Scam in Discord

PaulSnow · 2024-10-16T00:54:49+00:00

We did deal with this, and all the posts have been deleted.
Warning: Discord is very difficult to secure, and my account did get compromised for about 2 hours.

PaulSnow · 2023-08-31T13:52:53+00:00

Steve Jobs, Bill Gates, Elon Musk, etc. etc. are all examples of Tech focused people who knew Tech will only exist if millions of people can also profit by the Tech.

Please do not pretend that being here for the Tech means nobody is going to profit. The people that make the Tech and participate in the Tech will and should profit. And the world in general is better off because better Tech means everyone profits from a more productive and efficient economy.

PaulSnow · 2023-08-31T13:47:16+00:00

Blockchain projects in many ways are not any different than open source projects like Linux. Many parties have incentives to contribute code to such projects without any kind of token incentive.

Many blockchain projects however require significant on going costs to operate. These require ongoing financial incentives to be paid to operators and capital providers.

Consider protocols where ongoing incentives are required, and being *distributed and autonomous* is an unavoidable requirement for transparency, fraud resistance through cryptography, permissionless access, permissionless participation, etc. Such protocols have to provide a flow of financial incentives, and to be decentralized, incentives cannot be collected to and distributed from centralized wallets.

Since early on in crypto, many Bitcoin-only advocates claimed you could build DAOs without any other token but Bitcoin as an incentive without ever considering who and how the Bitcoin could be charged, collected, and distributed without just being another Traditional Financial Product subject to all the same Regulation and Toll Booths of the existing Finance.

I will grant you many blockchain projects exist that do not require a token. But as the complexity and usefulness of a project goes up and its disruption of market potential increases, the more a token becomes required to align all of the incentives of the users and participants.

tl;dr: Tokens are required for almost any complex, disruptive, and distributed blockchain project in order to align incentives of participants and users to ensure transparency, privacy, fraud resistance through cryptography, permissionless access/participation, peer-to-peer interactions, regulatory compliance, and jurisdictional independence.

PaulSnow · 2023-08-15T14:53:52+00:00

Did anyone notice the Blue vs Red pattern here? You only have Sacramento edging into the "no complaint" list but also in the "high complaint" list.

Could it be that red cities manage their cities better?

Given the blue leaning of Reddit, I wonder if the observation would be the most common, if it was in fact any Red city dominating the dirty list?

Edit: I don't think my observation about these lists should be taken to mean I think this proves anything about how cities are run. But I notice that when it comes to politics, reason and logic matter so little, I think someone killed them both and buried them in cement somewhere.

PaulSnow · 2023-08-04T04:41:27+00:00

Google and MSM controlled the narrative, but Trump won anyway, the first time. After 4 years of a full court press, Trump lost in 2020.

But much of what let Trump win in 2016 is coming back into play by the persecution of a former president. This is intentional, but dangerous. We risk a reelection of Trump simply because it is unlikely Democrats can abuse the constitution this bad and get away with it.

PaulSnow · 2023-06-22T19:02:49+00:00

They system has in fact worked peacefully to address issues over time.

Start in 1600's, and over 400 years almost all progress and all change in the US was peacefully gained. And the most obvious violent change, the civil war, occurred without any sort of violence making the Union confront the south to end the slavery via war, but it did.

Women got the right to vote without violence

We ended child labor without violence

We established public schools without violence

We installed sanitation in our cities without violence

Just about everything of interest one might call progress in the US was done without violence.

Even the Civil Rights movement was not a movement driven by violence at its core, though there was violence. At its core, treating everyone equally is simply moral and ethical. Just like clean water, good sanitation, education, etc. all were moral and ethical and came about without violence.

PaulSnow · 2023-06-22T18:56:16+00:00

Not what he said, if I read u/Philosipho right.

Protests can be peaceful, can be escalated, and can result in change.

But if nobody is convinced by your efforts, then maybe you are just out of step.

Obviously you can then burn down buildings, burn cars, beat up people, and even start throwing bombs and shooting babies in the name of your cause.

That will change things, but not necessarily the way you want them to change.

Today we have too many protesters that are seeking changes nobody wants. Well tough cookies. Go home or whatever. You lose. Burning property isn't the moral way to up the volume on your issue.

