Definitely not a pyramid scheme Bitcoin has just hit $17k....
It may not have been intended to be a pyramid scheme, but it looks like it has become one.
Always let the devil take the hindmost.
It is the dotcom bubble all over again...and then in 10 years time, things will have calmed, nonsense like Crypto Kitties will have long since disappeared and we will have the amazon's / netflix / etc of blockchain.
Whether you think the EU is benign or not is largely irrelevant. It won't look to conquer by force adjacent countries, or oppress or exterminate minorities. Neither does the UK.
The issue is whether or not I wish to be governed by Britons and British institutions in the UK or by pan-Europeans and EU institutions in a federal Europe.
It goes down to the absolute fundamentals of social identity and self-determination.
That's absolutely fair enough.
It all comes down to how you view a demos and what such a demos is for. For me, identity is a very fluid thing. I am English in the UK, I am British in Europe and Asia, I am European in the US. When it comes down to it, I feel I have enough in common with other Europeans in terms of ideals and outlooks that sharing an institutional and economic framework with them as a way of improving living standards and quality of life is not a huge problem for me. That will not stop me being or feeling English, British or European.
I accept absolutely that others may disagree.
I wish the referendum had been about that.
I agree. I also find that neither British party is close to my own political beliefs, and both are seriously flawed leaderships.
I am not bothered whether my democratic representatives are British, so much as whether they have the same aspirations as me. I would rather be represented by competent European Social Democrats than incompetent British Nationalists.
Yep, I am with you 100%. But that does not stop me feeling English or British, or strongly identifying as both. I am in a minority, though. There is no doubt about that!
The most bizarre thing about Brexit at the moment is that most commentators, politicians and even esteemed PB posters seem to have all decided that the government has completely screwed up just at the point where what has actually happened is that, for the first time since the referendum, we seem to be close to making some really major progress. The mood music from the EU26-and-a-half has been remarkably constructive and friendly - they do, at last, seem to accept that there will be an orderly exit deal, a transition deal, and a trade deal, and they are showing every sign of wanting to get on with it.
Admittedly there's a little local difficulty with the Irish, but when in the last 500 years has there not been? They are only arguing about semantics in respect of what happens if we don't agree a trade deal, and I'm sure some civil servant will be able to come up with some synonym for 'regulatory alignment' which doesn't scare the DUP horses.
I'm more optimistic about the overall picture than I have been at any time since the referendum. I seem to be in a minority of one in that, but 'Buy on the cannons, sell on the trumpets'.
It's not bizarre - it's the inevitable consequence of the 24 hour news cycle with twitterati, bloggers, et al having their tuppence hap'orth. Although it is strange that' given the pattern of every single EU negotiation, summit, etc almost invariably follows the same relentness pattern ending in a midnight plus one deal, that so few of them ever seem to cotton on to what is being done to them. I guess for those earning good money out of it it makes sense but hardly for the rest.
In some respects, if you believe that is the outcome, you have resigned yourself to it anyway. The entire point of the EU project is to renders the nation state obsolete - but even if we escape it you believe that the same outcome will occur.
If you really believe that in the modern world there is no such thing as the viable nation state, then that paints a particular view of the world which would support voluntarily giving up nationhood to a higher body , rather than having it wrested from us by the winds of change.
I don't think there's no such thing, as there are obviously hundreds of them. But I think they are largely unhelpful and unsuited to our globalised age, and in time they will come to seem archaic.
On the contrary. They are the ultimate expression of the shared aspirations of a group of like minded people. They are part of the safeguard against unaccountable elites and rootless multinational entities which would otherwise have far more influence than they already do.
Nation states help to safeguard democracy where it already exists and encourage it where it does not.
Whether you think the EU is benign or not is largely irrelevant. It won't look to conquer by force adjacent countries, or oppress or exterminate minorities. Neither does the UK.
The issue is whether or not I wish to be governed by Britons and British institutions in the UK or by pan-Europeans and EU institutions in a federal Europe.
It goes down to the absolute fundamentals of social identity and self-determination.
That's absolutely fair enough.
It all comes down to how you view a demos and what such a demos is for. For me, identity is a very fluid thing. I am English in the UK, I am British in Europe and Asia, I am European in the US. When it comes down to it, I feel I have enough in common with other Europeans in terms of ideals and outlooks that sharing an institutional and economic framework with them as a way of improving living standards and quality of life is not a huge problem for me. That will not stop me being or feeling English, British or European.
I accept absolutely that others may disagree.
I wish the referendum had been about that.
I agree. I also find that neither British party is close to my own political beliefs, and both are seriously flawed leaderships.
I am not bothered whether my democratic representatives are British, so much as whether they have the same aspirations as me. I would rather be represented by competent European Social Democrats than incompetent British Nationalists.
Yep, I am with you 100%. But that does not stop me feeling English or British, or strongly identifying as both. I am in a minority, though. There is no doubt about that!
Sure, I am properly British, with ancestry from 4 home nations and the wider Empire. Just do not require my politicians to be British, just as former generations were not too troubled by having German, Dutch, French or Scandanavian monarchs. It is more what the politicians get up to that bothers me!
Is there any potential for the collapse of BitCoin bubble to impact on the wider financial system?
Absolutely, yes. The collapse of one bubble invariably has a contagion effect on other markets. Indeed it isn't impossible that the end of the Bitcoin bubble will have a similar effect to the collapse of the tech stocks boom in 2000.
It is also almost certain that the mainstream banks are exposed to a significant proportion of the end liabilities arising from bitcoin.
Still, looking on the brightside, in the UK we can blame Brexit....
@SouthamObserver - the emotional drive and desire for a United Europe in the EU is so strong that they are simply blind to the idea that any other country within could think differently, and equate those that do with betrayal.
Meanwhile, most in the UK feel strongly about national independence and have a level of trust in British institutions that they would never dream of countenancing a higher authority that has supreme governance over us.
I recognise identity can be multi-layered, of course, but this is about very strong emotions. On both sides.
They matter.
I just do not see the other EU member states in that negative light. The ones I visit regularly (France, Spain, Belgium, Portugal, The Netherlands, Sweden, Germany) are more like the UK than they have ever been culturally and even linguistically (the French speak English these days for heaven's sake!) and are just as democratic, just as open and just as focused on free trade as we are. Most seem to be better run in terms of infrastructure and public services. Some in the Commission definitely feel hostility to the idea of the nation state, but they are a tiny minority.
In some respects, if you believe that is the outcome, you have resigned yourself to it anyway. The entire point of the EU project is to renders the nation state obsolete - but even if we escape it you believe that the same outcome will occur.
If you really believe that in the modern world there is no such thing as the viable nation state, then that paints a particular view of the world which would support voluntarily giving up nationhood to a higher body , rather than having it wrested from us by the winds of change.
I don't think there's no such thing, as there are obviously hundreds of them. But I think they are largely unhelpful and unsuited to our globalised age, and in time they will come to seem archaic.
