He would have gotten more functionality and style from a smartwatch.

China has been manipulating the lithium market the same way they've been manipulating the rare earths market (ie, poor environmental standards and anti-competitive practices by trying to build a monopoly). No other car company can acquire batteries at the same low cost as Chinese car producers. As soon as the supply chains are fixed (for both lithium and rare earths) this won't be a problem anymore.

China's dumping practices are well documented in the car industry. They overproduced and are now selling below cost.

From a technical standpoint your are correct. From a practical standpoint there is something we all are not seeing.

The industry has customers that place a lot of value on relative anonymity. There isn't anything inherently illegal, immoral, or wrong with 'dark money' either it really isn't anyone's business what anyone else invests their personal wealth in. (beyond basic tax law enforcement etc, which yes privacy does complicate)

The industry also must certainly be aware they make quite a lot of money off players who are in fact sanctioned, using their platforms in complex laundering schemes and the like.

I don't see anyone who is running and IB, brokerage, or exchange wanting to just make all that go away. Maybe I am to cynical but if the people in those positions were really the types to say "hey we are willing to make less money, for the greater good" well there are at lot of things like know your customer standards and the like they'd have beefed up voluntarily already.

So I am left with there is a plan here we have not seen yet, like charging premiums for coin blending services or other various proxy ownership games like invite only trading of in house assets off chain.

One thing I am certain of nobody is trying to give the SEC radical transparency out of the goodness of the big hearts

 

This thinking requires the ability to disassociate the individual from the stereotype of the group to which he or she may bear superficial resemblance.

Human history and current events keep telling us that this behavior is not natural; it must be learned. The unthinking default is to lapse into tribalism.

It would be a lot easier to elect a different president.

Part of me thinks they actually, truly, believe that making the distinction at all is immoral.

I don't really get it either* but Occam's Razor and all.

*I have a conjecture though: it's rich kids who do this, and it's because in their entire lives, they've been surrounded by immigrants who are either their peers or their servants. The concept of dysfunction existing abroad and sticking to many who come here unfiltered is just alien to them.

... is that it consumes standardized, structured text, has a consistent UI, etc.

This sounds ... like not that.

Well, actually, yeah, if he's not a citizen.

Why should we continue to tolerate a criminal guest?

I'm not even an american, mouth breather.

This really isn't any different than requiring advertisements to disclose the use of paid actors. I can see it running into a few problems with internet advertisements though. I'm not sure it really matters though. Some people will buy stupid crap regardless of what kind of labels or warnings are put on something.

I dunno. They make decent enough output for shitposting on social media. While there is a certain amount of delight to be had in coming up with a clever limerick about someone's mother, some people really aren't worth the effort. The AI can do it well enough in a few seconds though.

I'm not sure I'd use it for any productive work though. Of course not everything has to be for work though either.

The ideal number of hallucinations is zero unless they are specifically requested for whatever reason. If someone told you they were going to kick you in the nuts 38% fewer times this week, you're still getting kicked in the nuts.

I'm not sure a person who's hallucinating could be convinced by another person that what they observe isn't really happening. I think a person has to come to that realization themselves in order to be able to not lose their shit.

The dumbest part of the entire thing is - a college campus is one place where it should be like super easy to find some folks to wager with. Maybe like I dunno talk to some of the guys in your hall, activity lounge, wherever.

Setup some squares - everyone can photo the board with their phones so there isn't any funny business. You could even like socialize and watch some of the sporting events, maybe find girls like sports to watch as well get a couple bags of chips and some sodas and actually have a good time?

Oh the best part some of these people you call 'friends' win and maybe you win next time. There is no house taking a cut...

i don't think a little friendly gambling with people know is to likely to get anyone into addiction or encourage people to take risks they can't really afford but commercial gambling be it on sports, prediction markets, or stocks is down right predatory. The pattern-day-trading rule exists for good reason - its to prevent Etrade from turning into Draft Kings, and it has worked. We probably need something like it for Sports/Prediction market betting. If you can't find 25k worth of assets to park in an account, then you should be limited to handful of bets/plays a week. That way people don't get hooked, and hopefully you don't get people playing with money they can't afford to lose as often because, by virtue of the fact if you can keep it on account for x days you don't urgently need it.

Not really. Gambling (legal or otherwise) has been around for a long time.

What's changed is the ease of access. Today making a bet is a few taps away on a phone, whereas in the past you had to go to a bookie at the very least.

I'm not sure to what extent this can be fixed. I have a sneaking suspicion that even if all of these students were made to take a course that shows them how badly a casino, etc. will screw them out of their money that a few would just want to gamble even more because they think they can spot the tricks now.

Making it illegal won't really work either. Organized crime will just fill in for legal businesses. The internet makes it virtually impossible to stop unless a country is willing to implement levels of control similar to China and most people will not put up with that even if it would stop the gambling problem.

Few. Especially the white ones. They know they've been iced out of their futures. They see the clown-world around them: prosperity is for non-whites and corrupt while females. Not them.