Thread

Replies (35)

We are looking for someone who can invest 45,000 US dollars in our company. We are looking for an investor who can lend 45,000 US dollars to our company. We are looking for an investor who can invest 45,000 US dollars in our company. With this budget, we will produce our own uniquely designed furniture through our contracted manufacturers and offer them to the global market. By producing in bulk (wholesale), we will significantly reduce production costs and be able to sell high-quality, durable, and aesthetically pleasing furniture at affordable prices. With the budget of 45,000 US dollars you will invest in our company, we will produce our own designed furniture and sell it in the global market. With the money you lend, we will have the company we have agreed on produce quality furniture for a certain amount of money and sell it on the international market. Since our furniture will be produced wholesale, we will provide a cost advantage and will be offered to customers at affordable prices. In short, we will be able to sell quality, beautiful-looking, comfortable furniture to people at affordable prices. Since the furniture we produce will be made of cheap and high-quality materials, people will want to buy it quickly. You know that furniture is a type of profession that has been very profitable for years and will provide us with a large profit in a short time. Thanks to our experience in advertising, we will expand into international markets and make quick profits. Because our advertising network is strong, we will be able to acquire a customer base from many countries in a short time. This means that within this project, your money will grow more than fivefold in a short period, providing you with a high and guaranteed profit. 💼 Your Profit: You will provide a loan of 45,000 US dollars to our company. We will invest these funds in our furniture business, grow the investment, and return a total of 250,000 US dollars to you by March 22, 2026. You will invest 45,000 US dollars in our company. When 22.03.2026 comes, I will return your money as 250,000 US dollars. In short, you will receive back the 45,000 US dollars you lent to our company as 250,000 US dollars, and we will give you back your money in an increased amount. We will contact you on March 22, 2026, and refund your winnings of 250,000 US dollars. To learn how to lend 45,000 US dollars to our company and to get detailed information about our educational project, send a message to my Telegram username below. To learn how you can invest 45,000 US dollars in our company and how you can participate in our furniture project, send a message to my Telegram username below and I will give you detailed information. To learn how you can multiply your money by investing 45,000 US dollars in our company and to get detailed information about our furniture project, send a message to my Telegram username below. To learn how you can lend 45,000 US dollars to our company and increase your money by participating in our furniture project, send a message to my Telegram username below and all detailed information will be given to you. Turn your capital into opportunity! Our company is seeking a 45,000 USD investment to expand our innovative furniture project. Join us and discover how your money can grow while supporting a global venture. For full details, message us on Telegram at the username below. For detailed information and to learn how you can participate in our furniture project, send a message to my Telegram username below and I will give you detailed information. My telegram username: @adenholding
↩ replying to Stacking Functions
By incrementalism, do you mean the growing computer power to break, alter, rewrite (in one's favour),... the history of the Bitcoin ledger. I remember Guy Swann (Bitcoin Audible Podcast: "The guy who has read more on Bitcoin than...) or Jack Spirko (the of ~16-year running Survival Podcast, and recent Bitcoin Breakout podcast) Supposedly what quantum computing is all about or will do??? If you would ever have the patience to expand on the trojan horse scenario, i at least would be interested in hearing.
↩ replying to Kayne
This is a classic example of a False Dilemma (also known as a False Dichotomy or an Either/Or Fallacy). This construction deliberately excludes any nuanced, moderate, or alternative viewpoints. For example, a person might argue for the principles of decentralization and free speech on the blockchain while also believing that illegal content should be addressed through other technological or legal means, without resorting to centralized censorship. The question doesn't allow for this complexity. It's a loaded question: Both options are designed to make me look bad, regardless of my answer. It's a rhetorical trap. If I deny the first, I am implicitly pushed toward the second, equally damnable, option. The goal is not to understand my actual position but to corner me into a morally indefensible corner. Good job.
↩ replying to ⚡Lightning Goats⚡
first - "we" ??? what is this? you mindmelded with your wyfe or something? you speak as one!? lol... RED FLAG!!!!!!! wow... never heard - "im an ahistorical mcmerican consumer, johnny-come-lately, with an inability to think adversarially when i am up against a 5000-year old banking dynasty who has repeatedly destroyed opposition through various forms of sexualized blackmail up to and including CSAM." - it put quite that way. and it aint just the vile shit - its the BLOAT which will severely and negatively impact node decentralization and affordability... making it impossible for all those minorities you love more than your neighbors, in africa and indonesia, and increasingly most broke americans and destitute westerners, to run a node... and before you clonespeak, "prune' THIS! I dont get you jaw-agape complacent pacifists with your obliviously sunny takes - but I will not be surprised if you destroy bitcoin. you have destroyed everything else that made life tolerable with your kumbaya feminine disney outlook on world power dynamics and the absolutely RUTHLESS nature of the multi-front war. its YOUR world bro. look in the mirror - the rest of us are just living in the "its all gonna be fine" nightmare. glad I never got around to feeding your fucking stupid goats.
↩ replying to Weatherall
It seems like your argument relies more on personal attacks and mischaracterizations than on addressing the actual topic. Let's break down the logical fallacies you're using here: Ad Hominem (Personal Attacks): The majority of your reply is focused on attacking my character rather than my ideas. Phrases like "jaw-agape complacent pacifists," "kumbaya feminine disney outlook," and insults about my wife or "stupid goats" are all attempts to dismiss my argument by insulting me personally. Straw Man: You created a ridiculous quote—"im an ahistorical mcmerican consumer..."—and attributed it to me. I never said that. You're not arguing against my actual position; you're attacking a distorted, easy-to-defeat caricature that you invented. Hasty Generalization: You've leaped from a disagreement on this one topic to the conclusion that "you have destroyed everything else that made life tolerable." That's a massive, unsupported generalization. False Dilemma: You frame the situation as if there are only two options: my supposed "obliviously sunny" worldview or your "nightmare" reality. This ignores the possibility of any nuanced or complex perspective in between. If you'd like to discuss the actual issues—like node decentralization and data bloat—I'm happy to do that. But I'm not interested in engaging with personal insults and logical fallacies.