I don't share the viewpoint that a single world government (for that's the logical endpoint) is either inevitable or desirable.
It's just as idealistic as the tired old socialist panacea of worldwide equality and universal bliss.
I view it in the same way as I would a monopoly or a nationalised firm. It would operate in the interests of the producers (the global elites) and ignore the mass of consumers (the average citizens) whilst containing no choice or competitive pressures to change.
What I suspect we'd actually get is a number of global supercities with global citizens who did very, very well and for whom the system of global free movement and global currency worked superbly - the economy would boom in those places - who'd also be controlling the key lobby groups and institutions, which would also be deeply self-serving and corrupted, with elections largely a charade.
You'd then get large resentful parts of the world where those who still felt, or re-formed under a charismatic leader, a stronger localised identity, who'd also be much poorer, would routinely rebel, and have to be put down by force.
It's a terrible fate for humanity. Not on my watch.
Democracy. Regulatory diversity. And nation states, and international competition, for me.
Dynamic, organic human governance and polities is a strength, not a weakness.
Do we have any idea whether the idiocy is limited to individuals or do public organisations have any exposure. My understanding is that previous bubbles have been particularly damaging because so many public bodies got sucked in.
Whether you think the EU is benign or not is largely irrelevant. It won't look to conquer by force adjacent countries, or oppress or exterminate minorities. Neither does the UK.
The issue is whether or not I wish to be governed by Britons and British institutions in the UK or by pan-Europeans and EU institutions in a federal Europe.
It goes down to the absolute fundamentals of social identity and self-determination.
That's absolutely fair enough.
It all comes down to how you view a demos and what such a demos is for. For me, identity is a very fluid thing. I am English in the UK, I am British in Europe and Asia, I am European in the US. When it comes down to it, I feel I have enough in common with other Europeans in terms of ideals and outlooks that sharing an institutional and economic framework with them as a way of improving living standards and quality of life is not a huge problem for me. That will not stop me being or feeling English, British or European.
I accept absolutely that others may disagree.
I wish the referendum had been about that.
I agree. I also find that neither British party is close to my own political beliefs, and both are seriously flawed leaderships.
I am not bothered whether my democratic representatives are British, so much as whether they have the same aspirations as me. I would rather be represented by competent European Social Democrats than incompetent British Nationalists.
Yep, I am with you 100%. But that does not stop me feeling English or British, or strongly identifying as both. I am in a minority, though. There is no doubt about that!
The difference is I believe, and feel, you are wholly sincere in your patriotism.
If we do have another referendum I hope David Davis is the front man for Leave.
I hope that Blair, Campbell, and AC Grayling are the frontmen for Remain. They've been fighting so hard for it since losing last time round and do a wonderful job of getting across what their cause is about.
They can tell us we are 45 mins from disaster...
The fact that lot are so upset tells you we're doing something amazing.
O/T My wife and I went to see Oslo at the Harold Pinter theatre last night. It is stunningly good, despite the unpromising-sounding subject. I think there are just a few tickets left before the run ends. Go!
Definitely not a pyramid scheme Bitcoin has just hit $17k....
It may not have been intended to be a pyramid scheme, but it looks like it has become one.
Always let the devil take the hindmost.
It is the dotcom bubble all over again...and then in 10 years time, things will have calmed, nonsense like Crypto Kitties will have long since disappeared and we will have the amazon's / netflix / etc of blockchain.
I agree, Blockchain is an interesting technology. I believe central banks are looking into how they might use it.
Contrary to popular belief, the US is an extremely bureaucratic country, almost certainly worse than the EU.
Yes, when I went to get my piggyback pilot's licence in the US, I was struck by how their low level bureaucrats seemed better trained in the "say no" mentality than most of ours, it wasn't what I was expecting from the US. Still, watching Parks and Recreation is a useful education, even discounting for the comedy and satire.
The two seemingly most contentious planks of the Leave campaign (lying bus and racist posters) were both made far more effective with their constant repetition by the Remainers.
Most Leavers I know were embarrassed by the Farage poster, weren't entirely aware Turkey was being duped by both the UK & the EU and not about to join, and got tired of explaining that of course we couldn't guarantee £350m to the NHS - that would depend entirely on the government of the day - and ok.. it's the gross figure.
Online I saw all of the above stories spread far more effectively by the good, honest, caring Remainers, than by evil, racist Leavers.
Is that ironic?
It's certainly extremely amateur campaigning. But then, Remain will for decades be the textbook example of how to Fuck Up a Campaign 1.01. (1.02 was, of course, Clinton.)
The two seemingly most contentious planks of the Leave campaign (lying bus and racist posters) were both made far more effective with their constant repetition by the Remainers.
Most Leavers I know were embarrassed by the Farage poster, weren't entirely aware Turkey was being duped by both the UK & the EU and not about to join, and got tired of explaining that of course we couldn't guarantee £350m to the NHS - that would depend entirely on the government of the day - and ok.. it's the gross figure.
Online I saw all of the above stories spread far more effectively by the good, honest, caring Remainers, than by evil, racist Leavers.
Is that ironic?
It's certainly extremely amateur campaigning. But then, Remain will for decades be the textbook example of how to Fuck Up a Campaign 1.01. (1.02 was, of course, Clinton.)
Both of you miserably seeking to evade responsibility for the campaign you fought for. Pitiful.
The two seemingly most contentious planks of the Leave campaign (lying bus and racist posters) were both made far more effective with their constant repetition by the Remainers.
Most Leavers I know were embarrassed by the Farage poster, weren't entirely aware Turkey was being duped by both the UK & the EU and not about to join, and got tired of explaining that of course we couldn't guarantee £350m to the NHS - that would depend entirely on the government of the day - and ok.. it's the gross figure.
Online I saw all of the above stories spread far more effectively by the good, honest, caring Remainers, than by evil, racist Leavers.
Is that ironic?
It's certainly extremely amateur campaigning. But then, Remain will for decades be the textbook example of how to Fuck Up a Campaign 1.01. (1.02 was, of course, Clinton.)
Both of you miserably seeking to evade responsibility for the campaign you fought for. Pitiful.
Winners cheer the result , losers cry about the campaign.
@SouthamObserver - the emotional drive and desire for a United Europe in the EU is so strong that they are simply blind to the idea that any other country within could think differently, and equate those that do with betrayal.
Meanwhile, most in the UK feel strongly about national independence and have a level of trust in British institutions that they would never dream of countenancing a higher authority that has supreme governance over us.
I recognise identity can be multi-layered, of course, but this is about very strong emotions. On both sides.
They matter.
I just do not see the other EU member states in that negative light. The ones I visit regularly (France, Spain, Belgium, Portugal, The Netherlands, Sweden, Germany) are more like the UK than they have ever been culturally and even linguistically (the French speak English these days for heaven's sake!) and are just as democratic, just as open and just as focused on free trade as we are. Most seem to be better run in terms of infrastructure and public services. Some in the Commission definitely feel hostility to the idea of the nation state, but they are a tiny minority.
