pull down to refresh
0 sats \ 1 reply \ @johngalt 24 Mar \ parent \ on: Wall Street Radar: Stocks to Watch Next Week news
Chicken flight, or not?
I only see the charts on the radar, but I'm limited only to a few actions and some shitcoins.
In addition, the actions I put in the radar to graphically check, I give preference to those with good fundamentalist indicators.
Is this wave of happy single women really a choice, or is it more a reflection of unsatisfying relationships? Because there’s a big difference between saying, "I don’t want to get married because I’m great on my own" and "I’d rather be alone than get into another bad relationship." If the second option is more common, it means that it's not single life that's becoming more attractive, but rather that relationships aren’t worth it. And that should be a wake-up call for everyone—especially for the guys who want a relationship but aren’t offering the bare minimum for a balanced partnership.
So, the thing is, kindness nowadays feels like a transaction, right? Like, "Yeah, I’ll help you out, but you owe me one later." Kinda sad to think that kindness turned into some sort of emotional currency.
But has genuine kindness really disappeared? I don’t think so. There have always been people who only help to get something in return, but there are also those who do good just because they want to, no strings attached. The problem is, with everything moving so fast and so many relationships being interest-based, it’s getting harder to trust.
Now, let’s be real: is kindness with a little self-interest always a bad thing? If both sides benefit, it’s just a fair deal, no need to make it all "good vs. evil." The real issue is when someone pretends to be kind but is actually just looking to take advantage. That’s when it sucks.
Maybe the key is not to go full paranoid and assume everyone has an agenda, but also not be naïve and think the world is all sunshine and rainbows. The trick is balance—trust people, but keep a little caution in your back pocket. After all, being kind doesn’t mean being a fool, right?
The Bitcoin has always been the villain when it comes to energy consumption, right? Those crazy computers running 24/7, burning electricity to validate transactions and keep the blockchain running. But unlike cannabis, crypto mining is increasingly shifting towards renewable energy sources, like hydro and geothermal power.
If growing weed is using more energy than Bitcoin, shouldn’t people be complaining about that too? The difference is that mining can be done anywhere in the world, while cannabis still faces a bunch of legal barriers that force producers to stick to this unsustainable indoor model.
The idea of disabling these feeds, adding something like a captcha or something that "breaks" the flow, is really interesting! Imagine we’d be forced to stop and think: "Do I really want to see more of this now?" It would be a great brake on this endless scroll. There are already some productivity apps that kind of do this, like limiting the time you spend on social media, and I think that’s a good thing. Something that makes you reflect, like "Is this time well spent, or could I be doing something more useful?"
You made a very real point about the value of networking, especially in the freelance world. The reality is that being excellent at what you do isn’t always enough; the right connections can open doors that would otherwise stay closed. It’s a skill that, even for the most introverted, can be developed strategically—like participating in online communities or keeping in touch with past clients in a more natural way.
As for my own “work wisdom,” one thing that always stands out is that adaptability is just as valuable as technical knowledge. The rules of the game are constantly changing, so those who adjust quickly have the upper hand. Another lesson is that sometimes the way you present something matters as much as what you actually know. Many skilled people miss out on opportunities just because they don’t know how to sell themselves.
But back to your point—have you ever tried a more indirect approach to networking, like creating content or contributing to forums in your field? That can help build connections without requiring that more forced social interaction.
Honestly, I don’t think Saylor’s prediction is as crazy as it seems at first glance. Bitcoin has already proven to be the best-performing asset of the past decade, and if it truly becomes the foundation of a neutral global monetary system, who knows?
The real question is: Will this actually happen? If BTC truly establishes itself as "money over IP," then $13 million per unit wouldn’t be a random number but a natural consequence of mass adoption and the flight of value from traditional financial systems. Today, everyone uses the internet to find information—why not use Bitcoin to store value and transact globally? It makes sense.
