Spademan
-
Content Count
4,958 -
Joined
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Calendar
Posts posted by Spademan
-
-
Aiigh, I set it up.
Let the monies flow.
Let it flow.
-
I'll check out bitcoin and if I'm ok with it I'll come take some of the money out of that pond.
Coinbase require sms verication?
-
None of the normal methods of depositing work for me, and I don't use bitcoin.
meh
-
But you pretty much have to deposit with bitcoin?
-
Anyone play at Ignition?
-
I don't really disagree with anything here. But even if his current net worth was $0, he still lives in complete luxury, had his own very popular TV show, and somehow leveraged his position into being President of the USA. By almost any measure, he has been very successful in his life. I don't, however, for one second buy that any of this somehow makes him fit to be president.
Three things.
1. He lives in complete luxury - as would anyone who was given millions and millions and millions of dollars by their daddy and didn't somehow blow it all on coke and whores. Being bequeathed a shit-ton of money does not make you "successful".
2. You'll note I was speaking specifically about him being a "good business man". I'll reiterate, there is zero evidence he's made more money than he would have if he just put the money he was given away. Having the same or less than the amount of money you were given as you would have had if you had done nothing with it does not make a "good business man".
3. Yes, he's been very successful at getting famous and using his fame to ascend to the presidency by tapping into the most vile segments of our society. I haven't disputed that at all. Desperate housewives and the Jersey Shore people are famous too.
Great?
Him personally or some subsidiary company?
I'm not sure. You'll notice I've been using qualifiers like "probable" and "likely" and whatnot, and that's because it's been a long time since I was looking into all this, so I don't remember a lot of the specifics at all.
-
I think calling him a failed businessman is probably unfair.
As late as early nineties he was claiming he was worth billions, but when his bankers issued a report in hears related to casino matters he was in the red 300 million. He's claimed he has "bounced back" since then, but in nearly every instance that information is presented in hearings the figures concerning the worth of one thing or another is a fraction of what he had previously claimed. We're talking a difference of a 50 million dollar claim of worth that turns out to be 1 million.
I am not being hyperbolic when I say it is probable that he would have more wealth had he just put the money he was given by his father than he does having tried to do business with it. That would be an utter failure. And being recognizable != sound or successful money management and investments.
Of course, even if that is the case, he may at last succeed at turning a superior profit now that he can abuse his power as president.
-
but really i meant it was over the top to say that if DJT had just put his inheritance in a mutual fund
No it isn't.
But, without tax returns (which he won't show, for obvious reasons - he claims to be a billionaire, L O L), there is no way to say for sure. But, from all of the information I've seen, it's more likely than not he'd have more actual wealth had he not "done business the best and greatest than anyone has done business just tremendous because of his tremendous brain".
But sure, believe that the one thing that Trump is honest about is how much money he has.
Sure.
-
By whom?
The American left?
I know the left. For some issues, I love the left. Chomsky is right. That's absolutely not a fight the left wants if the gloves ever really come off.
The problem is, the current left/right paradigm has done a pretty good job compartmentalizing the people who the government might actually have to fear as far as all the armed, authoritarian, pro status quo mustache-faces are right wingers.
I didn't phrase that well. I implied that they'd all fall in a bloody coup. I meant, rather, that some of the most vocal and public officials will meet a bloody end via more targeted gorilla activities.
And there absolutely are left-leaning types who are both willing and capable of doing so, if that sort of in-your-face fascism continues into normalization.
-
If it's so easy to become a billionaire, why don't more people achieve it? Especially ones that have inherited or earned more than 100 million dollars?
Oh, he's a billionaire, is he? Because he says he is?
Ha. Ha.
You need to look into it a bit more, there's a lot of information out there. You'll have to go to an impartial source though, rather than his tweets.
spade, like so many well meaning leftists, has been sent over the edge by PDJT.
Don't know what this means. Yeah, Trump is a narcissistic fascist con-man, and something altogether different, and altogether more dangerous compared past idiots who have been elevated to president - but what edge have I been sent over?
