420600+ entries in 0.161s
mircea_popescu: and obviously there's no rule saying it has to do in the future what it did in the past.
mircea_popescu: ZedsterX there's dooglus' stuff which is pretty interesting
mircea_popescu: jurov normally server responds with a fu on error, but this is the new stuff that's still being debugged
mircea_popescu: jurov i was looking at it a moment ago, it came up as rss. lesee
mircea_popescu: <assbot> [MPEX] [S.MPOE] 6546 @ 0.00071102 = 4.6543 BTC [-
mircea_popescu: ZedsterX doesn't have to be really. anyway, hard to know what is ofcourse and what isn't ofcourse from yoru pov, ya know ?
mircea_popescu: or at least that's what they'e telling me in a doomed attempt to avoid the firing squad
mircea_popescu: ZedsterX you'll be well advised to remember chart reading as in, technical analysis is far from being accepted like newtonian mechanics is.
mircea_popescu: NOT the virtues of bitcoin. the fascinating fact that one of them got some.
mircea_popescu: and actually, talk about a trophy wife : she's maried to degeneres.
mircea_popescu: you know i can't see your name without thinking of portia de rossi
mircea_popescu: it's a bizzare question, what, they shoot canadians in wisconsin ? or how should i know anyway
mircea_popescu: i got it all because i asked, half hour ago or whatever.
mircea_popescu: for that matter i know you live in de soto, wisconsin, and that you collect, and what, and when you dated, and a whole other pile of stuff.
mircea_popescu: just like the uynemployed doesn't include the homeless
mircea_popescu: it's just they're carefully avoided when the statistics are made.
mircea_popescu: want me to pick up the reports that kids going to college today need to take basic literacy ?
mircea_popescu: i think that's what they hoped it to be, but it didn't work out.
mircea_popescu: the us financed nothing in particular, a buncha lossy wars.
mircea_popescu: kakobrekla seriously tho, people need about 3 average incomes now to maintain a 1950s lifestyle. in the 80s needed two.
mircea_popescu: presume you don't understand what's being said because of the other person once, get shown better, stop making the assumption. at least for a wittle while.
mircea_popescu: well that's true. but he already got slapped once with the entire statistics thing. you'd expect people a little quicker on their feet.
mircea_popescu: why do you presume to guess my emotional state ? does it help something ?
mircea_popescu: hm, if you won't think the question too much proof of my many and varied shortcomings,
mircea_popescu: people have never been this smart and yet men your age have never been this childish.
mircea_popescu: so nothing really, it's a little amusing, you'll grow out of it.
mircea_popescu: i guess for some views that constitutes proof of progress.
mircea_popescu: for that matter the raw raw raw we are the best the sun has ever seen is possibly the oldest rabble rousing talk ever. older than Athens for sure.
mircea_popescu: where they mean anything they're false, where they're not false they're meaningless.
mircea_popescu: or perhaps you're not quite up to the reading, seeing how it's both ancient and banal an example.
mircea_popescu: perhaps human notions of morality and ethics aren't quite as developed as all that.
mircea_popescu: so : if situation A is that 100 people die yearly in forest fires and situation B is that 3 people die yearly in forest fires but one person is kidnapped and tortured to death as a religious practice which causes the reduction in forest fires casualities, is a movement from A to B progress in your view ?
mircea_popescu: but let us better understand this notion of progress you use, because after all it's so messed up by commoners chewing on it.
mircea_popescu: (yes, surmise but not conclude. which is specifically why i used that word and not the other. i'm trying to help you judge here.)