I think a quick glance at the headlines on CNN and Fox News on any given day show them practicing the same type of intellectual dishonesty to further their narratives.
I'll give you OAN, that's an entirely higher level of misinformation.
Not just more specific rules, ones that just come later in source order too (with an identical specificity).
Oh, and more "important" rules too. "!important" overrides everything. Well, except more specific instances of !important, or instances of !important with the same specificity but later in source order.
Specificity is easy, the amount of specificity a selector has is measured using four different values represented by four single digits in four columns. (Of course, a single ID will override a thousand nested class selectors.)
And that's ignoring the origin of the rule (author, user, or user agent stylesheet).
Well tbh I would never leave a bike locked up in any kind of busy public place in the UK and expect it to be there when I got back either. But otoh I don't think bike theft has been turned into quite such a readily available service here!
I saw someone stealing a bike in Oxford once. There were two policemen just 50 yards away. They did eventually come over to find out why I was shouting at the guy to stop stealing the bike.
I've never lived somewhere where cars weren't the most common method of transportation and I've only heard about bikes being stolen. Probably because it's just so much harder to steal a car whereas you can feasibly just carry a bicycle on your back.
Do you mean "pyramid scheme" specifically or just "scheme"? A pyramid scheme recruits members for enrolling others into the scheme, and not in an abstract sense. Bitcoin is decentralized and there's no way to enroll in it, no one to enroll people.
...and everyone that owns (is "enrolled" in) AAPL is "incentivized to get other people to buy" Apple products. So Apple is a "pyramid scheme" right?
"Pyramid scheme" is a real thing with a real meaning. Someone posting "BTC to the moon!" on Twitter does not make BTC a pyramid scheme. Typically people are describing market manipulation, and they just don't know what a pyramid scheme is (your post).
Thank you for agreeing. So your definition is so bad Apple qualifies as a pyramid scheme under it. That makes it appear that you have no idea what a pyramid scheme is.
> so the owners don’t have much extent
...but "to a mild extent" they do, so your definition calls this a pyramid scheme. The no true Scotsman fallacy doesn’t work here.
> [BTC] is structurally a pyramid scheme
The decentralized blockchain? You haven't posted a specific reason to say this that isn't abstract, despite two desperate tries. There are no recruiters, there's no one actively distributing funds for getting new recruits.
Just curious, do you know the difference between market manipulation and pyramid schemes? Pyramid schemes and Ponzi schemes? Pyramid schemes and other MLM schemes?
Or you just use them all interchangeably because you have no idea what they mean?
> Thank you for agreeing. So your definition is so bad Apple qualifies as a pyramid scheme under it. That makes it appear that you have no idea what a pyramid scheme is.
If you weren’t misrepresenting me, you’d be able to quote where I agreed AAPL qualified as a pyramid scheme.
I understand that what people think of Bitcoin is of great importance to you, but it’s easier to discuss this if you stay away from ad hominem and misrepresentation.
Ah. I was just agreeing to the part about incentives. Not to the claim that it was a pyramid scheme. Sorry for my part in not clearing up the ambiguity present in your question. I shouldn’t have quoted the whole paragraph. This would have gone better if you had asked for clarification instead of making that assumption.
>> I understand that what people think of Bitcoin is of great importance to you
> Sure isn't.
Ok.
> Weird shift to a personal attack, but what else do you have left after failing so badly?
You seemed to care about what people think of Bitcoin. Now you say you don’t. I’m surprised given the level of zeal you are displaying.
I’m curious why would you take it as a personal attack to point out that you care about Bitcoin?
Everyone that owns (is "enrolled" in) AAPL is "incentivized to get other people to buy" Apple products, just like BTC. These were the only 2 reasons you've ever given for why BTC is a "pyramid scheme".
You've said that both apply to Apple. So Apple is a "pyramid scheme" right? Or does the No True Pyramid Scheme fallacy mean Apple is excluded?
Is there a reason you can't explain the difference between pyramid schemes, Ponzi schemes, other MLM schemes and market manipulation? The most reasonable guess would be that you don't understand the difference.
This is not an argumentum ad hominiem, it's an explanation for why you're so wrong, and why BTC's not a pyramid scheme.
> I’m curious why would you take it as a personal attack
We're discussing BTC, not me. It’s easier to discuss this if you stay away from ad hominem.
Every HODLer spends half their time virtually knocking on doors trying to make you the greater fool, by buying into bitcoin.
These big conferences and coiners on HN are constantly doing PR to make more people buy into bitcoin, to make their stash grow in value. And this speculation and pumping the only reason to do it, because it's a failure as a currency.
de Blasio’s executive budget proposal has NYPD funding at $5.13 billion for the 2022 fiscal year, ~$230 million more than the budget adopted last year for this fiscal year.
You're accidentally arguing that providing more funding to a multi-billion dollar government union ("fiscal conservatism") doesn't reduce crime. Maybe take a deep breath before you regurgitate your comment the next time.
Just so we are clear: the defunding was massive, and it happened in 2021. Here's [1] the latest budget report for NYPD. Please check page 1:
- Actual spendings for 2019: $5.98 BN, for 2020: $6.09 BN
- Plan for 2021: $5.35 BN, for 2022: $5.42 BN
The actual quote from the report, a few lines below the main chart: "The budget for the current fiscal year is $5.35 billion – the lowest figure since Fiscal 2016, a result of reforms aimed to lower City spending on policing".
