Now imagine how government will effect that. You know how the government’s been trying to put back doors into hardware? A lot easier to do when you own part of a major chip manufacturer. Do you think having a steady supply of government orders will make them innovate or get lazier? Why is the government proving up a dragging company? Isn’t that picking losers and winners like Republicans had issues with in the Solyndra deal?

Intel failing isn’t a reason for the government to get involved, it’s a reason to stay away.

Think long term. What kind of regulatory capture is going to happen? Protected companies stagnate instead of innovate. That 10%? That’s not a cash deal. It’s not revenue for the share holders. It’s basically the value of all the CHIPS deal and other things that Intel was already getting. They literally gave 10% of the company away for free.

And it’s illegal. And it’s communism. It’s everything Republicans hated when the Obama administration gave Solyndra a loan. This is pure corruption and will end badly for everyone.

The stock is up. But that’s not because this is good. It’s up because investors didn’t think this through. Short term profit vs long term fail.

It’s all happening just like the fortune teller said. Orange president. Orange shark. Up next, Orange Catholic Bible and the Butlerian Jihad

Edit to add this fresh OC:

I only have two dogs. I’m not quite sure how many cats there are But I think including the fosters are somewhere around a dozen. Sometimes it feels like my property is just a frog and toad sanctuary.

I used to write bash scripts that probably should have been Python. Now I have 6 geese and other birds.

But they are using zsh.

I’m not normally a fan of dramas but after Breaking Bad I became a person that will sit down and not leave the couch if Breaking Bad is on.

“Matt and tray so loved America they were willing to burn $1.5 billion to save it.”

Two wallets. 10k BTC each. These wallets were created back when BTC was 78¢. When you spend $10k the IRS might ask questions. If you are “structuring” correctly you avoid spending $9,999 and $1 within a short time span or even in the same reporting period. 10k BTC back then was something you could buy that looked like it wasn’t $10k but was really close. Spend it twice in two different wallets and if there are enough other transactions no one will notice.

Anytime you see a transaction or set of transactions that add up to or are just shy of 10k USD, BTC or pretty much anything, there should be a little bell that dings in your head and causes you to think “this person is clearly thinking about US tax reporting laws and trying to dodge them.”

Who had all that money back in 2011 that decided that now was the time to tap those wallets that are worth a billion each? Obviously someone that hasn’t needed the money until now. Someone that is planning on spending up to 2 billion. But not right away because if you try to sell 20k BTC in a hurry it will draw attention and potentially destabilize the currency. But you could sell it all off over the next year or longer without flooding the market.

Who wants to spend up to $2 billion in the next year? What could you buy with that kind of money? Elon musk spent ~$250 million getting Trump elected. That’s just an eighth of $2B. You could buy a lot of super PAC power with $2B. You could bankroll the primarying of every Republican that voted for OBBB. Weird that these wallets were dusted off so close to Elon saying he would primary anyone that voted for OBBB, and he has a strong affinity for crypto, and he had enough money in 2011 to buy that much BCT on a whim, and that he wouldn’t have had to touch it to pay other bills as BTC went from 78¢ to more than $100,000 over the last 14 years.

I wonder who these wallets belong to and what they will be used for?

This is what conspiracy thinking looks like. It’s me. I’m the one conspiracy thinking.

Star Trek fans.

NCC-1701

Species 8472 is under represented.

It’s too early for the Butlerian Jihad to start.

Good to know. As my posting history on Lemmy will show I definitely watch bread recipes videos. In fact I became a mod for c/cooking today.

You watch one ContraPoints video about Jordan B Peterson and the next thing you know … Still not any JBP video recommendations. So I guess there is an upside to the failure of big data.

Each day I go to the YouTube app on Roku to my subscriptions tab and watch whatever is new. Then I go to Recommend and it’s 90% or more previous videos from those same subscriptions and very little new creators it hasn’t showed me.

After almost a year of this it figured out last week I might like AronRa, a person I’m very familiar with. And after countless videos on anthropology, evolution and paleontology he should have come up so much sooner. So much for big data.

But what is completely lacking is a “show me completely random stuff, old, new, not in my algorithm, short, long, completely against my algorithm, etc.” it lacks almost any way to discover new stuff that isn’t 100% related to content you already have.

YouTube gets more uploads than any one person can possibly watch and yet it’s almost incapable of showing me something unless I explicitly tell it to find it for me.

Nothing I do need to account for relativistic speeds or quantum mechanics so I could get by on Newtonian mechanics just fine. Most people could get by on Archimedes.

There’s not much that can make their web experience worse, but this is definitely one of those things.

You didn’t understand the assignment. Before asking questions do the required reading. You may find your questions have already been answered.

Look into the history of libertarians trying to set up paradises of like minded people to find out why this will fail. They start into the 19th century and just keep failing.

Smoking causes spontaneous human combustion. Which means it is not spontaneous.