Bruh... the chicken is the glowie!

I see no one dare ask the tough questions, so I'll step up with one.

I'm Michael aka Schnitzel — ask me anything about heating with Bitcoin.
[..] I'm a Swiss engineer

How come a Helvetian wears the name Schnitzel? As far as my school of schnitzology is concerned, the Swiss could only credibly claim stake in the Cordon Bleu...

I am baffled. And hungry.

I know exactly how "nine giant institutions form a group to 'help' Bitcoin" sounds, I had the same reaction. So before accepting, I spoke one-on-one with each company about their values and priorities, to judge whether this would actually be a productive initiative for Bitcoin.

How does one speak one-on-one with a company?

Who is the one at those in part behemoth companies who can mirror the company's intention so accurately you can come to a reasonably confident judgment?

Also: very unfortunate name in these circles.

Indeed. But also:

Samir: Hmm... well, why don't you just go by Mike instead of Michael?
Michael Bolton: No way! Why should I change? He's the one who sucks.

Over/under on when does another AI find out that the first one was hallucinating?

I'm mostly indifferent.
My wife has a strong preference for trad burgers.

She found the smash burgers we've had too greasy, or too burnt at the edges.
Granted, the few times we tried them were all in different Euro countries, so might be a case of them being unable to make better ones because reasons.
It took them years to finally offer decent trad burgers after all.

Seems to me that everything always comes down to whether we let people live with the consequences of their decisions

What an anachronistic thing to say when everyone always blames every bad outcome on someone else. I love it.

You must've missed the memo about the redefinition of capitalism. It's no longer anything to do with free markets and choice, silly.

It now stands for...

*slams fingerless-glove-wearing fist into open palm while looking earnestly into the camera*

... regulation-protected moats designed so greedy, rich people can take advantage of us honest workers.

Exactly. From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs.

I'm still hoping a critical mass of people discover the opt-out route for it being far less violent.
Hey, don't chuckle. I'm allowed to dream.

Africa deserves better than serving as a backdrop for fundraising campaigns, and Bitcoin deserves better than becoming another industry where a compelling story generates more value than genuine transformation.

This is great. So is this:

If we truly believe Bitcoin can contribute to Africa’s future, then we owe this ecosystem the same standards we would demand anywhere else: real transparency, real accountability, real measurement, real communities, real adoption, real impact.

I am a bit concerned about the track-all-the-things undertone in this paragraph but agree with the general sentiment.

A lot of these type of things are measured. At least they're being heralded frequently enough.
But still, funding campaigns seem to work much better if you paint a pretty, printable picture rather than actual impact because that is what the funding parties want to put on their social timelines.

I don't consider monetary fragmentation the deepest structural constraint inherited from colonialism.
But even if it were so, expecting Bitcoin will help fix that is nothing to expect having visible results in the few years it existed. In fact, it spurred greater fragmentation with the whole crypto gang showing up to profit.

Ingerland.

Also: France v Spain was the real blockbuster. :)

It's a sad fall from the great nation that brought us Terrance and Phillip.

Derangement syndromes, derangement syndromes everywhere.

Talking of which. There's gotta be some Ex-Trump ETFs out already? Right? I bet they sell like hotcakes too.

Because they're having fewer kids?

France is something else. I had to go through their match stats for all rounds to see if really no one was capable of making their defense sweat even a little bit.

And while I wasn't impressed with Norway's attacking efforts against France and never considered Sweden a team to pay attention to begin with, the xG stats speak another language:
Of all challengers so far, Norway and Sweden had the highest xG against France. Norway even beat them on xG. Too bad the scoreboard couldn't disagree more.

I wonder how much friction there is in public discourse due to the different sides using words differently.

I can't remember who said it back in the day, but the best explanation in my opinion was that the use of captured terms doesn't serve to discuss a topic in earnest with any precision, rather it serves as rallying cry and for the speaker to identify themselves with the group they seek approval from.

Our system of forced redistribution doesn't work. Let's call that capitalism. And let's fix it with more redistribution that we shall then call something nicer.

France and Morocco will play tonight

I have high hopes this will show France's defensive mettle for the first time in the tournament. They still remain untested in my opinion.

We are still waiting for the best image from Spain as some players still coming out from injuries.

Spain haven't conceded a single goal so far. Only the Cabo Verde result seemed weak. Then again, no other team has beaten CV in regular time either.
Since then, they seemed to get into the swing of things at the right time.

England and Norway will fight for a spot to face, most likely, Argentina.

England v Norway could be entertaining. And I've got a feeling the Swiss are stronger than people give them credit for, would be a slight surprise but no upset in my books if they somehow edge past Arg.

I guess votes do not matter, as expected.

Of course votes matter. You're just not voting hard enough.