Markets /can/ fix this however with proper planning.
I would really like some dip right now, but also for me to not be afraid. Is that coming up? 👏
https://video.nostr.build/afc3b589b210dcc07bef4ed83b7ff41fbb86e8033b3d294800d336e24e9b3044.mp4
Yeah! Fuck the free market!
The Trump administration learning about what Biden has been up during his 4 year term measured in WTFs/min:

Team Problem: A Mystery
A certain cabal within the 6.042 course staff is plotting to make the final exam ridiculously
hard. (“Problem 1. Prove that the axioms of mathematics are complete and consistent.
Express your answer in Mayan hieroglyphics.”) The only way to stop their evil plan is to
determine exactly who is in the cabal. The course staff consists of nine people:
{Oscar, Stav, Darren, Patrice, David, Nick, Martyna, Marten, Tom}
The cabal is a subset of these nine. A membership roster has been found and appears below,
but it is deviously encrypted in logic notation. The predicate incabal indicates who is in the
cabal; that is, incabal(x) is true if and only if x is a member. Translate each statement below
into English and deduce who is in the cabal.
incabal means in group
∃ Exists
!= Not Equal
∧ And
∨ Or
→ implies, if ..., then ..., IMPLIES
∀ for all
¬ Not
(i) ∃x ∃y ∃z (x != y ∧ x != z ∧ y != z ∧ incabal(x) ∧ incabal(y) ∧ incabal(z))
- 3 unique members exist (x, y, and z)
(ii) ¬ (incabal(Stav) ∧ incabal(David))
- Not Stav and David are in the group
- An equal meaning to this is either Stav OR David are in the group
(iii) (incabal(Martyna) ∨ incabal(Patrice)) → ∀x incabal(x)
- if Martyna OR Patrice are in the group then for all x are in the group.
- This is a lie because only 3 people can be in the group and for all x implies all 9
(iv) incabal(Stav) → incabal(David)
- if Stav is in, then David is in
- It just said above they both can't be in the group so Stav can't be in group
(v) incabal(Darren) → incabal(Martyna)
- if Darren is in then Martyna is in
- this leads to a dead end because of (iii)
(vi) (incabal(Oscar) ∨ incabal(Nick)) → ¬incabal(Tom)
- if Oscar or Nick then Tom is not in.
- So it could be Oscar and/or Nick
(vii) (incabal(Oscar) ∨ incabal(David)) → ¬incabal(Marten)
- if Oscar or David then not Marten
Therefore:
The only remaining people that could be in the group is:
Oscar, David, Nick
It reminds me of how one could figure out how your coins went into silk road before it was captured. Oldies but goldies.
Sorry. I tend to read up until I find something I don't agree with. I probably missed your central point. Bad habits die hard 🙏
Early evolution required that we learn how to aim ahead of a moving target in order make contact. If we focus on where it is now, we will always miss.
Newton's laws of motion, etc, etc. Agreed.
And I don't need adequate data because I'm not making that point. I'm making a point that it can be measured in the form of direction.
The computer has become a schedule II narcotic. It's time to find something else to do for the rest of my life.
Is this indoctrination? We know what direction is leading to centralization caused by larger blocks. Bitcoin used to be run on a PI 4. The fact that it can't run on a PI 5 tells us that bitcoin is centralizing. Or look to 3rd world countries. Can they afford the hardware, or do they have the bandwidth?
Breaking the negative feedback loop on tit for tat.


