It blows my mind how easy it is for drunk drivers to get back behind the wheel. Once someone has proven how overwhelmingly selfish and foolish they are, it’s unfair to everyone else to put us in that danger.

So our solution is simply to weaken civil liberties for everyone with unreasonable searches.

I did this and they stole the bowl too.

Not every transaction, just the ones that open and close payment channels. This deletes data that would be needed to reconstruct an overwhelming majority of transactions.

(This is how Bitcoin’s lightning network works.)

If he doesn’t like hoarding, why doesn’t it just inflate?

Couldn’t they run a Chaumian digital cash server? It’s got top notch privacy, with the only downside of being a trusted central authority… which fiat currencies need anyways.

It’s because you’re taking a stance against cashless, which sounds paranoid and weird to most people.

Take a stand against VISA and PayPal. Then the bad guy isn’t “our” government, it’s corporations everyone already hates. And it references problems people already experience.

It’s much easier to explain how the situation is already bad than it is to argue how it “could become” bad.

What if it bounced through multiple peers between sender and recipient, encrypted on each hop like Tor? Then they’d need to actually break the encryption, or compromise every hop.

Sometimes I’ll ask a sincere question worded in a way that I didn’t realize implied anything, and get downvoted to hell. If anybody answers I’ll upvote, but I rarely want to stick around to explain why I don’t kick puppies or whatever.

This is a false flag study to undermine public support for mathematics research!

Well too bad, that’s leader talk. We need you to keep fighting until nature sacrifices you.

“We’ve decided on one year of really high inflation.”

I called him complicit by asking a question wrong hours later?

You (accidentally?) referred to both Bush and Obama as dynastic representatives in the post above.

Right, so why would anyone call him complicit?

Is it complacency if he’s forced to either deny genocide or lose his position to stop it?

We can always hold “we’ll organize and push her left after the election” people accountable. If they’re honest, then more people will organize, big win. If they’re not, then they’ll be so ashamed that they make new accounts.

Back then: “This will ensure we never tolerate genocide again!”

Now: mandatory genocide denial

The failure of FPTP was laid bare for all to see. Anyone who doesn’t support RCV after that is either a fool or already bought.

Well the second half is true.