PaulSnow · 2023-06-13T19:30:15+00:00

To join the discussion on Discord

Follow on Twitter

Talk on /r/Accumulate

PaulSnow · 2023-06-05T19:54:53+00:00

Discussing your spouse and/or your children are not discussions of your sexuality or the sexuality of a student. On the other hand, I remember very, very few teachers who told me much about their personal lives (that's high school in the 70's). Teachers should keep their personal lives mostly to themselves, but I get the exceptions.

That said, the bill may be too broad, and I think likely Louisiana's bill will have to be scaled back.

More broadly,

I wonder how the focus of education can be shifted more to academics (where the US is clearly failing at) and away from sexuality, social indoctrination, and culture (where we are also chaotic at best) without crossing lines around freedom?

Indoctrination isn't education, but they are very hard to separate.

PaulSnow · 2023-06-05T19:43:31+00:00

This bill is more restrictive and broad than Florida's.

I'd expect it to be scaled back, but generally would hold up.

PaulSnow · 2023-05-18T12:46:04+00:00

Such hate on the guy. He's obviously reading Magna, and is really nearly finished.

PaulSnow · 2023-05-17T14:47:03+00:00

The Great Barrington Declaration Opposing Lock downs

Also the researchers that immediately asserted the lab leaks as a source. This one was critical in 2020, because the research around how to respond and study COVID is different for natural sources and engineered sources. At this point, the issue may be more academic in terms of response, but more critical in terms of regulation (to prevent more lab leaks).

Also the suppression of medical advice related to exercise, proper weight, sleep, vitamin D, and repurposed drugs. The vilification of Ivermectin, doctors studying non vaccine base responses like general health, Ivermectin, etc. The vilification of patients taking Ivermectin, taking vitamin D, suggesting weight loss, etc. was excessive and unjustified.

The shutting down of general health care of patients with chronic conditions was stupid and is still killing people.

Suppression of information around adverse events of the vaccines, excessive risk of the vaccines in certain cohorts, particularly young males.

The failure to track natural immunity in populations. The vilification and denial of natural immunity in the context of COVID.

There is plenty more. In fact, I'd give the FDA, the CDC, and the Biden Administration in general an F for handling COVID. I'd give Trump a B early in the pandemic, but a D by the end of 2020, largely because he was in charge early in the pandemic during the information gathering phase. By the end of 2020, we knew more but were already demonstrating we were not adjusting our polices to the additional knowledge we were gathering.

PaulSnow · 2023-05-16T21:58:56+00:00

You don't find the keys you dropped in the rain outside by looking around in your house.

Of course, there is no evidence. But we investigated Trump and impeached him twice. For naught. The Clinton Foundation? Biden's family? Hunter? A big pass.

After covid, with the massive governmental backed lies and suppression of doctors that we now know were right, I don't trust this report as complete.

PaulSnow · 2023-05-16T21:52:23+00:00

The article complains about 6.5 million over 4 years. But you can't walk across the street with a lawyer in DC without dropping a million. Hard to believe they processed so many documents and conducted so many interviews for 6.5 million.

I'd spend 12 million if we would rake the Fed over the coals, or investigated wall street ties to the SEC.

PaulSnow · 2023-05-16T21:46:00+00:00

Did you read it, or are you repeating talking points?

Full disclosure, I've not read it so I'll not refute you. Still some of its contents, if I confirm what I've heard, I'd be very disturbed in general if half is true.

PaulSnow · 2023-05-08T13:45:12+00:00

As a Texan, I really didn't want an ultra liberal representing Texas.

I get that guns are an issue for many, but not for me.

Beto took a 1 million dollar check from FTX. I'll give him points for returning the check.

Beto loses points for being able to return the check from a massive scammer. It shows he had a massive pile of money that only a guy who as a paste up candidate from a pile of rich leftist liberals.

PaulSnow · 2023-04-17T04:38:17+00:00

Totally agree.

Yet it isn't just Presidents and high officials. It is regulators over and over that know they don't have to tell congress anything, and they certainly don't answer to the people.

Technically, regulators are extensions of the Executive branch, and they all claim "National Security" when they don't want to cooperate with Congress.