Sorry, you've misunderstood my post. It wasn't negative, and I don't see EU member states in a negative light either.
My wife is Bulgarian. I like Bulgaria. I like France and I visit it regularly. I just don't feel I wish to share my governance with either of those two countries.
What is hard to understand about that?
I like and respect their differences. We have our own ways of doing things. Our own cultures, languages, heritage, systems of governance and traditions of jurisprudence and legislative dynamics. I view that as a strength.
And, FWIW, I think you're probably inclined to see the bits you like on holiday or business: living in Switzerland, France or Portugal is a very different kettle of fish, and the UK compares well in comparison.
The two seemingly most contentious planks of the Leave campaign (lying bus and racist posters) were both made far more effective with their constant repetition by the Remainers.
Most Leavers I know were embarrassed by the Farage poster, weren't entirely aware Turkey was being duped by both the UK & the EU and not about to join, and got tired of explaining that of course we couldn't guarantee £350m to the NHS - that would depend entirely on the government of the day - and ok.. it's the gross figure.
Online I saw all of the above stories spread far more effectively by the good, honest, caring Remainers, than by evil, racist Leavers.
Is that ironic?
It's certainly extremely amateur campaigning. But then, Remain will for decades be the textbook example of how to Fuck Up a Campaign 1.01. (1.02 was, of course, Clinton.)
Both of you miserably seeking to evade responsibility for the campaign you fought for. Pitiful.
I didn't fight for a lying bus or a racist poster. I didn't particularly 'fight' for anything. I weighed up the pros and cons, and decided to vote to leave the EU.
It was loud people like you fighting against the bus and the posters that made people notice them.
Definitely not a pyramid scheme Bitcoin has just hit $17k....
It may not have been intended to be a pyramid scheme, but it looks like it has become one.
Always let the devil take the hindmost.
It is the dotcom bubble all over again...and then in 10 years time, things will have calmed, nonsense like Crypto Kitties will have long since disappeared and we will have the amazon's / netflix / etc of blockchain.
I agree, Blockchain is an interesting technology. I believe central banks are looking into how they might use it.
Blockchain is a really boring technology. It takes the simplest, non-scalable solution to a hard problem and ten declares victory.
Distributing a ledger to all agents then demanding they burn every increasing amount of energy to secure the ledger is a really stupid way of solving the problem. The fact that it may be the only way of solving problem suggests it's a stupid problem to solve.
Definitely not a pyramid scheme Bitcoin has just hit $17k....
Sorely tempted to sell my tulips right now.
The challenge/problem/fascination is that the internet means that there are potentially billions of people who could potentially join the market for Bitcoin, compared to a tiny number who has the knowledge and wherewithal to go buying tulips in the 17th Century. The bubble might be about to burst or, contrarywise, we might be just as the beginning.
Definitely not a pyramid scheme Bitcoin has just hit $17k....
Sorely tempted to sell my tulips right now.
The challenge/problem/fascination is that the internet means that there are potentially billions of people who could potentially join the market for Bitcoin, compared to a tiny number who has the knowledge and wherewithal to go buying tulips in the 17th Century. The bubble might be about to burst or, contrarywise, we might be just as the beginning.
As Bitcoin gets more valuable the rewards for mining increase, thus making it 'worthwhile' for miners to burn more and more electricity to mine. The energy usage of the Bitcoin network is eye wateringly staggering and can only ever linearly increase as the value of Bitcoin increases.
The two seemingly most contentious planks of the Leave campaign (lying bus and racist posters) were both made far more effective with their constant repetition by the Remainers.
Most Leavers I know were embarrassed by the Farage poster, weren't entirely aware Turkey was being duped by both the UK & the EU and not about to join, and got tired of explaining that of course we couldn't guarantee £350m to the NHS - that would depend entirely on the government of the day - and ok.. it's the gross figure.
Online I saw all of the above stories spread far more effectively by the good, honest, caring Remainers, than by evil, racist Leavers.
Is that ironic?
It's certainly extremely amateur campaigning. But then, Remain will for decades be the textbook example of how to Fuck Up a Campaign 1.01. (1.02 was, of course, Clinton.)
Both of you miserably seeking to evade responsibility for the campaign you fought for. Pitiful.
Why should either of us take responsibility for Dominic Cummings decisions? And, if we did, what would that look like? Us coming round to Pinsent Masons, prostrating ourselves in reception whilst calling out your name, and then self-flagellating ourselves in front of you whilst we beg for forgiveness?
I'm happy with what I did, the campaign I fought, the boundaries I put on it, and, what's more, I both sleep happily at night, and can look myself in the mirror.
If I can't (and will never) win your approval, then that's a shame, but I learnt a long time ago you can't live your own life by trying to please others.
The two seemingly most contentious planks of the Leave campaign (lying bus and racist posters) were both made far more effective with their constant repetition by the Remainers.
Most Leavers I know were embarrassed by the Farage poster, weren't entirely aware Turkey was being duped by both the UK & the EU and not about to join, and got tired of explaining that of course we couldn't guarantee £350m to the NHS - that would depend entirely on the government of the day - and ok.. it's the gross figure.
Online I saw all of the above stories spread far more effectively by the good, honest, caring Remainers, than by evil, racist Leavers.
Is that ironic?
It's certainly extremely amateur campaigning. But then, Remain will for decades be the textbook example of how to Fuck Up a Campaign 1.01. (1.02 was, of course, Clinton.)
Both of you miserably seeking to evade responsibility for the campaign you fought for. Pitiful.
"Pitiful" is giving Cameron a free pass for causing Brexit.
If I ever want legal advice, I will take on board that if I were to instruct you, you will take your own view on how to fight my case. Then, when you get it catastrophically wrong, I should just expect you to abandon the legal profession and become a goat herder in Hungary. Without a murmur.
I'm sure some civil servant will be able to come up with some synonym for 'regulatory alignment' which doesn't scare the DUP horses.
I don't think "regulatory alignment" scares the DUP horses - I think they are relaxed about that. It is the separate treatment of NI that scares them. This is easily solved by talking about regulatory alignment of ROI and the UK.
Blockchain is a really boring technology. It takes the simplest, non-scalable solution to a hard problem and ten declares victory.
Distributing a ledger to all agents then demanding they burn every increasing amount of energy to secure the ledger is a really stupid way of solving the problem. The fact that it may be the only way of solving problem suggests it's a stupid problem to solve.
It's not a good technology for a currency, but I can see that it could be useful for some applications with lowish volumes of transactions and the need to guarantee the integrity of the distributed ledger over very long periods.
Definitely not a pyramid scheme Bitcoin has just hit $17k....
Sorely tempted to sell my tulips right now.
The challenge/problem/fascination is that the internet means that there are potentially billions of people who could potentially join the market for Bitcoin, compared to a tiny number who has the knowledge and wherewithal to go buying tulips in the 17th Century. The bubble might be about to burst or, contrarywise, we might be just as the beginning.