The U.S. is jam-packed with god damn idiots. What do I care, when it really comes down to it? I'm content to sit here and watch it burn.
-
"Our opponents, the media and the whole world will soon see as we begin to take further actions, that the powers of the president to protect our country are very substantial and will not be questioned" - Stephen Miller, White House policy spokesman.
"Will not be questioned."
Heh. These people are going to come to a bloody end if they keep ramping up the fascism.
-
The rumblings from the American left are getting strong and the "Democrats" aren't faring well. I think this version of "Democrats" (old hippies LARPing as social justice warriors while they mind the interests of their mega-rich donors) are done for. The Sanders that comes after Sanders will be the real thing. Probably Corey Booker.
No. I literally can't think of a person who fits your first qualifier in the sense of "social justice warriors who actually mind the interests of their mega-rich donors" than Corey Booker. His vote on the meds from Canada thing, which was a blisteringly obvious result of his pharma-whore status, has already sunk him to "progressives".
-
Trump is not someone I would ever call wise, but he isn't a "failed businessman" by any metric.
Yes he is. He'd have more money if he had just let the money his father gave him accrue interest than he does having tried to "do business" with it, even using every corrupt, illegal thing he thinks he can get away with to get an edge while doing so. He's a fucking idiot on every conceivable level. But even idiots can get some shit done if they are full blown narcissists who will do anything to rise to power - because there are going to be a lot of other idiots who will believe their bluster.
-
Reading this shit is like watching mentally challenged people spit on each other.
Most of you are so fucking stupid I recoil in horror.
I literally scrunch my face and pull away from the screen.
-
The Scottish Harold, or something:
-
Now granted, not quite on the level of a guy who has actually dealt with terrorists overseas, but still informative.
Not just not quite on the level, but nothing like it at all, and not informative at all.
The stakes of making some guy tell me something in the street - where his choices are "lose some money" or "give back that thing", or "give up the drugs" vs physical damage is nothing whatsoever like the choice between, "give up information that will likely lead to the death of my friends and or family, betray my Country, my God and my mission in life, and which will ALSO incriminate me" vs physical damage is not even ****ing close to the same thing.
Not even close.
Also, the drawbacks and ****ing benefits of false information are nothing alike whatsoever.
Causing someone to *easily* and *quickly* not find the drugs and then beat you up later anyway is not the same thing as causing thousands to possibly MILLIONS of dollars of man-hours, technology, prep-and-planning, and execution in an extended operation that will cost the guy *NOTHING*, but rather extend his time from pain.
I don't know about the "experts" (in quotes) you've read about or whatever, or your SERE school buddy (lol), but... ahhh... ahhh, haha. You don't know what you're talking about here. It's all "common sense" sophistry.
Reality says one thing, your common sense says another, it seems.
But sure, take your experience beating some goobers up as some sort of evidence if you need to.
-
Some sort of ticking time bomb, unknown location.
Lunatic who planted it, detained,
Ice cream or a blow torch?
That situation, torture 100% of the time.
Like I said, I could thought experiment scenarios where torture would be the most viable option. Yours is too thin and is wrong, but with some additions it could work.
If we were to explicitly stipulate that:
1. There were multiple proofs of a nuclear bomb going to be set off.
and
2. There was explicit evidence that a detainee had knowledge of its whereabouts.
and
3. There was an hours-long deadline before the attack was set to happen.
and
4. The detainee had previously broken reliable and demonstrably true information - and broken quickly - to torture.
Then probably we have a good scenario for torture being viable.
Some kind of Schrodinger's-Information that may be both good and bad is better than no information at all.
That's thought experiment. That's not how reality works. In reality bad information is terrible. It's a tremendous waste of both time and resources. This is why torture fails. It demonstrably nets bad information at a much higher rate than other methods. People will say anything to make torture stop. And "anything" is not the information I am looking for when I interrogate someone.
