search results matching tag: cuban

» channel: learn

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.000 seconds

    Videos (85)     Sift Talk (2)     Blogs (7)     Comments (158)   

Curb your "safe" crypto exchange

newtboy says...

It sounds to me like Florida is casting a wide net, including anyone with direct connections.
Paid spokespeople who disclosed at the time they were paid spokespeople will likely not be liable, but Mark Cuban is in trouble. He promoted crypto for years it seems, rarely stating he got paid to do it or that he had a large stake in the company. It’s going to bite him.

Yes, there are VERY different rules when it comes to financial investing and being a spokesperson for financial investment opportunities. They’re dealing with the FEC.

eric3579 said:

Here is the attorney on Fox regarding the suit. https://www.foxnews.com/media/attorney-behind-lawsuit-against-ftx-tom-brady-celebrities-liable-crypto-endorsements

I wonder if having a stake in the company could have something to do with it. Also when it comes to financial investing the rules may be different having to do with responsibility. Will be interesting to see how it shakes out.

The Gamestop Short Squeeze in 4 Minutes

StukaFox says...

You utter fuckwit.

(not you, Morhaus, the dude in the video).

What exactly do you think happens to the people and funds holding those shorts? They have to pay the difference. They are contractually obligated to pay up -- period.

Everyone involved in the short was probably broke long before GME even hit $50. But, as we all learned from Goodfellas, "Fuck you, pay me!"

They're broke and on the hook for shit-tons of money. Guess where they're going to get that money? By selling solid assets. They're gonna dump everything they have to make up for the short loss. Who's holding the shares that're about to start tanking? The funds 401ks are invested in because they have to hold solid, reliable assets. The same funds people are relying on for their futures. These are the people who'll REALLY get fucked by this. If you've got a long enough timeline, hopefully, you'll get your money back (although at a loss of compounded value). If you're 65 and looking at your golden years through a lens of 20%+ returns, you're about to find out what happens when an irrational market decides to return to sanity.

Those are the first order effects. The second order effects range from the merely worrying to the outright fucking terrifying. There's a reason Goldman sent out its little missive last night after Mark Cuban pulled his stunt. This isn't just playing with fire, this is sitting in a room full of gasoline while Skippy, The Face-Ripper Ape On Meth, goes berserk with a blowtorch. God help us if this triggers some latent long-tail event.

The good news is that the idiocy of the crowds has apparently decided to dump GME in favor of silver. GME tanking will be bad, but mostly to people who should pay the price for dabbling magic they didn't understand. GME dumping will be good if you're worried about 2008 repeating itself, only without the whole "not letting AIG" fail thing.

People do not understand how fragile and insanely-interconnected the markets are, and how easily the whole goddamn thing could be brought down. We never solved the problems of 2008, we just dumped money on them; we never solved the underlying issues that lead to the Temper Tantrum of December 2018; and we sure the fuck didn't fix the fundamental issue that almost brought the whole show down on September 17 of 2019. And all this was before Covid. There's a reason I went all-in on bonds back in August and that Warren Buffet is sitting on a mountain of cash, and this is pretty much it.

So yeah, congrats to the little guy and all that shit, but don't think for a second that people at the top are going to be the ones who pay.

Hypersonic Missile Nonproliferation

Mordhaus says...

The simple point is that as soon as we realized the capability of the Zero we easily and quickly designed a plane(s) capable of combating it.

The Yak-3 didn't enter the war until 1944, at which point the war had massively turned in Western Theatre. For the bulk of the conflict, they were using the Yak-1.

The Mig 25 and Mig 31 are both interceptors, they are designed to fire from distance and evade. The Su 35 is designed for Air Superiority. We have held the edge in our capabilities for years compared to them.

Every expert I know of is skeptical of China's claimed Railgun weapon. As to why they would bother mounting it and making claims, why not? It is brinkmanship, making us think they have more capabilities than they do.

The laser rifle is a crowd deterrent weapon. It would serve almost no purpose in infantry combat because it cannot kill. Yes, it can burn things and cause pain, but that is all. Again, this was claimed to be far more effective than experts think during our diplomatic arguments over China's use of blinding lasers on aircraft. We have no hard evidence of it's capability.

Yes, Russia could sell such a missile to our enemies versus using it directly against us. The problem is that as soon as they do so, the genie is out of the bottle. It will be reverse engineered quickly and could be USED AGAINST THEM. No country gives or sells away it's absolute top level weaponry except to it's most trusted allies. Allies which, for all intents and purposes, know that using such a weapon against another nation state risks full out retaliation against not only them but the country that sold it to them.

Our carriers are excellent mobile platforms, but they are not our only way of mounting air strikes. If we were somehow in a conventional war situation, we could easily fly over and base our aircraft in allied countries for combat. Most of our nuclear capable aircraft are not carrier launched anyway. Even if somehow all of our carriers were taken out and somehow our SAC bombers were destroyed as well, we would still have more than enough land launched and submarine launched nuclear warheads to easily blanket our enemies.