But I also see the other side. This kind of growth would require a 29% annual appreciation for two decades, which is insane. Bitcoin has had exponential growth spurts before, but the bigger it gets, the harder it is to sustain that curve. Not to mention that governments might try to regulate it, other technologies could emerge, and Bitcoin’s own volatility could prevent it from being used as an everyday currency.
Now, if this does happen and Bitcoin truly moons, what does that mean for Satoshis? Well, in Saylor’s scenario, 1 satoshi would be worth 13 cents. That doesn’t sound like much, but today, 1,000 sats buy you a piece of gum, and in that hypothetical future, they could pay for a meal. The problem is: what about inflation? If the world undergoes financial collapse and traditional money gets diluted into nothing, then Bitcoin might grow massively in absolute numbers but without a real increase in purchasing power.
I do think Bitcoin has a bright future and could capture a huge share of global wealth, but setting an exact price for 2045 is just a guess. I’d rather believe that holding BTC long-term is likely a winning move, but maybe not as extreme as Saylor projects.
Dude, this Atacama Cosmology Telescope (ACT) stuff is absolutely insane. These guys basically hit "rewind" on the universe and managed to see light from when it was only 380,000 years old! To put that in perspective, the Big Bang happened about 13.8 billion years ago, so that’s like 99.99% of the way back. Almost like a save point from the beginning of everything.
This study on older AI showing signs of "cognitive decline" is quite interesting, but at the same time, somewhat confusing. Some people believe that older models are struggling with complex tasks, such as remembering things or processing visual information. However, others are questioning the validity of these tests, as they were designed for humans, not AI.
Can this be "cured"? Maybe it's a matter of improving model training or adjusting the tests to better align with what AIs actually do. It remains an open question, right?
It makes you think about space research. It’s amazing to make discoveries like this, but at the same time, we have problems here on Earth that need attention too, like climate change and social crises. People are out there spending money to figure out how plutonium got to the bottom of the ocean, while we still haven’t solved some basic stuff here. So, is this research really necessary, or is it just another excuse to focus on things way more distant from our daily lives?
Anyway, it’s a fascinating discovery.
Dude, this MemeChain thing is pretty interesting, but there are some points to think about, right? The idea of organizing memes to avoid that mess in the main feed is cool because, let's be honest, some days the feed is a total mess with just generic and repetitive memes. And if people start creating these specific MemeChains for niches, like "Pokémon MemeChain" or "Cat MemeChain," it could be great for those who like those specific topics and don’t want to be bombarded with random memes.
Good points about the idea:
-
Less mess in the feed: No one likes opening their feed and seeing a bunch of the same memes or low-quality ones. If everyone puts them in the MemeChain, people who aren’t as into memes can breathe a little and still enjoy the content.
-
Incentive for more creative memes: The niche idea is a win because it gives space to more personalized and funny memes that probably wouldn’t fit in the main feed. This could be a way for people to show off their creativity and still engage with smaller groups.
-
Organization: Nothing’s worse than wasting time scrolling through the feed looking for something you actually want to see. The MemeChain could make everything easier and quicker, without so much visual pollution.
On the other hand, there are some issues:
-
Generic memes being left out: One of the coolest things about the internet is the variety of memes, from the most specific to the super generic. If people focus too much on niche content, the feed might lose that spontaneity and all those light-hearted, random memes. It might get too segmented.
-
Involuntary exclusion: Imagine people who aren't super into niches or don’t have time to keep creating these chains. They might get left out, and the focus will be only on those in the "bubble," which could lead to a sense of exclusion.
-
Money involvement: The idea of paying 10 sats to post a meme in the MemeChain does have its cool side, like an incentive, but it could also push away people who aren’t willing to spend just to share something funny. Also, there might be pressure to make more viral and commercial memes just to generate engagement, and then the whole essence of memes being spontaneous kind of goes out the window.
In the end, I think the idea has its value, but it needs balance. Organizing memes is great, but without losing creative freedom and excluding anyone. If the MemeChain is balanced well, it could be a way for people to keep creating without turning everything into a formula. Let’s see if it catches on, right?