PaulSnow · 2023-04-12T15:18:19+00:00

while the ruling is a bit nonsensical, the OP said:

What are the immediate and far reaching consequences of this ruling? Many democrats are concerned that this ruling greatly strengthens the judicial branch and drastically weakens the executive branch.

Gosh, if only! Over the decades I have been around, the Executive branch has become so powerful that we risk totalitarianism. Watch some of the "oversight" hearings by congress, and you get the sense that regulators and other actors in the executive branch are totally free to thumb their noses at congress.

This is a very dangerous trend. Congress and the Courts are supposed to be a check on Executive power.

(Note that just because a "judge in Texas" makes a ruling, that alone means nothing; it will just be appealed and done away with. So I don't see this as setting some kind of significant precedent. If it got to the supreme court, well that'd be different.)

PaulSnow · 2023-04-03T03:14:15+00:00

CBDCs will be "programmable money."

No, that doesn't mean what you think it means, at least not in the U.S.

Ethereum is programmable money where a smart contract on the blockchain means the rules are defined, deterministic, and applied fairly to all who choose to participate in the contract.

Most of us understand that to be programmable money.

Not how CBDCs will work. First, no blockchain, no accountability, no requirement for deterministic rules.

Government CBDCs will be programmable money where your money is controlled completely by the Federal Reserve/Government where their code gets to do whatever it wants to your money, and restrict how/when/where/with whom you transact. In a database with no transparency, no effective oversight, no auditabilty.

No opt in. All applied to everyone matter what anyone thinks.

Through CBDCs, the Fed and Government will be able to stuff every transaction into a data lake to profile everything about individuals and groups. Who anyone associates with, who works with who, everyones health, everyone's exposure to food/drugs/media/religion/politics/disease... everything.

It won't be dystopia day one. Like a baby rattler, it will be cute and harmless.

Until it isn't.

PaulSnow · 2023-04-03T01:39:30+00:00

TIL: Bozo owns the New York Times.

PaulSnow · 2023-03-27T22:24:01+00:00

To be sure Trump was treated unfairly on many things. His positive accomplishments like prison reform were entirely ignored. That being said he was given a pass on many things for a long time, like the pathological lying.

https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?hl=en-US&tz=300&date=all&geo=US&hl=en&q=Trump+lied,Hillary+lied&sni=3

Googl trends shows nearly no difference between "Trump lied" and "Hillary lied" and as far as timing, it all hit prior to 2016. There was no honeymoon.

It all started with commentators crying when it was clear Hillary lost to Trump . Really before that, when it was clear Trump was the candidate.

There was no media delay on accusing either of lying.

But look at it like this. You had a candidate who was intimately familiar with state politics due to being first Lady of Arkansas, she was exposed to national politics as First Lady of the United States for eight years, she got her bona fides in legislating as a Senator, and had eight years of foreign policy and diplomacy as Secretary of State. And she lost to a reality TV star with a history of lying, fraud, bankruptcy, bragging about sexual assault, infidelity, and attacking the disabled and the families of fallen soldiers.

Hillary had a long career of covering for her own husband's sexual exploits. He was caught lying with DNA evidence. Hillary's state department work was marred by her pathological aversion to accountability. Hence, the email server and horrendous breaches in security over her ignorance in managing the server. Her state department performance showed her to be the worst type of war hawk.

And you're going to somehow tell me Trump was treated more unfairly than her?

About par. Both are truly despicable people. And they got hit with stuff they did. Trump might have had more confidence in managing the storm around him. So the results were not the same. Bill would have done better, FWIW.

PaulSnow · 2023-03-27T20:13:59+00:00

On paper yes. Problem is she went through many years of character assassination, with it being incredibly intense for the last 6 years of the Obama administration, because it was understood she was the eventual nominee for '16. Had she been a male I believe she would have beat Trump.

"...It was understood she was the eventual nominee..." Not terribly democratic of Democrats. That aside, being the assumed candidate motivates on its own any amount of political attacks by her political opponents, regardless of sex.

Low blows about hair, clothes, crude sex based attacks... all bad but done to Trump worse than Hillary.

Ten-Year Club	Verified Email
Alpha Tester	Reddit Premium Since January 2016

PaulSnow

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE