Crypto was suppose to make me rich, now I'm still poor but with a gambling addiction

Borgers? Nah Burgers? Burgers….

ok I need BURGERS TO GO UP. like VERY SOON. I cant take this anymore. every day I am checking BURGERS and it is staying the same. every day, check BURGERS, same. I cant take this anymore, I have over invested, by a lot. it is what it is. but I need the BURGERS to GO UP ALREADY.

You’re not on HL yet anon? COPE harder

I think @udiWertheimer should publicly admit defeat and submit his request to have cat included in the forthcoming CTV activation client

We're going to win so much you're going to get sick of winning. You're going to say "please, mr cryptoanarchist, i'm tired, can we please stop winning" and I'm going to say "NO, MOAR!, WE NEED TO WIN!"

Alright, I have not heard back from the @MEonBTC peeps, and I think it's necessary to share some thoughts: Potential Vulnerability Exposure (this is a consideration of events, not a disclosure or results of an audit of any kind):

Introducing SOLO: a protocol that lets anyone run an Ethereum validator with just 1.25 ETH instead of 32 ETH. It enables an LST backed by the portion of a validator's stake unlikely to be lost, without relying on governance or trusted hardware. Here's how it works 👇

Art, Competition, AI, and What We Value > "AI will be better than humans in creative, artistic, and competitive domains, it's going to replace us." I believe this is the wrong framing, because it’s predicated on a misunderstanding of what art and competition are intended for: human consumption. Artists should not fear AI. They should view it as a tool that can enhance them, not an entity that supplants them. Because people are the arbiters of value, not machines. We don't always value what's objectively best or technically superior. We innately seek out unique individual expression, and associate it with its creator. When there's no human to accompany that creation, it rings a bit hollow. We have many an "irrational" need and attraction to a human presence when experiencing an authentic human message. What we consider as "real" and "fake" is entirely psychological framing that cannot be rationalized away. Examples: - If someone's lip-syncing at a concert... do you like that? Or do you feel a little betrayed? By all audio accounts, it’s better than the artist's live voice. In fact singers often sound much worse live than they do in the studio. Lip-syncing gives you that pristine studio sound in the arena. Weird we don't prefer it. - Do people favor the Harry Potter originals or Harry Potter fan fiction? I'm sure some of it's better than JK Rowling's work. I bet Claude could easily whip up some stories that rival it. Why is hers famous and revered, and not the derivatives? What connotation does the word “original” have that has such valence to us…? Why do we consider the initial version that came from the human progenitor the authentic one? - Luxury items: can you tell the difference between a fake (what makes it fake?) Louis Vuitton bag and a “real” one? What about an organic diamond borne from millions of years of pressure, or a lab-made one? The lab-made diamonds have less “imperfections” and are way cheaper. They look exactly the same, and are even made with similar carbon-crystallization processes. What’s not to like? Someone wrote this in response to one of my essays (which I deeply appreciate): This illustrates my point beautifully, “devastated” if he found out a machine was behind my accounts, and not a person’s creative expression and thoughts. I would never have an AI write my stuff. The more presence an LLM has in your work, the less presence you have, and there is zero point to any of my writing if it's not a representation and extension of me. It’d be a betrayal, both to my readers and to myself, because it’d be a lie. Textual lip-syncing but worse, because it’s not even your own lyrics you’re faking, so it’s not your own ideas or thoughts, yet your presenting them otherwise. For technical writing or the like, fine, go nuts, it’s not something anyone enjoys reading anyways (clearly you don’t enjoy creating it either, otherwise you wouldn’t outsource its production). No one consumes research papers or technical manuals for the author’s artistic expression. But for whatever it is I’m doing on my blog and on Twitter: it makes you a fraud if you conceal it and present it as you. ART IS NOT AN OBJECTIVE DOMAIN, BECAUSE IT'S A HUMAN ONE Look at this. This is perhaps the most famous piece of American modern art ever. Do you think Midjourney can "do better"? Because I sure do. We don't care though. Because that's not how appreciation or sentimentality works. You want a human expressing something to you, that resonates in a human way. This is an evolved characteristic. Part of the value we ascribe to creative work (and not only creative work) comes from the effort we perceive was put into it. We value homemade things more than factory output. You value a person's hand stitching more than the sewing machine. You judge and appreciate how something is made and the effort put into it sometimes nearly as much as you do the thing itself. This is known as the Labor Illusion of Value, however calling it an "illusion" doesn’t make it go away. Again, this is an evolved belief we’ve cultivated over centuries, and not something we can rationalize away. You know how people like their fruit labeled "organic" because something being natural is instinctively more attractive? "Human made" is the new organic in the artificial-abundance era of AI. Even when The Machine is vastly superior to us, it does not change the human condition of how creative value is perceived and appreciated. It's your programming to seek it out and exalt... the human. You’ll still want anthropogenic work from brilliant folks you admire; you won't cherish a machine’s output the same way you do your fellow man’s. A machine does not feel or understand the world or humanity in the manner we do, and its characterization and depiction of it will be lacking the psychological touch that the lab-made diamond is all too familiar with. Art is a microcosm of humanity: expressed via text, imagery, or sound, and consumed with the heart. HUMAN VS MACHINE COMPETITION Another example of human imperfection prevailing over AI superiority: competition. Say, chess. AI dominates us at chess, computers have basically solved the game. Yet it's Magnus Carlsen and slow, plodding, blemished meat contests we watch. Two computers playing each other just doesn't fill the seats the same way, because clinical robot performance isn't what you watch when elite-yet-flawed fellas are available. He's just like me! It's your programming to venerate human triumphs, accomplishments, and performance. We are the consumers of art and competitive feats, not machines. Thus humans are the judges of what's valuable in these domains, and we value... the human. Blog in profile.

I wanted to test something in OpenSeason (@opunshizun) so I staked $FU MONEY on myself and played three ranked games. I played like shit (as you can see) and still made $31 worth of $FU in less than 30 minutes. Pretty cool. I'm now going to stake (sponsor) the top 10 players and see how they perform for me. Stake here: openseason.games Buy $FU MONEY on Arbitrum: dexscreener.com/arbitrum/0x8…

Meow

Blue pixel #761 has been attested by Floatingfurther. Thank you! rcs.rc.xyz/?id=761

Gentlemen, we have a duty.

IF YOU WANT TO CHECK YOUR RETARDIO METER ON THE RETARDIO SOLAMI INDEX INDICATOR JUST PLACE YOUR PICTURE IN HERE: $RSI #MemeGenerator retardio-tau.vercel.app

ALL HEIL PETOSHI

“Hawk Tuah is brat. Inside Out 2 is demure. The Rizzler is cringe, and Lil Yachty is bas—” You bolt awake in the mountains of Carthage. You are not online. It is 217 BC. You are the general Hannibal. The future cannot come to pass. Rome must burn.

The beginning of the end is coming to a CME near you.

Consciousness is synergetic chaos balancing between life and death