React-native dev @fold_app #christian

Joined March 2007
949 Photos and videos
LeBron James scores too much. I propose his shots are only worth 1 point, and he can only play 20 minutes per game. In one season the Lakers will lose enough so all the other teams will feel better.
Musk is worth more than South Africa’s GDP. @BernieSanders and I proposed a 5% tax on people like him. In one year, it could fund: - free public college & trade school -$10/day childcare - Special-needs education nationwide Wealth inequality is the moral failure of our time.
66
Iced coffee on the beach tastes so much better when stacking sats with @fold_app credit card. 🧊 ☕
1
1
14
2,315

1
53
Dylan Bathurst retweeted
If that addict on your street were your own son, what would you do? That is the defining question that guides my 5 step plan to fix the homelessness problem in LA. We *must* end this evil racket of corrupt politicians and NGOs who profit off the misery of these poor souls. They launder money and feed them more drugs, so they can keep their customers locked in this hell on our streets. We have a moral obligation from God to help them and make our city safe and clean for everyone. Karen Bass and Nithya Raman have forsaken this city. Time for real leadership. Time for real compassion.
2,819
17,478
87,507
5,523,094
They should do this over and over and over and over again.
THIS IS ACTUALLY INSANE!đŸ€Ż The FBI launched its own crypto token last year just to trap the scammers. They were sick of pump and dumps. So they built a real token with a real site and real branding, called it NexFundAI, and waited to see who would show up. Within weeks, scammers were lining up to fake the volume for undercover agents. Then one of them got on a recorded call and said it out loud. Their entire business model was making regular people lose money so they could profit. The FBI had all of it on tape. 18 charged. $25M seized. Arrests across 3 countries. The wildest part? The FBI ran a cleaner crypto project than half the founders out there. And the whole thing was a trap from day one.
102
His meeting is starting right now. Ask him to login or retry loading his Google Calendar before he can click the video link. Make the retry button do nothing. Force him to use a passkey. Make the passkey scan try to open 1Password. Now make 1Password require a password before he can get to his passkey.
1
76
Dylan Bathurst retweeted
📱 Calling all Senior Software Engineers - Bitcoin only company - Fully remote - Equity - Competitive salary - 401k match - Flexible time off - Vacation stipend - Bitcoin starter pack - much much more ➕you get to work with the best team in the biz (biased opinion) Apply 👇
10
19
123
20,681
Dylan Bathurst retweeted
California gave ONE nonprofit $1 BILLION. To put solar panels on poor people's roofs. You know how much solar they actually installed? $72 million. That's it. So where the FUCK is the other $928 MILLION? I'll tell you exactly where. The same nonprofit that WROTE the law that gave them the money ALSO got the contract to run "community outreach." Same guy runs the nonprofit AND the program. Chris Walker. Two paychecks. Look it up. And their SISTER organization — same building, same staff, same donors — is a 501(c)(4) that endorses Democrat candidates and runs door-knocking operations in the EXACT SAME NEIGHBORHOODS. Connect the dots, idiot. You pay $7.50 a gallon for gas. Cap-and-trade takes a cut at the pump. That money flows to "climate justice nonprofits." Those nonprofits funnel it into Democrat get-out-the-vote machines. You. Are. Funding. The. People. Who. Are. Robbing. You. Every time you fill up your fucking tank, you're paying for a Democrat campaign