"hardworking people [had] their dreams liquidated over [Musk's] public temper tantrums."
They've joined a ponzi scheme, so they shouldn't complain if it doesn't work out for them.
Entities using the name and iconography of hacktivist collective Anonymous have deemed Elon Musk's recent crypto-tweeting worthy of a re-emergence. A new video that uses the group's trademark Guy Fawkes mask and a digitised voice opens by voicing appreciation for Musk's contributions to space exploration and electric car …
While I disagree on the "ponzi scheme" claim, people need to understand that unregulated, decentralized currencies are given value by and large by the people/groups that use them, and as such are really in no place to be upset if those people/groups use their platforms to sway the value of their assets. If people want more stability they should invest in stable assets. In other words, they invested poorly.
Not quite, a Ponzi scheme is funding payouts to existing investors from new investors = ultimately unsustainable con.
Bitcoin is just like any mining any other useless scarce resource.
If you can convince the peasants that a bit of crystal coal or shiny orange metal is worth a months salary and is required as a mating ritual - then you win.
Except that shiny orange metal actually has uses, and therefore has some intrinsic value. Crypto currencies have 0 intrinsic value and are far more volatile.
It's 100% speculation, basically a greater fool market. You can make money as long as you can keep finding a greater fool than you who will pay more than you did.
I get your point but it's still not a ponzi scheme.
Keep in mind the original stated intention of Bitcoin was to have a fiat currency without the baggage of eg. banks and governments, for all the positive and negative that brings with it. It's like I said earlier: The people support the value, so if the people say it's less valuable, there is no government or bank to prop up the price with their reserves or promises. However, hardware and energy prices also have a lot to do with costs associated with crypto mining, which puts a heavy incentive on miners to raise they price they sell at—so at the end of the day, there is an underlying link between the cost of Bitcoin (and other proof-of-work coins) and the cost of mining them.
Also, there are cryptocurrencies that do have some kind of intrinsic value, eg. Etherium smart contracts. (To put it simply it's a way to put an immutable, cryptographically secure transaction on the blockchain with some kind of data attached, which can be used for verification, authentication, data storage, etc...)
You can make money as long as you can keep finding a greater fool than you who will pay more than you did.
I'd say that about most casual stock traders.
All the quoted complaints just seem like a slightly less detailed or interesting version of a business text book. They don't really need to be stated. This is a thing that business people do to make money off people.
I don't get involved in Bitcoin (or any of the others). But many do seem to sucessfully take advantage of it and are "winning". Unfortunately that means there are people who have to "lose". You can't really blame the winners. That is poor sportsmanship.
... Anonymous had descended to the level of a joke. Much like Antifa (an ideology, not an organization) but with a more nebulous charter. I've seen far too many people post "We're Anonymous and we're coming for you!" to believe anything else.
QAnon is going be that way as well. Too many Q-posters sitting in their parents' basement sh*t-posting.
I don't understand why people continue to think of "Anonymous" as a tangible group of specific people. The original "group" was just a bunch of like-minded posters; there was no authentication, no membership requirements, it was all communal. After the original group stopped doing things many different people have come forth using the title of "Anonymous". It's an idea and culture that cannot be easily quantified, and anyone can take up the mantle, as we see here.
The QAnon nitwits I've run across couldn't find 4Chan with a search engine and a YouTube video explaining it.
I suspect many of the downvotes to the OP are because there's no evidence to support the claim that Anonymous participants have become QAnon adherents. In particular, Anonymous was appealing to people who overestimated their own political and material power; QAnon appeals primarily to those who feel relatively powerless.
"Qanon is probably why Anonymous has been so "quiet". They all became Qanon instead."
When you consider that both Anonymous and Qanon started on 4chan by skiddies trolling adults for the lulz, this is probably the most accurate post in this thread. I find it absolutely mind boggling that some actual adults actually give any credence to either.
"Conspiracy Theory followers are easily swayed"
Not swayed. Duped, suckered, hornswoggled, mislead and taken would fit better. However, once they have been hoodwinked they are far more tenacious in maintaining their delusion than people not so easily snowed. I've found that the more logical the argument against their confusion, the harder they cling to it. Kind of like religion.