@SouthamObserver - the emotional drive and desire for a United Europe in the EU is so strong that they are simply blind to the idea that any other country within could think differently, and equate those that do with betrayal.
Meanwhile, most in the UK feel strongly about national independence and have a level of trust in British institutions that they would never dream of countenancing a higher authority that has supreme governance over us.
I recognise identity can be multi-layered, of course, but this is about very strong emotions. On both sides.
They matter.
But the thing is, we're not going to have "independence" even after we leave the EU. We are still going to have to make tons of concessions and suffer incursions on our sovereignty if we want to make trade deals with anyone, and indeed will be doing so from a weaker position when we're on our own. That's not to say that, for our size, Britain isn't a great and fantasically talented country, because we are, but it's a matter of basic arithmetic that we're going to have a relatively weak hand when we're dealing on our own with countries/blocs with economies and populations many times bigger than us, such as the USA, China and indeed the remaining EU.
As one T. May put it in a speech before the referendum:
I use the word “maximise” advisedly, because no country or empire in world history has ever been totally sovereign, completely in control of its destiny. Even at the height of their power, the Roman Empire, Imperial China, the Ottomans, the British Empire, the Soviet Union, modern-day America, were never able to have everything their own way. At different points, military rivals, economic crises, diplomatic manoeuvring, competing philosophies and emerging technologies all played their part in inflicting defeats and hardships, and necessitated compromises even for states as powerful as these
Today, those factors continue to have their effect on the sovereignty of nations large and small, rich and poor. But there is now an additional complication. International, multilateral institutions exist to try to systematise negotiations between nations, promote trade, ensure cooperation on matters like cross-border crime, and create rules and norms that reduce the risk of conflict.
These institutions invite nation states to make a trade-off: to pool and therefore cede some sovereignty in a controlled way, to prevent a greater loss of sovereignty in an uncontrolled way, through for example military conflict or economic decline.
The two seemingly most contentious planks of the Leave campaign (lying bus and racist posters) were both made far more effective with their constant repetition by the Remainers.
Most Leavers I know were embarrassed by the Farage poster, weren't entirely aware Turkey was being duped by both the UK & the EU and not about to join, and got tired of explaining that of course we couldn't guarantee £350m to the NHS - that would depend entirely on the government of the day - and ok.. it's the gross figure.
Online I saw all of the above stories spread far more effectively by the good, honest, caring Remainers, than by evil, racist Leavers.
Is that ironic?
It's certainly extremely amateur campaigning. But then, Remain will for decades be the textbook example of how to Fuck Up a Campaign 1.01. (1.02 was, of course, Clinton.)
Remain certainly made some tactical blunders, but their overall strategy was sound. They knew that to get swing voters to back them - however half-heartedly - they needed to be negative about Brexit rather than positive about the EU and had a clear and consistently repeated economic security message to that end.
F***ing up the campaign would have been trying to persuade the fundamentally EU-sceptic British public that FoM and political integration are good things. If they'd done that Leave would have won 60-40, in the event they were able to run us close.
Realistically we need a major recession the Brexit talks to collapse and for the perfect storm the government to fall.
All very possible
If Brexit is to be convincingly reversed it needs to be tested to destruction first. Hopefully the destruction will be limited to the government and the Tory Party and not the economy and the country - this cannot be guaranteed unfortunately.
LOL! Remainers salivating at the prospect of misery and poverty for the country...
The two seemingly most contentious planks of the Leave campaign (lying bus and racist posters) were both made far more effective with their constant repetition by the Remainers.
Most Leavers I know were embarrassed by the Farage poster, weren't entirely aware Turkey was being duped by both the UK & the EU and not about to join, and got tired of explaining that of course we couldn't guarantee £350m to the NHS - that would depend entirely on the government of the day - and ok.. it's the gross figure.
Online I saw all of the above stories spread far more effectively by the good, honest, caring Remainers, than by evil, racist Leavers.
Is that ironic?
It's certainly extremely amateur campaigning. But then, Remain will for decades be the textbook example of how to Fuck Up a Campaign 1.01. (1.02 was, of course, Clinton.)
Both of you miserably seeking to evade responsibility for the campaign you fought for. Pitiful.
Why should either of us take responsibility for Dominic Cummings decisions? And, if we did, what would that look like? Us coming round to Pinsent Masons, prostrating ourselves in reception whilst calling out your name, and then self-flagellating ourselves in front of you whilst we beg for forgiveness?
I'm happy with what I did, the campaign I fought, the boundaries I put on it, and, what's more, I both sleep happily at night, and can look myself in the mirror.
If I can't (and will never) win your approval, then that's a shame, but I learnt a long time ago you can't live your own life by trying to please others.
The country is going to carry on going backwards until Leavers appreciate the consequences of the campaign that they fought for. Since they currently have no interest in doing so, the country will keep going backwards.
Definitely not a pyramid scheme Bitcoin has just hit $17k....
Sorely tempted to sell my tulips right now.
The challenge/problem/fascination is that the internet means that there are potentially billions of people who could potentially join the market for Bitcoin, compared to a tiny number who has the knowledge and wherewithal to go buying tulips in the 17th Century. The bubble might be about to burst or, contrarywise, we might be just as the beginning.
Maybe I'll sell half
If you have some and they have at least doubled in value, selling half is an excellent strategy. You have your stake back and can sit back and enjoy the ride.
The two seemingly most contentious planks of the Leave campaign (lying bus and racist posters) were both made far more effective with their constant repetition by the Remainers.
Most Leavers I know were embarrassed by the Farage poster, weren't entirely aware Turkey was being duped by both the UK & the EU and not about to join, and got tired of explaining that of course we couldn't guarantee £350m to the NHS - that would depend entirely on the government of the day - and ok.. it's the gross figure.
Online I saw all of the above stories spread far more effectively by the good, honest, caring Remainers, than by evil, racist Leavers.
Is that ironic?
It's certainly extremely amateur campaigning. But then, Remain will for decades be the textbook example of how to Fuck Up a Campaign 1.01. (1.02 was, of course, Clinton.)
Both of you miserably seeking to evade responsibility for the campaign you fought for. Pitiful.
Why should either of us take responsibility for Dominic Cummings decisions? And, if we did, what would that look like? Us coming round to Pinsent Masons, prostrating ourselves in reception whilst calling out your name, and then self-flagellating ourselves in front of you whilst we beg for forgiveness?
I'm happy with what I did, the campaign I fought, the boundaries I put on it, and, what's more, I both sleep happily at night, and can look myself in the mirror.
If I can't (and will never) win your approval, then that's a shame, but I learnt a long time ago you can't live your own life by trying to please others.
The country is going to carry on going backwards until Leavers appreciate the consequences of the campaign that they fought for. Since they currently have no interest in doing so, the country will keep going backwards.
My approval or disapproval is beside the point.