My points remain:

1. It is in the greatest interest of our enemies to boast about weapon capabilities even if they are not effective yet.

2. Most well regarded experts consider many of these weapons to either be still in the research stage, early production stage (IE not available for years), or they are wildly over hyped.

3. There is no logical reason for our enemies to use these weapons or proliferate them to their closest allies unless the weapons can prevent a nuclear response. Merely mentioning a weapon that would have such a capability creates a situation that could lead to nuclear war, like SDI did. I don't know if you recall, but I do clearly, how massively freaked out the Soviets got over our SDI claims. For two years they started threatening nuclear war as being inevitable if we continued on the path we were, all the while aggressively trying to destabilize our relations with our allies. 1983 to 1985 was pretty fucking tense, not Cuban missile crisis level maybe, but damn scary. Putin has acted similarly over our attempts to set up a missile barrier in former satellite states of Russia, although we still haven't got to the SHTF level of the early 80's.

scheherazade said:

The Zero's Chinese performance was ignored by the U.S. command prior to pearl harbor, dismissed as exaggeration. That's actually the crux of my point.

Exceptional moments do not change the rule.
Yes on occasion a wildcat would get swiss cheesed and not go down, but 99% of the time when swiss cheesed they went down.
Yes, there were wildcat aces that did fairly well (and Zero aces that did even better), but 99% of wildcat pilots were just trying to not get mauled.

Hellcat didn't enter combat till mid 1943, and it is the correction to the mistake. The F6F should have been the front line fighter at the start of the war... and could have been made sooner had Japanese tech not been ignored/dismissed as exaggeration.


Russian quantity as quality? At the start they were shot down at a higher ratio than the manufacturing counter ratio (by a lot). It was a white wash in favor of the Germans.
It took improvements in Russian tech to turn the tide in the air. Lend-lease only constituted about 10% of their air force at the peak. Russia had to improve their own forces, so they did. By the end, planes like the yak3 were par with the best.


The Mig31 is a slower Mig25 with a digital radar. Their version of the F14, not really ahead of the times, par maybe.

F15 is faster than either mig29 or Su27 (roughly Mig31 speed).
F16/F18, at altitude, are moderately slower, but a wash at sea level.

Why would they shoot and run?
We have awacs, we would know they are coming, so the only chance to shoot would be at max range. Max range shots are throw-away shots, they basically won't hit unless the target is unaware, which it won't be unaware because of the RWR. Just a slight turn and the missile can't follow after tens of miles of coasting and losing energy.


Chinese railgun is in sea trials, right now. Not some lab test. It wouldn't be on a ship without first having the gun proven, the mount proven, the fire control proven, stationary testing completed, etc.
2025 is the estimate for fleet wide usage.
Try finding a picture of a U.S. railgun aboard a U.S. ship.


Why would a laser rifle not work, when you can buy crap like this : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7baI2Nyi5rI
There's ones made in China, too : https://www.sanwulasers.com/customurl.aspx?type=Product&key=7wblue&shop=
That will light paper on fire ~instantly, and it's just a pitiful hand held laser pointer.
An actual weapon would be orders of magnitude stronger than a handheld toy.
It's an excellent covert operations weapon, silently blinding and starting fires form kilometers away.


Russia does not need to sink a U.S. carrier for no reason.
And the U.S. has no interest in giving Russia proper a need to defend from a U.S. carrier. For the very reasons you mentioned.


What Russia can do is proliferate such a missile, and effectively deprecate the U.S. carrier group as a military unit.

We need carriers to get our air force to wherever we need it to be.
If everyone had these missiles, we would have no way to deliver our air force by naval means.

Russia has land access to Europe, Asia, Africa. They can send planes to anywhere they need to go, from land bases. Russia doesn't /need/ a navy.

Most of the planet does not have a navy worth sinking. It's just us. This is the kind of weapon that disproportionately affects us.

-scheherazade

Denzel Washington speaks out: Where are the Fathers

bobknight33 says...

Slavery has ZERO impact to today's society.


Everyone has the opportunity to become what ever one desires.
To hang on to the past is nothing more than a self inflicted wound.

My GGgrandfather was a laborer.
GFather was a plumber.
Dad was first to finish HS.
I was able to finish college.


Each generation trying to make the next a little better.

Also Cubans flooding Florida over last fifty years doing better than black counterparts

Illegals traveling thousand of miles for a chance of making a better life for themselves and family.

Yet you give blacks a pass to hang onto the crutch of the past.

Micro aggression! Really MICRO. If you are offended by micro anything then you are too thin skinned.

