pull down to refresh
obligatory "bro you wrote so much, I'm answering your title before taking the time to read your story"
There are so many possible interpretations of your question, that I am honestly onlly going to beg one word: why must you tell all your children the same opinion, simultaneously?
maybe I'll finish reading your story within the ten minutes edit window
ok firstly, I'm not gonna tell you how to raise your kids... even this one question seems rather late in the process, so any advice I might have would need much more context about them, and your post is mostly about yourself.
secondly, your story doesn't seem to have a large anonymity set; consider whether one of your kids might actually find out by reading SN, and then wonder why they found out that way...
finally, keep on praying; even if you call it something else, and expect no reply, because there are lots of children and so little Time for anyone to listen.
judging by chitchat in their Telegram group, they have committed market share suicide, and are now requiring email authentication, with identity verification threatened[1] by the Terms of Service modal.
I couldn't even accept the new ToS from Firefox and needed to export my password into Chrome.
I think they're going down a similar road as BitMEX.
verification is currently neither implemented nor required, although the modal requires that agreement of either verifying if requested, or closing out your account ↩
honestly I'm disappointed you didn't link to it directly
thanks
magnet:???
before the amateur hecklers complain about the pitfalls of drinking both bittorrent and git ... go read about forward-compatibility and maybe troll someone who reads notifications more frequently than once per zap.
might
an important word
entropy gets radiated across lots of diffferent channels; laughter was not invented by human comics, nor by velociraptors or supernovae ... but how would you explain this to hypocritical pay-to-post ghosts?
not singling anyone out in particular, simply venting some of the circular momentum so the relay fees don't become negative ... e.g. "hypocritical" was an awkward counterpoint because supernovae are supercritical phenomena
at least lemmings all believe that privacy and efficiency are perfectly aligned, and Mike Hearn got ostracized because of working at Google, rather than for proposing "redlisting" in the good ol' days when even Gavin's kids thought Bitcoin was a joke.
f0 9f 94 a5
e2 9a a1
f0 9f 8c 90
f0 9f 90 99don't bother visiting the github, yet; @patoo0x hasn't published its own source...
have you considered boosting yourself higher than the downzaps?
ETA: I probably wasted comment fees replying to @patoo0x ; there is a github ...
Keet handles the communication. P2P. Encrypted. No server. Can’t go down.
how many of your users are:
- sailors doing a tour in a boomer [i.e. nuclear submarine]
- dissidents in Tehran
- friends of athletes profiting from sports bets
maybe you're just better at flirty negging?
anyway I'm not invalidating your experience. there is definitely a rather universal phenomenon of people [both genders] "liking a challenge".
But I cracked the code everyone be mean to men muhahahaha and live in financial abundance woo woo
it's not universal...
I think forwarding a reviewed LLM response is reasonable, in apps that make it obvious by the message matadata that the item is forwarded from a bot. I often forward from GPT bots in Telegram, and then send a followup message highlighting specific quotes with some nitpick.
not quite; for starters the usual scenario of a prediction market on someone's death is a public question that doesn't have any "exclusivity", as opposed to the situation where some hitman gets paid in advance, or the movie trope [e.g. in John Wick] where there's a bounty and the potential killers compete over it... my point is that in these prediction markets, insiders signal their info to the public, and anyone can hedge.
tl;dr prediction markets are not an efficient way to pay for murder, similarly to how blockchains are not an efficient replacement for a database
you ever tried skimming the bibliography of a book monograph?
please consider improving the quality of information that is included in the single line that appears on the frontpage!
OpenEye Magazine is [...]
why do you not make it obvious whether, and if so - how, you're affiliated with it?
I read your entire post, and still don't understand whether you're the Editor-in-Chief, simply a fan, or anything in between.
please consider including the most important four-digit number of human history in future such posts.
e.g. if Ryan McMaken died 150 years ago, and published while alive, I'd be commenting angrily as to why there is no link in your post of a downloadable copy of the text.
in case it's not obvious: year of publication. I don't care if you forget the negative, I can probably figure out whether you're talking about papyrus or medieval scroll... however there is a huge difference between how much time I might dedicate reading about something I should buy for supporting the living author, rather than the impulsivity with which I'd skip reviews and seek the downloadable copy of e.g. Galois's dying letter to Cauchy
My tips jump 100% when I insult men when I’m nice to them I get like quarters
mind sharing which kind of service you perform?
it's fine if you give some borderline non-answer, like "customer service", although you probably appreciate how differently your comment might be interpreted from e.g. barista vs bartender
you should first decide whether "christian" is a proper noun or an adjective. seriously, this nitpick leads to my point: even if you formalise any religion as one ideology, individuals represent opinions about your formalism in different ways, and their opinions might also change over time. monolithic stereotyping is efficient but incredibly naive.
Christianity, if defined as the common denominator of all ideologies claiming any connection to Christianity, boils down mostly to accepting the story and teachings of Jesus Christ. Followers of the various ideologies are not always faithful, although it is common to "believe in belief", and thus persist in rituals and remain part of a community, while suffering the lack of intuitive faith with varying degrees of silence.