Which consequences do which Leavers need to appreciate, how do they need to appreciate them, and how will their appreciation of the consequences change the direction of the country?
You could learn that pointing at the other side and shouting "RACIST!" doesn't work very well. You don't seem to be.
The two seemingly most contentious planks of the Leave campaign (lying bus and racist posters) were both made far more effective with their constant repetition by the Remainers.
Most Leavers I know were embarrassed by the Farage poster, weren't entirely aware Turkey was being duped by both the UK & the EU and not about to join, and got tired of explaining that of course we couldn't guarantee £350m to the NHS - that would depend entirely on the government of the day - and ok.. it's the gross figure.
Online I saw all of the above stories spread far more effectively by the good, honest, caring Remainers, than by evil, racist Leavers.
Is that ironic?
It's certainly extremely amateur campaigning. But then, Remain will for decades be the textbook example of how to Fuck Up a Campaign 1.01. (1.02 was, of course, Clinton.)
Both of you miserably seeking to evade responsibility for the campaign you fought for. Pitiful.
Why should either of us take responsibility for Dominic Cummings decisions? And, if we did, what would that look like? Us coming round to Pinsent Masons, prostrating ourselves in reception whilst calling out your name, and then self-flagellating ourselves in front of you whilst we beg for forgiveness?
I'm happy with what I did, the campaign I fought, the boundaries I put on it, and, what's more, I both sleep happily at night, and can look myself in the mirror.
If I can't (and will never) win your approval, then that's a shame, but I learnt a long time ago you can't live your own life by trying to please others.
The country is going to carry on going backwards until Leavers appreciate the consequences of the campaign that they fought for. Since they currently have no interest in doing so, the country will keep going backwards.
My approval or disapproval is beside the point.
"consequences of the campaign"
the only one is Brexit (well and Cam and GO getting the hump) - why would they apologise for that ?
Definitely not a pyramid scheme Bitcoin has just hit $17k....
It may not have been intended to be a pyramid scheme, but it looks like it has become one.
Always let the devil take the hindmost.
It is the dotcom bubble all over again...and then in 10 years time, things will have calmed, nonsense like Crypto Kitties will have long since disappeared and we will have the amazon's / netflix / etc of blockchain.
I agree, Blockchain is an interesting technology. I believe central banks are looking into how they might use it.
Blockchain is a really boring technology. It takes the simplest, non-scalable solution to a hard problem and ten declares victory.
Distributing a ledger to all agents then demanding they burn every increasing amount of energy to secure the ledger is a really stupid way of solving the problem. The fact that it may be the only way of solving problem suggests it's a stupid problem to solve.
Bitcoin might be today's tulip mania - certainly the last year's price action most closely matches that of the tulip bubble - but it is equally possible it could become the digital alternative to gold as a store of value... ...currencies are also mass popular delusions, in some respects.
Mr. Essexit, not sure I agree with that. Both the EU and GE campaigns indicated that optimistic bullshit can work rather well.
The Remain campaign overdid the Armageddon talk.
One thing which is somewhat perverse, but nevertheless logical, is that the harder it is to leave, the more convinced some people will be that we should. Claims that we aren't tightly linked to the EU and it's all just a matter of convenience are hard to maintain now.
Of course, on the other side, a lot of people would be relieved if this could all just be over, one way or the other. It does make me wonder how a theoretical second referendum would end up going (both in terms of result and campaign style).
The two seemingly most contentious planks of the Leave campaign (lying bus and racist posters) were both made far more effective with their constant repetition by the Remainers.
Most Leavers I know were embarrassed by the Farage poster, weren't entirely aware Turkey was being duped by both the UK & the EU and not about to join, and got tired of explaining that of course we couldn't guarantee £350m to the NHS - that would depend entirely on the government of the day - and ok.. it's the gross figure.
Online I saw all of the above stories spread far more effectively by the good, honest, caring Remainers, than by evil, racist Leavers.
Is that ironic?
It's certainly extremely amateur campaigning. But then, Remain will for decades be the textbook example of how to Fuck Up a Campaign 1.01. (1.02 was, of course, Clinton.)
Both of you miserably seeking to evade responsibility for the campaign you fought for. Pitiful.
Why should either of us take responsibility for Dominic Cummings decisions? And, if we did, what would that look like? Us coming round to Pinsent Masons, prostrating ourselves in reception whilst calling out your name, and then self-flagellating ourselves in front of you whilst we beg for forgiveness?
I'm happy with what I did, the campaign I fought, the boundaries I put on it, and, what's more, I both sleep happily at night, and can look myself in the mirror.
If I can't (and will never) win your approval, then that's a shame, but I learnt a long time ago you can't live your own life by trying to please others.
The country is going to carry on going backwards until Leavers appreciate the consequences of the campaign that they fought for. Since they currently have no interest in doing so, the country will keep going backwards.
My approval or disapproval is beside the point.
As is your analysis, as it is based upon your own disapproval and your own misguided perceptions. Like Casino I have absolutely nothing to apologise for. One might as well ask the UK to apologise for being on the winning side with the Russians in WW2 and demand we apologise for their crimes.
Blockchain is a really boring technology. It takes the simplest, non-scalable solution to a hard problem and ten declares victory.
Distributing a ledger to all agents then demanding they burn every increasing amount of energy to secure the ledger is a really stupid way of solving the problem. The fact that it may be the only way of solving problem suggests it's a stupid problem to solve.
It's not a good technology for a currency, but I can see that it could be useful for some applications with lowish volumes of transactions and the need to guarantee the integrity of the distributed ledger over very long periods.
I believe IOTA tries to address this problem.
As I said, it feels to me we are in the days of Altavista and Lycos, then came along Google who solved the search problem.
@SouthamObserver - the emotional drive and desire for a United Europe in the EU is so strong that they are simply blind to the idea that any other country within could think differently, and equate those that do with betrayal.
Meanwhile, most in the UK feel strongly about national independence and have a level of trust in British institutions that they would never dream of countenancing a higher authority that has supreme governance over us.
I recognise identity can be multi-layered, of course, but this is about very strong emotions. On both sides.
They matter.
But the thing is, we're not going to have "independence" even after we leave the EU. We are still going to have to make tons of concessions and suffer incursions on our sovereignty if we want to make trade deals with anyone, and indeed will be doing so from a weaker position when we're on our own. That's not to say that, for our size, Britain isn't a great and fantasically talented country, because we are, but it's a matter of basic arithmetic that we're going to have a relatively weak hand when we're dealing on our own with countries/blocs with economies and populations many times bigger than us, such as the USA, China and indeed the remaining EU.