volunteer to knock on a stranger's door and tell them how amazing Gavin Newsom is. $928 MILLION. GONE. And not one journalist in this state asked a single question until @jennyraeca and CAL DOGE pulled the receipts. You think this is the only one? There's a hundred more like it. This is how California works now. This is how a "blue state" stays blue when only 48% of the voters are Democrats. Wake the fuck up. @patrickbetdavid @VincentOshana @FoxNews @WallStreetApes @CalDOGEgov @elonmusk @libsoftiktok We're standing in front of the building right now. youtube.com/@raminrealtalk
785
14,925
36,628
710,541
Dylan Bathurst retweeted
How much are diapers at Target compared to Gavin Newsom's government diapers paid for by YOUR taxes? We went to take a look:
1,759
16,649
55,879
922,341
In what reality does it make sense to tax everyone more in order to buy diapers just to give them away? Why wouldn’t they just reduce everyone’s tax bill by the same amount as the diapers and let people go buy their own diapers? Because fraud

Ok
 most of you know I was in the organic baby formula business, but what you don’t know is I dabbled in diapers as well. I also know this baby2baby “non profit” and have had past interactions with them.. I’ll leave that out for now.. Let’s dive into this absolute grifting nonsense. Prepare to be shocked. California is about to spend $20 million of taxpayer money to give 100,000 newborns 400 diapers each through Baby2Baby. Do the math with me: 100,000 babies × 400 diapers = 40 million diapers $20,000,000 Ă· 40,000,000 = $0.50 per diaper!!!!! Now walk into any Costco in California and you can buy the same quality diapers for .12 to .15 cents each! That’s $48 to $60 for 400 diapers. So the state is paying 8–10x more per diaper than a regular family buying in bulk. They could’ve just handed every low-income new mom $100 cash and told her to go to Costco. She’d get more diapers, better ones if she wanted, and still have money left for formula, wipes, or whatever the hell she actually needs. But nah
 that wouldn’t let Gavin and his connected “nonprofit” girls running the show there cut ribbons, take photos, do galas and be friends with celebrities and brag about the “first-in-the-nation” program while skimming their cut for “administration” and “partnerships.” This is peak government stupidity!!! Spend way more money to feel good and look good, instead of just trusting parents with their own damn money. We’re not helping babies. We’re funding another bloated nonprofit-government grift. Math doesn’t lie. The diaper math is brutal. What a scam and a joke!!!!!
3
85
Dylan Bathurst retweeted
AOC vient d'expliquer qu'on ne peut pas "gagner" un milliard de dollars. Que c'est mathĂ©matiquement impossible. Que tout milliardaire est forcĂ©ment un voleur, un abuseur de lois du travail, un payeur sous-Ă©valuĂ©. Ce niveau d'ignorance Ă©conomique de la part d'une Ă©lue qui lĂ©gifĂšre sur l'Ă©conomie devrait nous faire hurler. Reprenons depuis le dĂ©but, parce qu'apparemment c'est nĂ©cessaire. Un milliardaire n'est pas quelqu'un qui a un milliard de dollars en cash sur son compte. Un milliardaire est quelqu'un dont le marchĂ© Ă©value les actifs (principalement des parts d'entreprise) Ă  un milliard ou plus. Elon Musk n'a pas "pris" 800 milliards Ă  quelqu'un. Il a créé Tesla, SpaceX, Starlink, Neuralink, xAI. Le marchĂ© Ă©value ces entreprises Ă  plusieurs trillions cumulĂ©s. Il en dĂ©tient une fraction. C'est ça, sa "fortune". La question fondamentale qu'AOC ne se pose jamais : d'oĂč vient la valeur ? La valeur n'est pas un gĂąteau fixe qu'on se partage. La valeur est créée. Quand SpaceX divise par 10 le coĂ»t du lancement orbital, ce n'est pas du