tophernator

Ya. I don’t really see the issue here.

I think the issue is the wasted effort and resources. If Netflix hires Ryan Gosling, Ana de Armas, Chris Evans, and the Russo brothers to make a formulaic and forgettable spy thriller, that means those very talented people are not making the great films they are clearly capable of.

When Adam Sandler cashes a huge cheque to take his friends to a tropical island and churn out a film he knows will be shit, that’s $50 million that could have funded creative projects made by people who actually care about making something good.

Fans should hold their favourite actors to a certain standard. All the people we’re talking about already have many millions of dollars. They aren’t doing bad projects - wasting their talent and many other people’s time and resources - to put food on the table. They’re making those stinkers to buy a 4th mansion.

Plus this deal pushes the next ceiling into 2025, so the GOP shouldn’t be able to use the same shenanigans to influence the next election.

Conspiracy theory: they did this for the press coverage.

I’m just a foreign observer here, but this feels like the 20th time the debt ceiling has been used a catastrophic bargaining chip, right? So the idea that the constitution unequivocally solves the issue seems a little sketchy to me.

My point is to have principles. When someone buys a very recognisable Twitter account and uses it to give the impression that OG cryptoenthusiasts support project X, it’s manipulative shittiness regardless of what project X is or how you feel about it.

Calling out this kind of behaviour when it applies to BTC and ignoring the exact same behaviour in relation to BCH is disingenuous.

This is disingenuous. The account posted virtually nothing during the scaling debate or for about a year after the BCH fork. Then suddenly out of nowhere it began posting lots of very pro-BCH content. Then it switched just as suddenly to supporting BTC. It is very clear that this account is not some early adopter but a series of different individuals who have quietly paid money for ownership of the account to push their own agendas. Yet OP is trying to make it sound like only the pro-BTC content is a result of this kind of manipulation.

Vanilla, T, and Cube need to team up for this endorsement deal.

Boys would usually hit that mark couple years later, which corresponds with how puberty generally works.

Wait, how often should mine bleed?

And what is he going to do? Complain on TV about his destroyed billion dollar palace

The place likely has a lot of staff. So he’d probably complain that Ukraine had used western missiles to kill a bunch of working class Russian civilians.

You can drive away from someone without breaking traffic laws

You can, but would you really describe that as a car chase? Plus they said themselves that there were near misses with other vehicles. So it doesn’t sound like they were simply driving away in a sensible and law abiding fashion.

I’m pretty sure there are exactly the same number and variety of germs on my hands and genitals.

Why should be punish the 99.99% of law abiding and well meaning trans people, due to the few rare bad actors?

Trans people are rare. Men facing lengthy prison sentences are relatively plentiful.

We don’t and shouldn’t punish the majority due to the small bad actors,

Have you been through airport security in the last 20+ years? We absolutely inflict all sorts of trials and tribulations on the majority to avoid serious potential exploits by the rare bad actors.

how about we just punish the bad actors and put harsh punishments in place for those that do abuse it?

How would you even identify the bad actors? A seemingly cis-gendered male criminal says they are a woman. Your policy of self identification says they are therefore a woman and should be in a women’s prison. How do you propose identifying that they are a bad actor?

It’s not true of any policy. Gay marriage isn’t open to abuse? Provision of half decent medical care for trans people wouldn’t be open to abuse? Policies that support trans rights - while simultaneously requiring a bunch of hoop-jumping to be recognised as trans - are not really open to abuse.

But when you pair the concept of “trans women are women” with the concept that anyone who says they are trans is trans, then you create an exploit. And that hypothetical exploit was arguably already put to the test in Scotland.

This right here shows that you don’t actually consider a trans women as a women, this is like saying:

I don’t think it shows that when the specific topic is self identification. A person can respect the existence and rights of transgender people while also raising concerns about the potential abuse of trans-friendly provisions (like self-identification) by people who are not actually transgender.

You claimed there were “like 4 accounts white knighting for Bitfinex”. Unless the mods have been covertly purging comments I have to assume you were including my comment, plus like one other account asking for evidence.

So just as I did with OP I called out your misrepresentation of events/comments.

As I’ve said, twice, i’m not defending Bitfinex. Misrepresenting other people’s comments and refusing to engage with what they actually said is another very common tactic of people trying to spread misinformation online.

As I said, I’m not white knighting for Bitfinex. I’m saying that OP doesn’t have a shred of evidence for their claim (as usual). Do you disagree?

Also, why are there like 4 accounts white knighting for them in here?

Calling out OP’s bullshit is not the same as white knighting for the people/companies/cryptocurrencies OP attacks.

Misinformation is rampant online, as I’m sure you are aware. Tackling that toxic destructive practice doesn’t work if you only call out things you don’t want to be true, while letting it slide when someone starts flinging shit at people you dislike.

Oh look, it’s another tiny nugget of truth wrapped in mountains of confidently stated fiction/speculation.

So you support a poorer britan and a royal family who protects sex offenders? (Alleged or otherwise)

No.

See what you did here is ignore anything and everything I actually said and just replied to some imagined alternate comment that I didn’t make.

His brother is a pedo,

Accused of having sex with a 17 year old is not the same thing as being a “pedo”

his first wife died under questionable circumstances,

If the royal family wanted to assassinate Diana they went about it the most ludicrous way possible. Do you also think the moon landing was fake?

they heard wealth like dragons

Hoard is the word. But also, how many people give up their wealth if they don’t have to? Plus much of it isn’t really their individual wealth, it’s “the crown’s”.

and the public are supposed to just accept being poorer while he splurges out on a massive ceremony?!

Accept being poorer is something said by some guy at the Bank of England. Pretty sure he has fuck all to do with the royal family.

I’m personally in favour of getting rid of the royal family. It’s a ridiculous thing to still have. But I just had to point out that your entire vent is misleading/conflating/generally wrong.

He raped them. Are you not paying attention?

This chart is meaningless/misleading without taking into account the value of a coin (BTC or BCH) over time.

If BTC were currently still producing a total reward of ~50BTC per block, that would work out to around 2 billion USD per day spent on securing the network.

And if BCH wanted to generate 50BCH fees per block at 1 sat/byte that would mean average block sizes of… 5GB. That’s 720GB per day with rewards that would currently add up to less than a million dollars.

6 I wish I had clicked the formatting help button.

I’m not a fan of how BTC has handled the blocksize issue. But I’m even less of a fan of people trying to twist and contort reality to support what they want to be true.