As one T. May put it in a speech before the referendum:
I use the word “maximise” advisedly, because no country or empire in world history has ever been totally sovereign, completely in control of its destiny. Even at the height of their power, the Roman Empire, Imperial China, the Ottomans, the British Empire, the Soviet Union, modern-day America, were never able to have everything their own way. At different points, military rivals, economic crises, diplomatic manoeuvring, competing philosophies and emerging technologies all played their part in inflicting defeats and hardships, and necessitated compromises even for states as powerful as these
Today, those factors continue to have their effect on the sovereignty of nations large and small, rich and poor. But there is now an additional complication. International, multilateral institutions exist to try to systematise negotiations between nations, promote trade, ensure cooperation on matters like cross-border crime, and create rules and norms that reduce the risk of conflict.
These institutions invite nation states to make a trade-off: to pool and therefore cede some sovereignty in a controlled way, to prevent a greater loss of sovereignty in an uncontrolled way, through for example military conflict or economic decline.
The country is going to carry on going backwards until Leavers appreciate the consequences of the campaign that they fought for. Since they currently have no interest in doing so, the country will keep going backwards.
My approval or disapproval is beside the point.
Which consequences do which Leavers need to appreciate, how do they need to appreciate them, and how will their appreciation of the consequences change the direction of the country?
You could learn that pointing at the other side and shouting "RACIST!" doesn't work very well. You don't seem to be.
I assume - maybe I'm wrong - but I assume that at some point Leavers want to live in a country that is reasonably united. Until Leavers appreciate that their entire approach to Brexit has been founded on a campaign that pandered to xenophobia by lying and the impact that had on those on the other side of the debate, there is no chance of that happening any time soon.
You won. Get over it and start dealing with it. 18 months on, Leavers are as clueless as ever.
The two seemingly most contentious planks of the Leave campaign (lying bus and racist posters) were both made far more effective with their constant repetition by the Remainers.
Most Leavers I know were embarrassed by the Farage poster, weren't entirely aware Turkey was being duped by both the UK & the EU and not about to join, and got tired of explaining that of course we couldn't guarantee £350m to the NHS - that would depend entirely on the government of the day - and ok.. it's the gross figure.
Online I saw all of the above stories spread far more effectively by the good, honest, caring Remainers, than by evil, racist Leavers.
Is that ironic?
It's certainly extremely amateur campaigning. But then, Remain will for decades be the textbook example of how to Fuck Up a Campaign 1.01. (1.02 was, of course, Clinton.)
Both of you miserably seeking to evade responsibility for the campaign you fought for. Pitiful.
Why should either of us take responsibility for Dominic Cummings decisions? And, if we did, what would that look like? Us coming round to Pinsent Masons, prostrating ourselves in reception whilst calling out your name, and then self-flagellating ourselves in front of you whilst we beg for forgiveness?
I'm happy with what I did, the campaign I fought, the boundaries I put on it, and, what's more, I both sleep happily at night, and can look myself in the mirror.
If I can't (and will never) win your approval, then that's a shame, but I learnt a long time ago you can't live your own life by trying to please others.
The country is going to carry on going backwards until Leavers appreciate the consequences of the campaign that they fought for. Since they currently have no interest in doing so, the country will keep going backwards.
My approval or disapproval is beside the point.
As is your analysis, as it is based upon your own disapproval and your own misguided perceptions. Like Casino I have absolutely nothing to apologise for. One might as well ask the UK to apologise for being on the winning side with the Russians in WW2 and demand we apologise for their crimes.
That doesn't make any sense. One was clearly the moral high ground and the other is most likely a tragic and damaging mistake.
Whether you think the EU is benign or not is largely irrelevant. It won't look to conquer by force adjacent countries, or oppress or exterminate minorities. Neither does the UK.
The issue is whether or not I wish to be governed by Britons and British institutions in the UK or by pan-Europeans and EU institutions in a federal Europe.
It goes down to the absolute fundamentals of social identity and self-determination.
That's absolutely fair enough.
It all comes down to how you view a demos and what such a demos is for. For me, identity is a very fluid thing. I am English in the UK, I am British in Europe and Asia, I am European in the US. When it comes down to it, I feel I have enough in common with other Europeans in terms of ideals and outlooks that sharing an institutional and economic framework with them as a way of improving living standards and quality of life is not a huge problem for me. That will not stop me being or feeling English, British or European.
I accept absolutely that others may disagree.
I wish the referendum had been about that.
I agree. I also find that neither British party is close to my own political beliefs, and both are seriously flawed leaderships.
I am not bothered whether my democratic representatives are British, so much as whether they have the same aspirations as me. I would rather be represented by competent European Social Democrats than incompetent British Nationalists.
Yep, I am with you 100%. But that does not stop me feeling English or British, or strongly identifying as both. I am in a minority, though. There is no doubt about that!
You can't feel properly English or British, however, nor truly patriotic until you have f**cked off to live somewhere else.
Only at that point can you lecture people about what it means to be British and love Britain.
Whether you think the EU is benign or not is largely irrelevant. It won't look to conquer by force adjacent countries, or oppress or exterminate minorities. Neither does the UK.
The issue is whether or not I wish to be governed by Britons and British institutions in the UK or by pan-Europeans and EU institutions in a federal Europe.
It goes down to the absolute fundamentals of social identity and self-determination.
That's absolutely fair enough.
It all comes down to how you view a demos and what such a demos is for. For me, identity is a very fluid thing. I am English in the UK, I am British in Europe and Asia, I am European in the US. When it comes down to it, I feel I have enough in common with other Europeans in terms of ideals and outlooks that sharing an institutional and economic framework with them as a way of improving living standards and quality of life is not a huge problem for me. That will not stop me being or feeling English, British or European.
I accept absolutely that others may disagree.
I wish the referendum had been about that.
I agree. I also find that neither British party is close to my own political beliefs, and both are seriously flawed leaderships.
I am not bothered whether my democratic representatives are British, so much as whether they have the same aspirations as me. I would rather be represented by competent European Social Democrats than incompetent British Nationalists.
Yep, I am with you 100%. But that does not stop me feeling English or British, or strongly identifying as both. I am in a minority, though. There is no doubt about that!
The difference is I believe, and feel, you are wholly sincere in your patriotism.
I don't doubt yours and never have. As I said to you in a previous conversation: it's interesting how two relatively intelligent people can see exactly the same problem and react to it in entirely different ways. I don't blame you for campaigning for what you wanted and believed in. I don't agree with Alastair that you have any responsibility for the inflammatory nonsense spoken by those who led the Leave campaign, just as I take no responsibility for the nonsense about an immediate recession spouted by the leaders of Remain. Being on the soft centre left I am all too aware of the nuances of voting.
I may hold chancers and charlatans like Johnson, Fox, Davis and Farage in total contempt, but Leave voters are a different matter altogether. They are members of my family, they are friends and they are neighbours. We disagree. That does not make them evil.
Blockchain is a really boring technology. It takes the simplest, non-scalable solution to a hard problem and ten declares victory.
Distributing a ledger to all agents then demanding they burn every increasing amount of energy to secure the ledger is a really stupid way of solving the problem. The fact that it may be the only way of solving problem suggests it's a stupid problem to solve.