vol, c'est de la crĂ©ation pure. Avant Musk, lancer un kilo en orbite coĂ»tait 50K$. Aujourd'hui 1.5K$. Cette crĂ©ation de valeur est mesurable, vĂ©rifiable, et bĂ©nĂ©ficie Ă  toute l'humanitĂ©. L'internet par satellite couvre des zones que les États ont Ă©tĂ© incapables de connecter en 50 ans. Les voitures Ă©lectriques ont forcĂ© toute l'industrie auto Ă  se rĂ©inventer. Maintenant, la question centrale qu'AOC Ă©vite soigneusement : qui devrait allouer les ressources dans une sociĂ©tĂ© ? Parce que l'argent, fondamentalement, c'est ça. Un signal d'allocation. DĂ©cider oĂč va le capital, le travail, l'Ă©nergie, le temps humain. Trois options historiques : L'État (bureaucrates Ă©lus ou nommĂ©s) Les comitĂ©s citoyens (dĂ©mocratie directe) Les entrepreneurs qui ont prouvĂ© leur capacitĂ© d'allocation par leurs rĂ©sultats L'option 1 a Ă©tĂ© testĂ©e massivement au 20Ăšme siĂšcle. URSS, Chine maoĂŻste, Venezuela, Cuba, CorĂ©e du Nord. RĂ©sultat : famines, pĂ©nuries, effondrement. Des dizaines de millions de morts. L'allocation Ă©tatique est un dĂ©sastre empirique total. L'option 2 n'a jamais existĂ© Ă  grande Ă©chelle pour des raisons mathĂ©matiques. Le calcul Ă©conomique nĂ©cessaire pour allouer les ressources d'une Ă©conomie moderne dĂ©passe les capacitĂ©s cognitives d'une assemblĂ©e. Hayek l'avait dĂ©montrĂ© dĂšs 1945 (The Use of Knowledge in Society). L'option 3, c'est le marchĂ©. Et le marchĂ© rĂ©compense ceux qui allouent bien. Ceux qui allouent mal font faillite, perdent leur capital, sortent du jeu. Les survivants sont par sĂ©lection darwinienne les meilleurs allocateurs disponibles. Elon Musk est riche parce qu'il a prouvĂ©, sur 25 ans, qu'il alloue mieux le capital que 99.9999% de l'humanitĂ©. PayPal. Tesla. SpaceX. Starlink. Chaque fois, il a pris du capital et l'a transformĂ© en infrastructure civilisationnelle. La vraie question n'est pas "pourquoi Musk a tant", c'est : "pourquoi n'a-t-il pas plus ?" SĂ©rieusement. Si on veut maximiser la crĂ©ation de valeur pour l'humanitĂ©, on devrait vouloir que les meilleurs allocateurs aient accĂšs Ă  plus de capital, pas moins. Donner 100 milliards Ă  AOC pour qu'elle les redistribue selon sa vision morale, c'est garantir leur destruction. Donner 100 milliards Ă  Musk, c'est probablement obtenir des bases martiennes, de l'Ă©nergie quasi-gratuite, et une rĂ©volution robotique. Le prĂ©jugĂ© d'AOC, c'est que la richesse est un pĂ©chĂ© moral. C'est une vision thĂ©ologique, pas Ă©conomique. Elle traite le capital comme un stock Ă  confisquer, pas comme un flux Ă  orienter vers les usages les plus productifs. Et c'est lĂ  que sa thĂšse devient grotesque : "vous payez les gens moins que ce qu'ils valent." DĂ©finition de "ce qu'ils valent" selon AOC : ce qu'AOC pense qu'ils devraient toucher. DĂ©finition selon le marchĂ© : ce qu'un autre employeur est prĂȘt Ă  leur offrir. Si Tesla payait ses ingĂ©nieurs en dessous de leur valeur, ces ingĂ©nieurs partiraient chez Google, Apple, Meta. Ils restent. Donc la rĂ©munĂ©ration est compĂ©titive. MĂ©canisme de base que tout Ă©tudiant en L1 d'Ă©co comprend. Le pattern fondamental : AOC, et toute la classe politique qui pense comme elle, n'a jamais allouĂ© une seule ressource productive de sa vie. Jamais embauchĂ© en assumant le risque salarial. Jamais investi son capital dans un projet incertain. Jamais créé une entreprise qui survit. Et pourtant elle veut dĂ©cider qui peut possĂ©der quoi. C'est l'Ă©quivalent de quelqu'un qui n'a jamais jouĂ© aux Ă©checs voulant arbitrer un tournoi de grands maĂźtres en réécrivant les rĂšgles Ă  mi-partie. Ce qui est triste, c'est que cette vision a un coĂ»t massif. Chaque fois qu'on taxe les meilleurs allocateurs, on dĂ©tourne du capital de ses usages productifs vers des usages politiques (subventions, clientĂ©lisme, projets vanity Ă©tatiques). La France en sait quelque chose. 