Not only can you quit if you don't like the company direction, frankly you have an obligation to resign if you believe you cannot fulfill your duties. This used to be ethics 101.

It's not shocking but is nonetheless disturbing that there are a not-small number of adults who think that throwing a tantrum and acting like a small child is a proper response to receiving news you don't like. Society has done a great disservice to these poor people who are used to being told whatever they do is good and fine. These humans deserved to be loved enough to be told when they're off the rails. But it's clear nobody loved them enough to discipline them in order to help them learn so they could be strong, well-functioning, ethical adults today. It's really very sad.

Charles Hoskinson is a well-known scam artist and pathological liar.

Sad to see Dirk associated with Charles's latest scam.

n/t

I've modeled my portfolio using the do-opposite-of-what-Jim-Cramer-says strategy. Have made a killing.

I know many conservative environmentalists. They're just not chaining themselves to trees or screeching about the end of civilization in ten years.

It turns out people don't really like preachy content. Which is what a lot of content nowadays is. That words seems an accurate descriptor for a lot of content nowadays.

Have you ever watched something "preachy" in your life? Of course you have. We all have. You know, with the tedious, over-the-top moralizing? Probably a lot of Christian content classifies.

But this is what "mainstream" content has become: preachy. And it turns out that people don't like "woke preachy" any more than they like "Christian preachy". It's all too cringey, repetitive, boring and, yes, unwatchable. And Netflix isn't alone; which is a reason why the value of a lot of other entertainment and news streaming services has also been falling.

Undoubtedly the economy is also a factor. In the face of inflation like this, of course a Netflix subscription would be high on the list of things people are going to cut. Russia is also a contributing factor, although it certainly doesn't cover enough lost accounts to cover the huge Q1 expectation gap. There are multiple reasons for the fall of Netflix, but -- love him or hate him -- Musk is right: content is the main reason.

Unfortunately it doesn't look like Netflix is externally yet ready to admit the real problem, which reduces the likelihood of them being able to course correct. It's hard to unaccidentally solve a problem that you won't acknowledge or seek to understand. Hopefully they're at least acknowledging the problem internally. Otherwise they're screwed.

Maybe about ~5% emphasis? Which is pretty significant.

Twitter isn't worth nearly that much. Not as a technology, communication company.

Twitter is worth that much, and much more, to the permanent state, Democrat party, media cabal, who use it to prevent peasants from saying true things that are inconvenient to their oligarchy. I get that. I'm sure they're scrambling to prevent this Twitter takeover in any way they can. But if the utility of Twitter was only what it purports to be, its value just isn't that high.

Twitter is a crappy way for humans to communicate that was started based on technological limitations of SMS message sizes and hasn't improved much beyond that. Humanity would be far better if humans went back to having normal conversations where not everything was about scoring points. Humans individually would be much healthier and happier.

Declaring the death of crypto? That is so original. I'm sure nobody has ever thought of that.

https://www.bitcoinisdead.org/

Did anyone doubt that blockchain payments are traceable? It only takes 5 seconds worth of investigation to know that blockchain transactions are open ("traceable") but the participants are pseudonymous (so it doesn't matter unless you leak your own identity). I'm not sure why you think this is some kind of "gotcha" moment.

Your fiat payments through centralized money services (banks, digital wallets like Venmo and GPay, brokerages, remittance companies, credit/debit card companies, payment processors, etc.) are 100% traceable and 100% tied to your real identity. So... if you're knocking crypto for the potential traceability then I'm not sure why you are supposedly content with legacy payment systems. Or if you're trying to say that crypto transactions should be more traceable, then frankly you believe silly things.

A lot of anti-cryptocurrency sentiment nowadays seems to be of the religious variety. I can understand hesitancy approaching crypto years ago when it was just establishing itself. But nowadays it's institutional. It's well-established and solving real problems. And, frankly, it's not going anywhere.

To be not only hesitant but actively anti-crypto today, in 2022, can't be much more than just a mark of faith. Mindlessly repeating long-debunked FUD about environmental impact and black market use is the liturgy.

Yeah. It's good at storing value long-term. That volatility makes it not good for short-term storage of value is perhaps obvious. But if you bought Bitcoin during any one of its first 12 years of existence and held onto it, your value would not only still be there but would have increased.

Fiat currencies generally lost value, some more than others. That's called inflation. Actually the central banks that manage fiat currencies typically target a certain amount of loss of value every year. It's intentional. Fiat sucks for storing value long-term. You can count on it losing value.

This use case of long-term value storage is only going to become more important as the world's currencies continue to be debased. Ask someone from Argentina or Turkey how it is. That you don't see or understand this use case only points to your incredible privilege.

It won't be climate change.

An argument can be made that the ideal average temperature for life on Earth is actually a few degrees higher.

But it's better to keep the populace in a state of perpetual panic. Much easier to control that way.

Tax revenue doesn't fund the federal government. Money creation at the Fed does.

So it doesn't really matter who contributes the most.

I can tell the headline is false without evening knowing anything about how that conclusion was reached. For the simple reason that you will not get 99.9% consensus from any large group of humans on anything.

You will not get 99.9% consensus on whether or not water is wet.

If you really want your cause to spread, stop hallucinating consensus that isn't there and focus on actually making persuasive arguments.