In other situations that aren't quite as exigent, maybe the 'build a rapport' method is the right way but higher level ideologues who just sit in the corner and chant aloha-snackbar all day, sorry. Blowtorch.
This is again, armchair thought experiment gobbledy-gook.
I've spent a good deal of my life doing this stuff for a living at the highest level, with the highest-tier, highest-value targets, and the hardest terrorists on the planet, and there isn't a single one that conducted themselves in that way. Sure, it's almost certainly true they exist at some exceedingly minute percentage.
But, here's the thing, even if with such a person - the "blowtorch" will net bad information more often than not, and that bad information results in wasted time, resources and inherent risks involved in action on bad information.
In fact, such a single-minded, evil-villain, pure ideological caricature type would be the worst candidate for torture. The absolute last person (aside from an innocent, obv) you're likely to get reliable information from via torture.
-
Upon further consideration: adding buying a subject ice cream and giving him a blowjob to the normal course of an interrogation would almost certainly, and I mean this literally, would almost certainly net better information, in more cases, than adding torture to the normal course of an interrogation.
Don't ask me why I considered this further. But I did.
You're welcome.
-
Torture is a poor method of extracting information. Morality, "if we do it they do it", blah blah blah are all irrelevant, given my first statement is true.
I'll point out, because I'm sure some idiot will say that torture has worked sometimes, that it being a poor method of extracting information doesn't mean that it "never works", or that I can't easily construct a thought experiment where it would not only be the correct course of action, but the most viable. Anything can work, under specific circumstances with specific people and ignoring the probability of success vs false positives. Buying a detainee ice cream and giving him a blowjob would work sometimes too. But outside of a thought experiment where you have perfect information, in reality that is, torture is much less effective than other methods of interrogation.
-
Problem is, there are a few really sensitive people around here who get REALLY antsy when the R word is brought up.
One easy way to identify where someone who isn't unabashedly racist is on the racist/not racist spectrum is how often they express rage at "racism cards" and how literally never they are outraged at pervasive racism.
-
1
-
-
I agree with his point that not all Trump voters are racists.
Except for the blisteringly ignorant (that is to say more ignorant that the normal amount of ignorant - where they literally don't know anything about anything at all, and vote without any knowledge about their candidate whatsoever), yes, yes they are.
Most Trump supporters are not racist.
Bullshit.
The whole GOP isn't racist
Again, except for the reality that some people are genuinely too stupid to recognize what they "support" or "vote for", yes, yes it is.
-
1
-
-
Since Dana is talking about going into Russia, some people are looking for Khabib vs Conor possibility because people like to jump the gun and get hyped for shit that probably won't happen. However, it has given me a couple of highlight videos that have made me change my mind.
I wouldn't take 60/40 with Khabib as favorite, it's more 50/50 for me now. Looking at a bunch of clips of Khabib striking with his wild abandon, ducking his head the same way every single time as he swings, I have him in real, real trouble on the feet vs Conor. Particularly to uppercuts.
Regardless, I'd want to see the fight, obviously, because somebody is getting smashed one way or another.
-
Now, lets talk about McGregor holding that 155 strap against either Ferguson or Nurmagomedov.
Answer: he does not.
Discuss.
I don't know what it is about McGregor that people just lose their senses in regards to how dangerous he is - but, yeah, no.
It is nowhere near that simple. Yes, Khabib is a straight monster on the ground, and in getting it to the ground. For this reason alone I would absolutely have him as a favorite. But the whole unequivocal "no" thing is absurd, at this point. Like Ron pointed out, Khabib got stunned badly by MJ.
MJ couldn't stun Diaz. He outboxed him until Diaz got in his head, but he never hurt him. McGregor put Diaz on his ass again and again and again.
To not see this translates into a very dangerous situation for Khabib is crazy to me.
Sure, I'd lay down 60/40 on Khabib, probably. But not thinking McGregor could reasonably knock him cold is silly, imo.
-
Yeah, so, about all that.
I've Got A Serious Dilemma...
in General Poker Forum
Posted
Eat more apples and wheat.