Avatar
denimdan0947437051
901f4e1f5e3098171e8ee7f1dc3adb4699c6a3b3ada42647495b4b0e685807bb

Nope, I agree with that. But my question is more along the lines of, haven’t people been claiming that a country can essentially bank run “the world” by using precious metals ever since? And how would the UAE be in a better position now than France was then? Comprende?

Ok, BUT, the whole reason Nixon ended the gold-dollar (generalizing) was because some Eurozone countries (*cough *France *cough) we’re taking advantage of the standard to get gold for a “better” price. Then people started claiming the end [of the dollar] is nigh. History shows the end was not nigh…

Just questioning how non-major / regional players will ever be able to destroy the dollar with gold… if a major world power wasn’t able to do it back in the 70s?

Replying to Avatar rabble

What’s the real 1st ammendment implications of the proposed TikTok ban / divestment law?

nostr:npub1uuxnz0sq60thc098xfxqst7wnw77l0sm3r8nn48yspuvz4ecprksxdahzv takes an indepth look at the case and it’s implications for free speech on the internet in the US.

nostr:note1s5msfydfl0nz3m44qxgg52jtarnsdjnfzluajflkwh7znkt8w5cq9zm0de

I’m not convinced that anything with an algorithm that’s controlled by anyone BUT the end-user could be considered a public square and be protected by the 1st amendment for speech. I think the government can consider regulation of any foreign-owned app if that app refuses to make its algorithm transparent, an algorithm is not human anyway.