50 ans de redistribution, ISF, exit tax, taxe Ă  75%. RĂ©sultat : zĂ©ro gĂ©ant tech, fuite des cerveaux, dette Ă  113% du PIB, croissance atone. AOC veut nous vendre le mĂȘme poison en plus grand format. La conclusion est inconfortable mais nĂ©cessaire : nous avons besoin de plus de milliardaires, pas moins. Plus d'allocateurs prouvĂ©s. Plus de capital concentrĂ© entre les mains de ceux qui ont dĂ©montrĂ© qu'ils savent le faire fructifier pour l'humanitĂ©. Et nous avons besoin de moins d'AOC. Moins de gens qui n'ont rien construit, qui n'ont rien risquĂ©, qui n'ont rien créé, mais qui veulent dĂ©cider Ă  la place de ceux qui font. Le mythe ce n'est pas "le mythe d'avoir mĂ©ritĂ© son milliard". Le mythe c'est qu'une dĂ©putĂ©e de 36 ans qui n'a jamais gĂ©rĂ© un budget supĂ©rieur Ă  son staff parlementaire ait la moindre lĂ©gitimitĂ© Ă  thĂ©oriser sur l'allocation du capital mondial.
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez: You can't earn a billion dollars. Ilana Glazer: That's right. AOC: You just can't earn that. Glazer: That's exactly correct. AOC: You can get market power. You can break rules. You can do all sorts of things. You can abuse labor laws. Glazer: Yup. AOC: You can pay people less than what they're worth. Glazer: Yup. AOC: But you can't earn that, right? Glazer: That's right. AOC: And so you have to create a myth that -- since you didn't earn that, you have to create a myth of earning it.
208
772
3,430
413,095
We may hear from Hal Finney sooner than we thought. Think about it. Companies like Alcor Life Extension Foundation (cryopreserve) must be actively researching how to combine Elon's Neuralink and AI to create a massive SOUL.md file from their customers` consciousness. This would be something that is actionable now/soon vs their original idea of brining physical bodies back to life in some distant future.
1
43
Dylan Bathurst retweeted
After 17 years, bitcoin is still widely misunderstood. We partnered with @atlanticrethink to make a short film for the curious ft. @natbrunell, @NSmolenski, and our CEO @josephkelly. Not the crypto story. The bitcoin story. The New Rules of Bitcoin, out today cc @TheAtlantic.
50
189
654
127,748
The @fold_app credit card is the only bitcoin rewards card that will work at @Costco and not jam altcoins down your throat. đŸ«¶
2
4
19
1,264
Dylan Bathurst retweeted
The robots are loose at BTC26 Scan, grab a poker chip, bring it to booth #931 near the espresso station Walk away with $21 in bitcoin Simple as that
5
7
83
3,906
Changing my name to “Not @_DannyKnowles“ for the remainder of the conference.
1
5
80
Dylan Bathurst retweeted
Apr 23
Fold just announced Fold Business, a new B2B platform that lets employers give recurring Bitcoin bonuses through existing payroll. Employers send one USD invoice per pay cycle, while Fold handles the Bitcoin conversion, custody, and built-in vesting to encourage retention. Steak ’n Shake is already live with the program for over 10,000 hourly workers.
5
31
249
17,227
Dylan Bathurst retweeted
Hey Coindesk
the Admiral said “Bitcoin” not “crypto” - your article content says “Bitcoin” not “crypto” - so why is “crypto” in the title of your article and “Bitcoin” isn’t? This is frustrating for many of us as we try to educate the public about bitcoin - clumping bitcoin with crypto adds confusion by including funded projects alongside a novel digital money, a computer science breakthrough that is bitcoin.
3
5
76
2,997
expo run:ios
47
X needs "theater mode" for video posts. Only small or entire screen is not the way.
1
43