throwaaskjdfh

Cryptocurrencies, DeFi, and retail trading are all areas where more skilled traders take money from less skilled traders.

These venues can be distinguished from a Ponzi scheme because the participants are traders in a market, not investors in a company or managed financial product.

That's something I actually wouldn't fault Zuckerberg for. Too often someone with a vague idea and some money get more than they really paid for as the people doing the actual work discover what the real challenges are and solve them.

Waters raises a good question in the video - how did someone who started off with with a project for rating women by appearance become one of the most powerful people in the world?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Facebook#FaceMash

Being a rock star isn't what it used to be.

What does the Internet Archive/Wayback Machine do in similar circumstances?

I had the opposite experience. I suspect people spending time abroad temporarily, but long enough to go grocery shopping, tend to arrive at the most expensive grocery stores during their temporary stay.

No, being prosecuted at the whim of the powerful is horrible, but Bitcoin claims to be a kind of technological "escape hatch" from this kind of abuse.

The sooner we find out that it isn't an escape hatch, the better. We can then return to social and political hard work of curbing the powerful, instead of pretending we can just take our cryptocurrencies and escape.

Supporters of Bitcoin should be in favor of making it illegal in as many jurisdictions as possible. It's the only way to be sure it's as resistant to government power as it claims to be.

Ah OK, I guess the line of reasoning is that if the low water levels were due to low maintenance, then maybe there isn't really a drought.

Of course the enormous fires last year and the potential for a severe fire season this year suggests this line of reasoning is incorrect.

Thanks!

It seems like you're suggesting something but I can't tell what it is. What are you talking about?

I wonder if people that trade on headlines would get ruined so fast that no particular, single headline would make much of a difference (i.e. most people who would be fooled by this would already have been weeded out by some set of previous headlines).

> [I]t's very difficult to say what happens in year ~2140, we'll all be long gone by then

I think it's more likely that at least one young person reading this news today will live to ~130 than Bitcoin making it that long.

With just a SIM swap, isn't it possible for an attacker to reset the password on your main email account (e.g. gmail) via the phone, then from there reset the password on your money account through the stolen email?

> It is a false assumption that everyone who wants to work needs a wage that will support a family of four with no other income.

Maybe, but the post at the root of this thread invokes both a $10/hour wage and the virtue of starting a family.

Side-hustles are a thing because people think that if they have to hustle for someone, it might as well be themselves.

But why hustle for anyone? We should establish a universal basic income for all, and leave hustling to people who are hustlers by nature.

The trade was relevant because it's what she was lying to protect. My point still stands: people will take a large risk for a gain that is negligible relative to their net worth.

It'll be interesting to see how it plays out. I expect a catastrophe, but anything could happen. I suspect Bukele will have more influence on the outcome than Mallers or the users.

The question isn't whether they used insider information well, it's whether they used insider information at all.

Using information gained through their political office to inform their personal trading is improper, even if they lose money.

Just because many of these trades are bad or useless in retrospect doesn't mean that didn't try to profit from insider information.

EDIT: And I don't buy the argument that the small size of the trades relative to wealth implies that they're not using insider information. Martha Stewart went to jail over a $230,000 trade [0] at a point when her net worth was likely hundreds of times that amount.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ImClone_stock_trading_case - interestingly the loss she avoided was only $45,673

That's interesting, thanks for the correction. I was extrapolating from https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/02/health/white-people-covid... but that might not have been applicable here.

EDIT: I was mistaken here, corrected by a response below.

-

I don't think there was a way for the public health authorities to create an explicit rule about neighborhood residency without inviting lawsuits. The best they could do is place vaccination centers in more convenient locations for underserved communities, and hope that it could raise the rate of vaccination in the vicinity.

I think there were people assuming that if it wasn't against the explicit rules to commute there to be vaccinated, it must be OK, even though it might (in the event of limited supply) undermine the effort to raise vaccination rates in that specific area.

The technical work that a lot of us are involved in is deeply intertwined with the venture capital business. This is a glimpse of how things operate inside of that business.

It's like these two people are competing for the worst self-own. From what I can tell (and the communications on this are very confusing), Biggar goes after Prafulfillment without having his facts straight enough to avoid issuing a nearly immediate correction. Then when Biggar gets canned, Prafulfillment gloats in a way that draws attention to their identity, without clarifying what actually happened, leaving Biggar's version as the only account of events. Additional tidbits of information are coming out, mainly in responses to responses to tweets... but this is a ridiculous way to conduct public relations.