• 0 Posts
  • 167 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: October 21st, 2023

help-circle










  • Yes, Monero fills a niche, and it’s the closest crypto asset to resemble a currency.

    However, your previous post talked about replacing finance with Bitcoin. Even if we pretend you were talking about Monero, that just means you have a one world currency, and no one at the helm who can guide monetary policy for any one country.

    You shouldn’t need a degree in finance or economics to understand how disastrous that would be, especially for smaller and poorer countries.

    So, Bitcoin and the rest of crypto are all commodities, not currencies. They are commodities with a high environmental cost, and a floor of zero because they have no tangible assets to speak of.

    Monero can fill a niche, and I’m actually happy about that because I like Monero and the principles behind the project. Unless of course you believe that includes delusions of grandeur and replacing all world currency and financial systems, with the magic of the “just the right crypto”.





  • pandapoo@sh.itjust.workstoTechnology@lemmy.worldGuaranteed Crypto Loss.
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    This has to be a joke right? Satire?

    I mean, it’s one thing to be a long on Bitcoin, or even just see it’s value as a niche commodity.

    But suggesting Bitcoin mining is an energy efficient way to heat buildings, is capable of replacing global finance, or that it creates more tangible benefits than artisanal glass blowers…?

    You know what I can do with a artisanal piece of glass? Hold it, use it, own it.

    You know what I can do with Bitcoin? Speculate that if I hold on to it long enough, I can convert it to actual currency that can actually be used as a currency.

    Unlike BTC, which is just a speculative commodity, with no tangible assets to provide an actual floor.

    The floor on crypto is zero. If I buy a bunch of gold right now, even if the price crashes, I still have a bunch of gold.


  • People here get really uppity when you point out that Ukraine’s enemy lossss and casualty reports are likely inflated, because that’s what all militaries do in all conflicts. It doesn’t even always have to do with wartime propaganda, but because it’s hard to accurately tally enemy losses during active conflict.

    Anyways, when you point that out the usual responses to point out the patently ridiculous reports on Ukrainian losses that the Russian MoD puts out, as if somehow that means Ukraine’s are accurate.

    The best I can say is that Ukrainian reports are almost certainly exponentially closer to reality than Russia’s comically absurd and fantastical figures.

    I will finish it up by saying that there are good independent sources who open source intelligence to track verified losses, and air on the conservative side.

    That of course means their loss reports aren’t accurate either, but they provide a good figures to be used as a floor for any estimate ranges.


  • Casualties are not the same as KIA, and not all WIA are permanently combat ineffective.

    Someone who got shrapnel in the leg or abdomen and requires 6-8 weeks of recovery, before returning to combat, is a single casualty.

    That same soldier can return to combat, catch a bullet in their arm, and be a casualty again.

    That same soldier can return to service three months later, etc.

    If after returning to service a 3rd time, they’re eventually KIA, then they would have been counted as a casualty three times.

    Not saying this is typical, or that this is indicative of the normal WIA casualty. Just pointing out that a single soldier can be counted as a casualty more than once, and it’s not uncommon.


  • No, I’m referring to back channel reports where Iran was relaying something along the lines of the “acceptable targets” where they would not retaliate, or at least not escalate. Including certain types of military bases and facilities.

    I don’t believe the IRGC headquarters was included on that list, but as it’s “proportional” to targeting Mossad HQ, I think it’s possible they could lump it in with the other acceptable strikes.

    That is, assuming that reporting was even accurate, and if it was, that they’ll extend additional restraint for the IRGC strike.

    Again, if that reporting was correct, and if this attack was more or less in line with it, I think it’s extremely likely that the reasoning would be that the US government applied real pressure for the first time during this conflict.

    However, that is a lot of what ifs, and assumptions, and it’s probably just as likely, if not more likely, that they’re all shit.

    Guess we’ll see.



  • I can see it now. This great AI mediator will reach the consensus that Eric Schmidt is correct. We shouldn’t worry about meeting our climate goals, we should cook the planet faster to accelerate AI development.

    Eventually of course, the AI will save us.

    Now some of you might think that’s a terrible idea, from bad actors, that simply suits their own greed.

    Don’t worry. The new Google AI wouldn’t leave us without a backup plan.

    That backup plan? If plan A fails, simply reduce human population by 35%.

    Concerned about who will get picked for population reduction? Don’t worry, the AI has it covered…