already over $31.7 trillion. The debt ceiling was exceeded on January 19 of this year and, strictly speaking, a technical default has already happened.
In sounds like you are saying that the U.S. is in default because it has exceeded its debt limit. That is not true. The debt limit itself is not a condition of default. The reason it is a factor is that the U.S. spends more than it takes in, so it must go deeper into debt in order to pay its current debts, and it cannot because of the self-imposed debt limit. Exceeding the debt ceiling is in itself a technical default, to call a spade a spade. It's just that the word is too scary and the US government prefers to call its actions after exceeding the debt ceiling extraordinary measures. The suspension of contributions to state pension funds looks like a default. |
|
|
|
А как поведёт себя биток при дефолте (техническом) мы можем увидеть в самое ближайшее время - в начале июня.
Я все еще сомневаюсь, что мы увидим дефолт. Все таки, это не выгодно никаким крупным игрокам, это ломает устоявшуюся систему. Думаю, все будет делаться для того, чтобы по-маскимуму избежать этого и минимизировать негативные последствия. Потому что вряд ли мир готов к ним, учитывая что экономическую, что геополитическую ситуацию на данный момент. (а не реальный). И в истории Америки это несколько раз было. Страшного ничего нет, но психологический эффект огромный. Ну и под это всё могут напустить дымовую завесу и немного пришпилить биток к низам. Вот ведь Трамп недавно говорил или писал, что стоит позволить произвести дефолт. чтобы отбить у демократов тягу к излишним тратам бюджета, которые провоцируют дефицит и заставляют залезать в долги. Республиканцы, во всяком случае, настроены решительно. Технический дефолт уже произошёл 19 января сего года, когда внешний долг США преодолел установленный потолок в 31.4 триллиона долларов. Щас внешний долг около 31.8 триллионов и продолжает увеличиваться, перебор уже почти на четыреста милльярдов американских зелёных денег. |
|
|
|
I was going to make a replication to your last comment, but i learn you are TROLLING a high level. Its doesnt worth to waste energy in a answer to that last claim.
I hope nobody keep feeding this troll. DONT FEED THE TROLL.
You have nothing to say in essence and you decided to get personal? Cute. I have more Merits in 120 days than you. I don't hide my face and don't try to lick ass on a price watch thread. So shut up and go fuck yourself. |
|
|
|
I think this is just the media exaggerating and sensationalizing events for dramatic effect on viewers and readers. As you know, the United States has led the economy for the past few decades. So it is very unlikely that the United States will break me. Even if the USA is about to reach the ceiling, those things haven't happened yet, have they? Therefore, we should still remain calm rather than panic, because panic will make it very easy to be manipulated by people. In general, it is still necessary to continue to follow the news every day, and in addition, it is also necessary to have a reasonable approach.
It seems you are not well informed about the current state of affairs. The US debt ceiling is $31.4 trillion, and the US external debt is already over $31.7 trillion. The debt ceiling was exceeded on January 19 of this year and, strictly speaking, a technical default has already happened. So the answer to the question in the thread title is yes. It's up to you to panic or not. |
|
|
|
Permissionless freedom or bust. I'm never budging on that, so either get used to sharing a blockchain with me or fork off. Your call.  So Bitcoin belongs to you to do whatever you want with it and its the end of discussion. Bitcoin belongs to anyone who is willing to pay the market price for a transaction. But for some reason you demand special preferences for yourself, and it seems your best argument is that transactions used to be cheaper than they are now. That's funny. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