It's not a good technology for a currency, but I can see that it could be useful for some applications with lowish volumes of transactions and the need to guarantee the integrity of the distributed ledger over very long periods.
The issue is that the amount of energy expended securing the network has to continue for perpetuity. If the amount of energy expended in the network falls beneath the value secured in the ledger then it becomes cost effective to attack it.
Blockchain is a really boring technology. It takes the simplest, non-scalable solution to a hard problem and ten declares victory.
Distributing a ledger to all agents then demanding they burn every increasing amount of energy to secure the ledger is a really stupid way of solving the problem. The fact that it may be the only way of solving problem suggests it's a stupid problem to solve.
It's not a good technology for a currency, but I can see that it could be useful for some applications with lowish volumes of transactions and the need to guarantee the integrity of the distributed ledger over very long periods.
Land registries, for example. Almost ideal for that.
One thing which is somewhat perverse, but nevertheless logical, is that the harder it is to leave, the more convinced some people will be that we should. Claims that we aren't tightly linked to the EU and it's all just a matter of convenience are hard to maintain now.
We're 'shackled' to European politics because of geography and history. The delusion was to convince ourselves that somehow we'd got in with the wrong crowd in the 70s but had plenty of other geopolitical options.
The failure of Brexit might bring back the British quality of stoic fatalism.
Mr. Essexit, not sure I agree with that. Both the EU and GE campaigns indicated that optimistic bullshit can work rather well.
The Remain campaign overdid the Armageddon talk.
One thing which is somewhat perverse, but nevertheless logical, is that the harder it is to leave, the more convinced some people will be that we should. Claims that we aren't tightly linked to the EU and it's all just a matter of convenience are hard to maintain now.
Of course, on the other side, a lot of people would be relieved if this could all just be over, one way or the other. It does make me wonder how a theoretical second referendum would end up going (both in terms of result and campaign style).
Optimistic bullshit from Corbyn saying he'd wipe student debt and generally splash the cash worked because people like public spending. Turning around the EU-scepticism of the British public in a campaign of a few months was never going to happen, so all Remain had was relentless negativity and nastiness.
FWIW like other Vote Leavers in this thread, I have nothing to apologise for and consider my role in the campaign one of my proudest accomplishments.
One thing which is somewhat perverse, but nevertheless logical, is that the harder it is to leave, the more convinced some people will be that we should. Claims that we aren't tightly linked to the EU and it's all just a matter of convenience are hard to maintain now.
We're 'shackled' to European politics because of geography and history. The delusion was to convince ourselves that somehow we'd got in with the wrong crowd in the 70s but had plenty of other geopolitical options.
The failure of Brexit might bring back the British quality of stoic fatalism.
You can be in EFTA and still be part of European politics as we were from 1960 to 1973, you do not have to be in the EU
Definitely not a pyramid scheme Bitcoin has just hit $17k....
It may not have been intended to be a pyramid scheme, but it looks like it has become one.
Always let the devil take the hindmost.
It is the dotcom bubble all over again...and then in 10 years time, things will have calmed, nonsense like Crypto Kitties will have long since disappeared and we will have the amazon's / netflix / etc of blockchain.
I agree, Blockchain is an interesting technology. I believe central banks are looking into how they might use it.
Blockchain is a really boring technology. It takes the simplest, non-scalable solution to a hard problem and ten declares victory.
Distributing a ledger to all agents then demanding they burn every increasing amount of energy to secure the ledger is a really stupid way of solving the problem. The fact that it may be the only way of solving problem suggests it's a stupid problem to solve.
Bitcoin might be today's tulip mania - certainly the last year's price action most closely matches that of the tulip bubble - but it is equally possible it could become the digital alternative to gold as a store of value... ...currencies are also mass popular delusions, in some respects.
You can pay your British taxes in pounds sterling.
Bitcoin has no storage capability, it's is predicated on the continual burning of energy. The less people who burn energy the less valuable it becomes.
@SouthamObserver - the emotional drive and desire for a United Europe in the EU is so strong that they are simply blind to the idea that any other country within could think differently, and equate those that do with betrayal.
Meanwhile, most in the UK feel strongly about national independence and have a level of trust in British institutions that they would never dream of countenancing a higher authority that has supreme governance over us.
I recognise identity can be multi-layered, of course, but this is about very strong emotions. On both sides.
They matter.
But the thing is, we're not going to have "independence" even after we leave the EU. We are still going to have to make tons of concessions and suffer incursions on our sovereignty if we want to make trade deals with anyone, and indeed will be doing so from a weaker position when we're on our own. That's not to say that, for our size, Britain isn't a great and fantasically talented country, because we are, but it's a matter of basic arithmetic that we're going to have a relatively weak hand when we're dealing on our own with countries/blocs with economies and populations many times bigger than us, such as the USA, China and indeed the remaining EU.
As one T. May put it in a speech before the referendum:
I use the word “maximise” advisedly, because no country or empire in world history has ever been totally sovereign, completely in control of its destiny. Even at the height of their power, the Roman Empire, Imperial China, the Ottomans, the British Empire, the Soviet Union, modern-day America, were never able to have everything their own way. At different points, military rivals, economic crises, diplomatic manoeuvring, competing philosophies and emerging technologies all played their part in inflicting defeats and hardships, and necessitated compromises even for states as powerful as these
Today, those factors continue to have their effect on the sovereignty of nations large and small, rich and poor. But there is now an additional complication. International, multilateral institutions exist to try to systematise negotiations between nations, promote trade, ensure cooperation on matters like cross-border crime, and create rules and norms that reduce the risk of conflict.
These institutions invite nation states to make a trade-off: to pool and therefore cede some sovereignty in a controlled way, to prevent a greater loss of sovereignty in an uncontrolled way, through for example military conflict or economic decline.
[snip] ...currencies are also mass popular delusions, in some respects.
No, they are not. As a means of exchange, they are guaranteed (indeed mandated) by the issuing state, and as a means of storing value they are protected by an implicit guarantee that the government won't let inflation get out of hand.
Of course, if the guarantee becomes worthless, as in the Weimar Republic or Zimbabwe, that's a different matter. but in normal circumstances people have every reason to believe that the currency of an advanced economy is OK.
That doesn't make any sense. One was clearly the moral high ground and the other is most likely a tragic and damaging mistake.
Not at all. Both were campaigns fought for the best of reasons and which will make our country a better place to live. At the same time both demanded we fight on the same side as some people who used methods we would not condone.
The alternative was to simply give up the fight. Something we were not willing to.do. we did not confine the tactics used and will not apologise for the actions of others.
The trouble for poor old Alastair is that this us the only argument he has left. So he repeats it over and over again even when it has clearly failed.
No one cares. No one is apologising and no one thinks it makes a blind bit of difference.
Comments
Always let the devil take the hindmost.
They're selling for upwards of $100k...
Does anyone know how much actual trading there is in the current mania?