Also a liar, though not (yet) at trumpian levels, more like jobsian levels at the moment
Just look at his latest excuse for cancelling a premium Tesla model.
He said the base model is so good that you don't need the premium version. As range is one of, if not the main issue with EVs for most people you'd think a 1/3 increase in range is substantial enough that many people would care quite a lot, so I'm not buying it. The more likely reason is that they can't hit the targeted range, or at least not at the prices they were trying to sell it for.
You often drive 400 miles without stopping to discharge/recharge occupants?
Clearly, you have never driven across Kansas. Where, exactly, would you stop? ... And why would you want to? Nothing against Kansas, but there is WAY more of it than seems necessary. 50 or 60 miles would seem to be quite sufficient.
"You often drive 400 miles without stopping to discharge/recharge occupants?"
It depends where you live, but if you're in a country like the U.S., Canada, or Australia, yes many do. Since you used miles, I'm guessing you are in the U.S., so you should know how much of that country there is and how long it takes to drive between major cities. Picking two cities that are in the same time zone, driving from Dallas to Chicago is a trip of about 970 miles and you'd probably recharge twice during that trip. Using a car which can refuel faster means you don't have to delay so much. It depends whether you expect to take such a trip and whether you care about the delay while charging, but there's an easy example to prove it happens. Many other city pairs are a lot further apart.
I sometimes have to drive 400 mile round trips in a day in the UK. Long stops eat into daylight at certain times of the year. Some brief toilet 'pit-stops', or maybe a grab and go sandwich are all the time budget allows. Since my non-EV will do over 600 miles per tank, a 400 plus mile range EV (including using the A/C, lights or heater as needed), would be the only workable replacement. No EV gains a usable range with a 5 minute top-up.
The fact that one man COULD manipulate crypto coins via opinion tweets suggests that investments in such things is, at the very least, UNSTABLE.
(which is why I do not do crypto currencies)
Also if someone(s) claims to speak FOR 'Anonymous', and does something lame like this, chances are it's NOT 'Anonymous' but someone(s) that is a pretender, an attention-seeker, or basement-dweller.
something like DDoS'ing the Church of Scientology [with all of the evidence about them] or going after rapists is the kind of 'vigilante justice' that would gain approval of a loosely associated bunch of individuals. Going after Musk or his companies because of a few tweets? No. That's lame.
S&P 500 is currently down by 0.19%. It's a big index of big companies, so movement should be considered in relative terms. Also hard to attribute movement of the S&P 500 to a single statement from someone. Maybe the S&P actually dropped because Bezos announced he was going to space this summer.
There are two important differences: firstly, it's her job; secondly she does not stand to benefit personally from her pronouncements. That the markets respond so dramatically, though you need to look more at the volume than at the price movements, is evidence of the inefficiency of markets. Everyone knows that, given the size of the various programmes of the last few years, both interest rates and taxes are going to have to go up at some point. The only real questions are: when and by how much.
"Everyone knows that, given the size of the various programmes of the last few years, both interest rates and taxes are going to have to go up at some point. The only real questions are: when and by how much."
Yes, you and I know that. Most people know that. But when it happens, you just KNOW the market traders are going to be "caught unawares" and go into met-down.
Somebody buying or selling an investment based on ANYBODY saying that "one day the interest rates will rise" is just as stupid as somebody making investment decisions because somebody said "the sky is blue" ... OF COURSE interest rates are going to rise someday! Then they will go down again, And then back up, and down. And up. Ad nauseam.
This post has been deleted by its author
Its not from one of the core anonymous groups and likely one person. Seems kinda obvious if you know their stuff.
If anyone other than an individual was involved they would have told him to make it less drivel and more concise.
Normally the hacks have been done already before a video is made and you get the idea this guy doesn't know about sql injections yet alone a buffer overflow. Not that a PR spokesman needs to have those skills but in the past they did...
Anyone can be anonymous, that is how the group was made. Anyone who hacks something or protests can attribute it to the name/cause and keep the movement going so to speak. But there was/is a core group which is mostly quiet and I am sure a few will splinter to be in the limelight again when the hackers get a good target and making money from ransomware dies off...
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2021