S410

Well, why would banks replace the system which allows them to charge fees for every other interaction with their services? A blockain solution would allow multiple different banks (and, possibly, even regular people) to access the data with no middlemen, and, therefore, no fees. Or, well, no fees that directly end up in the bank’s pockets as profit, that is.

Getting rid of that is bad for business. So, unless something magical happens and the EU, for example, pass a law requiring the banks to switch to a more de-centralized, more fair system, it’s not going to happen.

Every source I can find mentions maximum effective range at 15ft to be ~98 feet, not 909. So that zero in the middle is probably a typo, if I had to guess.

Regular bullets fired out of regular firearms basically disintegrate in water. Counter-intuitively, putting more energy into a bullet only worsens the results, making it stop even faster.

Underwater firearms do exist, but they are not common, and even they have incredibly limited range. As far as I know, none have effective range greatly exceeding 50 meters, let alone 100.

A person who grabbed a gun after the police knocked on the door and announced themselves.

Treat a firearm like you’d tread your dick. You keep the latter in your pants and the former in your holster. It’s not illegal to hold your dick in your hand while your at home, but if you answer your while doing so, chances are, you’re getting charged with indecent exposure. Makes sense, right?

Similarly, it’s perfectly legal to carry or even flail around a gun while you’re in your own home. But it can very easily turn into brandishing if you’d go to answer the door with one in hand. So here’s a crazy idea: how about you don’t? Particularly when you’re answering the door to police, of all things, who you know are armed.

Being lectured for supposedly “dehumanizing people” by people who yell that “all cops are bastards”…
Maybe look in a mirror once in a while?

Okay, I officially feel like an idiot now.
This entire thread is like arguing with a dog regarding its barking. No matter how much thought and logic is thrown at it, the dog just wouldn’t shut up, because it doesn’t even comprehend what “an argument”, “logic” and “reason” are.
Same here. You use logic and explain that the world is not perfectly black and white, in returns they yell “acab” just because they “feel” like it.

Clearly that’s only reason police exist. No exceptions. They never do anything other than abuse power and shoot people for funzies. Not at all.

As we all know, the world is perfectly black and white. Assigning qualities to groups of people and, then, treating people in those groups as if all of them posses those same qualities is a perfect system with no flaws. AdolfSchmitler would know.

Okay, fine. At the door. In direct line of sight. With a gun in hand. Because that changes everything.
This conversation isn’t going anywhere. Look, if you think that walking up to cops with a gun in hand is good idea, more power to you. Have fun figuring out that actions have consequences.

“Pouncy’s girlfriend told reporters Friday that she and Pouncy heard banging on the door and that Pouncy walked to the door with gun.”

It’s not on the video, but it’s confirmed that it has happened. Not everything has to be in one place.

The cops are several yards to the right of the door. Last time I’ve checked, the cops didn’t posses the ability to see through walls or behind corners.

That did not happen.

There’s a video. You can watch it.

Also did not happen. Holding a weapon is not brandishing it.

The definition of “brandishing” in holding or display a weapon in an intimidating or threatening manner. Substitute the cops with a pizza delivery person, for example, and I bet they’d feel pretty darn intimidated and/or threatened in this exact situation.

When you greet someone at your door, you keep your gun in your holster, just like you keep your dick in your pants. That’s called common sense. If you don’t have, you’ve only got yourself to blame.

The slogan isn’t “get shot and die, because you’re too tough to shoot an armed person first” either.

Just imagine yourself in this situation: You’re a cop. You’re in front of a house that someone, reportedly, broke into. You bang on the door and identify yourself. Several seconds later, a person with gun walks out, not saying a word.

Even if you take a second to access the situation: there’s a person, brandishing a weapon (which, in most cases, is a crime) walking out of a house that has been broken into. How does this come off as a safe or normal situation, exactly?

There are plenty of cases where the police overreact or use excessive force entirely unjustified. There are even more cases when the police get shot at without any rhythm or reason.

There’s a reason they’re trained to open fire in uncertain situations. A split second decision might be the difference between them dying on the job and going back home to their families.

So, don’t create those uncertain situations, unless getting shot is what you’re looking for. If the police are banging on your door, they suspect that something is going on. Best you can do, is help them figure out the situation. The cops, however, are not psychic and don’t know you and your intentions. So, if you have a gun, keep it in your holster or off yourself entirely. Identify yourself. Talk to them. Don’t just walk out on them, gun in hand…

Overwhelming “support” is not that surprising, to be honest, when the question is “Do you support Putin or do you want to fall out of a window?”

Contribute to FOSS software.

“What are your thoughts about setting your hair on fire?”
“This Wikipedia article about burns covers it pretty well”
“Aha! So you’re a parrot!”

There’s a finite number of possible conclusions one can come to if they use this little thing called “logic”. If multiple people apply it to the same problem, they’re likely to come up with similar, if not identical, answers. If your conclusions about some given thing aren’t shared by anybody else, it’s more likely than not because they’re illogical nonsense. It’s even worse if your conclusions are outright nonexistent. That’s not good. Means you stoopid.

Something like a centralized financial system has some very obvious, glaring issues that should be instantly apparent to anyone. And I’m, obviously, not the first person to think about it. So, why should I write something, if people who thought about it before me already outlined all the logical concerns about this system? And, likely, in a more detailed and in-depth manner than I’d care to write in a comment on a random website.

The “Criticism and risks of the digital euro” section on Wikipedia outlines my concerns about such a system pretty well.

Unless they are going to implement a cryptocurrency with centralized minting (essentially giving themselves both as much and as little control over the digital currency as they have over physically printed money), it doesn’t seem that much different from what we have already. Just because it’s going to be a new system, doesn’t really mean it not going to have issues with false-positives suspending regular transactions or fees that are higher than they need to be.

If you’re in the US, it’s not very practical to try to pay for things using Turkish liras either, for example. But it’s not any less “real” because of it. There is still a market for that currency, even if you might need to look around for a bit to actually use it or exchange it for a different one. Same for WoW gold or crypto.

Anything can be a currency, if you use it as a currency. A currency is not defined by its ability to be exchanged for gas or used to pay taxes.

If children in some school start to exchange pogs for junk food or video game cartridges, the pogs become a currency. By definition. The fact that the use is clearly limited and the value is a subject to rapid change or speculation is irrelevant.

There isn’t a single currency in the world the value of which is set in stone. There isn’t a single currency in the world which is universally accepted. Just because there exist currencies linked to some of the strongest economies in the world, which are relatively stable and incredibly hard to affect the value of via speculation, doesn’t mean they’re immune to speculation, nor does it mean that any smaller currencies, be it currencies or small countries, crypto or pogs, are “not real”.

I, personally, use crypto to do art commissions (I’m an artist) and to pay my VPS’s rent. Neither is an illicit good or related to money laundering.

And, honesty, it’s pretty great, compared to alternatives.
Last time I’ve used PayPal, it decided to withhold the funds for a month, for whatever reason. Plus, the transaction fee was about a dollar.
Transferring the same amount of money via Monero is guaranteed take only about a minute or two to process, since a transaction in that system would never get withhold, plus the processing fee would be about a hundred times smaller.