~200k BTC per day, so $2b/d
Seems a lot....
https://data.bitcoinity.org/markets/volume/7d?c=e&t=b
https://twitter.com/cjciaramella/status/938803951985709061
Nation states help to safeguard democracy where it already exists and encourage it where it does not.
Bitcoin Price Hits $26,000 in Zimbabwe as Country’s Sole Exchange Suffers ‘Technical Fault
It is also almost certain that the mainstream banks are exposed to a significant proportion of the end liabilities arising from bitcoin.
Still, looking on the brightside, in the UK we can blame Brexit....
It's just as idealistic as the tired old socialist panacea of worldwide equality and universal bliss.
I view it in the same way as I would a monopoly or a nationalised firm. It would operate in the interests of the producers (the global elites) and ignore the mass of consumers (the average citizens) whilst containing no choice or competitive pressures to change.
What I suspect we'd actually get is a number of global supercities with global citizens
who did very, very well and for whom the system of global free movement and global currency
worked superbly - the economy would boom in those places - who'd also be controlling the key lobby groups and institutions, which would also be deeply self-serving and corrupted, with elections largely a charade.
You'd then get large resentful parts of the world where those who still felt, or re-formed under a charismatic leader, a stronger localised identity, who'd also be much poorer, would routinely rebel, and have to be put down by force.
It's a terrible fate for humanity. Not on my watch.
Democracy. Regulatory diversity. And nation states, and international competition, for me.
Dynamic, organic human governance and polities is a strength, not a weakness.
https://grist.org/article/bitcoin-could-cost-us-our-clean-energy-future/
(NB this is one scare story I'm staying sceptical about)
https://twitter.com/RichardNewby3/status/938806990742179842
He also stopped the 2007 snap election with a great policy.
The top countries for Google Trends search interest in Bitcoin is currently Nigeria and South Africa.
The Google Trends search graph bear a striking similarity to the Bitcoin price chart.
My wife is Bulgarian. I like Bulgaria. I like France and I visit it regularly. I just don't feel I wish to share my governance with either of those two countries.
What is hard to understand about that?
I like and respect their differences. We have our own ways of doing things. Our own cultures, languages, heritage, systems of governance and traditions of jurisprudence and legislative dynamics. I view that as a strength.
And, FWIW, I think you're probably inclined to see the bits you like on holiday or business: living in Switzerland, France or Portugal is a very different kettle of fish, and the UK compares well in comparison.
It was loud people like you fighting against the bus and the posters that made people notice them.
Man up and take responsibility.
A big bus did it, and ran away...
Plus, perhaps the final chapter on Osborne's career hasn't been written.
https://twitter.com/christopherhope/status/938782457284919296
Distributing a ledger to all agents then demanding they burn every increasing amount of energy to secure the ledger is a really stupid way of solving the problem. The fact that it may be the only way of solving problem suggests it's a stupid problem to solve.
Doesn't make it impossible, of course, but it can't have helped.
I'm happy with what I did, the campaign I fought, the boundaries I put on it, and, what's more, I both sleep happily at night, and can look myself in the mirror.
If I can't (and will never) win your approval, then that's a shame, but I learnt a long time ago you can't live your own life by trying to please others.
If I ever want legal advice, I will take on board that if I were to instruct you, you will take your own view on how to fight my case. Then, when you get it catastrophically wrong, I should just expect you to abandon the legal profession and become a goat herder in Hungary. Without a murmur.
As one T. May put it in a speech before the referendum:
I use the word “maximise” advisedly, because no country or empire in world history has ever been totally sovereign, completely in control of its destiny. Even at the height of their power, the Roman Empire, Imperial China, the Ottomans, the British Empire, the Soviet Union, modern-day America, were never able to have everything their own way. At different points, military rivals, economic crises, diplomatic manoeuvring, competing philosophies and emerging technologies all played their part in inflicting defeats and hardships, and necessitated compromises even for states as powerful as these
Today, those factors continue to have their effect on the sovereignty of nations large and small, rich and poor. But there is now an additional complication. International, multilateral institutions exist to try to systematise negotiations between nations, promote trade, ensure cooperation on matters like cross-border crime, and create rules and norms that reduce the risk of conflict.
These institutions invite nation states to make a trade-off: to pool and therefore cede some sovereignty in a controlled way, to prevent a greater loss of sovereignty in an uncontrolled way, through for example military conflict or economic decline.
https://www.conservativehome.com/parliament/2016/04/theresa-mays-speech-on-brexit-full-text.html
F***ing up the campaign would have been trying to persuade the fundamentally EU-sceptic British public that FoM and political integration are good things. If they'd done that Leave would have won 60-40, in the event they were able to run us close.
My approval or disapproval is beside the point.
You could learn that pointing at the other side and shouting "RACIST!" doesn't work very well. You don't seem to be.
the only one is Brexit (well and Cam and GO getting the hump) - why would they apologise for that ?
https://community.innoenergy.com/groups/blockchain/blog/2017/11/20/energy-efficiency-of-blockchain-technologies
Bitcoin might be today's tulip mania - certainly the last year's price action most closely matches that of the tulip bubble - but it is equally possible it could become the digital alternative to gold as a store of value...
...currencies are also mass popular delusions, in some respects.
The Remain campaign overdid the Armageddon talk.
One thing which is somewhat perverse, but nevertheless logical, is that the harder it is to leave, the more convinced some people will be that we should. Claims that we aren't tightly linked to the EU and it's all just a matter of convenience are hard to maintain now.
Of course, on the other side, a lot of people would be relieved if this could all just be over, one way or the other. It does make me wonder how a theoretical second referendum would end up going (both in terms of result and campaign style).
As I said, it feels to me we are in the days of Altavista and Lycos, then came along Google who solved the search problem.
You won. Get over it and start dealing with it. 18 months on, Leavers are as clueless as ever.
Only at that point can you lecture people about what it means to be British and love Britain.
https://www.coindesk.com/price/
I may hold chancers and charlatans like Johnson, Fox, Davis and Farage in total contempt, but Leave voters are a different matter altogether. They are members of my family, they are friends and they are neighbours. We disagree. That does not make them evil.
The failure of Brexit might bring back the British quality of stoic fatalism.
FWIW like other Vote Leavers in this thread, I have nothing to apologise for and consider my role in the campaign one of my proudest accomplishments.
It's not as though those currently running the show are actually proving his critiques wrong....
Bitcoin has no storage capability, it's is predicated on the continual burning of energy. The less people who burn energy the less valuable it becomes.
Of course, if the guarantee becomes worthless, as in the Weimar Republic or Zimbabwe, that's a different matter. but in normal circumstances people have every reason to believe that the currency of an advanced economy is OK.
The alternative was to simply give up the fight. Something we were not willing to.do. we did not confine the tactics used and will not apologise for the actions of others.
The trouble for poor old Alastair is that this us the only argument he has left. So he repeats it over and over again even when it has clearly failed.
No one cares. No one is apologising and no one thinks it makes a blind bit of difference.