C-note said:

More Black Men Are In Prison Today Than Were Enslaved In 1850.
Knowing the past is important to understanding the future. There have been improvements, but there are still disparities too numerous to list. The thought that blacks make up excuses is just ignoring present realities they have to deal with.

As for getting over slavery, well Blacks have been free less then half the time they were enslaved in this country. Studies have even concluded the stressful, violent and brutal traumas experienced over lifetimes of generations of enslaved people may even be pass down to there offspring.

Epigenetics, if one believes in that sorta thing, could lead to explaining why on top of current modern day racial based micro aggressions, bias and abuses of power things within the Black population as a whole in america are still broken. Neither political party is willing to address that.

Conga

lurgee (Member Profile)

Irish People Taste Test American Rum

oritteropo says...



I don't think it's that unusual to describe drinks by their origin. Cuban rum for instance is very much a thing, as is American Whiskey vs Scotch Whisky vs Irish Whiskey (or the highly regarded Japanese).

I wouldn't know one way or the other for the Thanksgiving vid. Scalloped potatoes are a thing here though I had some last night.

eric3579 said:

It's entertaining and fun to see the reactions. My issue is they say "American" rum as if it's somethings different than other rum. They just can't say Irish people drink rum, because nothing about that is interesting. I recall the Thanksgiving video when the food they chose was so not typical American thanksgiving food. To the point id never heard of some of it. I just think they are willing (imo) to fudge a bit just to make a video. Anyway im just bitchin and moaning for no particularly good reason

Adam Ruins Everything - Real Reason Hospitals Are So Costly

JiggaJonson says...

Careful, if @bobknight33 sees you saying that he'll respond with some pretty harsh criticism. I'll pull quotes from his profile to simulate what he would say.

"Cuba citizens live as long and pay less? That Communism is better? That Cubans live shit life's but have live as long? Sign me up for that stuff... Then I 'll build a boat out of trash bans and float 90miles to tot the USA for a worse life. Sign me up for that stuff.

Every group that a has money at stake are trying to influence the people / governments one way or another in their favor.

All those hard line [prices] are only starting negotiating positions.

Trump is punking the shit out of liberals. Too funny. No real evidence or facts. just "sources" for liberal media false hype to continue its 24/7 anti Trump narrative."

bobknight33 said:

A good start would to make facilities post their cost for services.

Another would be to only allow x% profit on a good or service.

AHCA: A Republican Response to The Affordable Care Act

bobknight33 says...

What exactly is your point?

You point about an article from 2014 ( obama care era) that the current system is shit?


That Cuba citizens live as long and pay less? That Communism is better? That Cubans live shit life's but have live as long? Sign me up for that stuff... Then I 'll build a boat out of trash bans and float 90miles to tot the USA for a worse life. Sign me up for that stuff.


What is you point because are not putting anything out but your straw man argument.

newtboy said:

Look it up.

America was 50th out of 55 countries in 2014, according to a Bloomberg index that assesses life expectancy, health-care spending per capita and relative spending as a share of gross domestic product. Expenditures averaged $9,403 per person, about 17.1 percent of GDP, that year — the most recent for which data are available — and life expectancy was 78.9. Only Jordan, Colombia, Azerbaijan, Brazil and Russia ranked lower.

Cuba and the Czech Republic — with life expectancy closest to the U.S. at 79.4 and 78.3 years — paid much less on health care: $817 and $1,379 per capita. Switzerland and Norway, the only countries with higher spending than the U.S. — $9,674 and $9,522 — had longer life expectancy, averaging 82.3 years.

Less than 1/10 the cost for better results sure sounds better to me.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-09-29/u-s-health-care-system-ranks-as-one-of-the-least-efficient

AHCA: A Republican Response to The Affordable Care Act

newtboy says...

Yep, better protect the wealthy, they've had it so bad lately, and the poor are just handed everything for doing nothing.
Also, better end family planning services, because we want more, more dangerous abortions to happen, but must be certain we don't pay a penny of public funds for them.
So far, their plan seems certain to raise costs for everyone while making about 10000000 people uninsured and returning to insane hospital costs to cover the uninsured who can't pay and 6+ hour emergency room wait times.
Doesn't anyone notice that tiny Cuba, with no money, has some of the best medical care in the world for free? If they can do it, why does the right think America is incapable? We aren't as smart as Cubans? We shouldn't be as healthy as Cubans? What?

SMBC Theater - Wargames

oblio70 says...

History Lesson:

In 1949, when only the United States had nuclear weapons, everybody was asking when the Russians would have the capability.

President Harry Truman answered the question with "I know...never"

He never clarified what he meant by those words, and those in that meeting declined to ask, but the topic would be rehashed again and again.

I really recommend Dan Carlin's Hardcore History podcast. Episode 59 (Blitz) the Destroyer of Worlds. A nearly 6 hour fascinating look into the period starting with the Trinity test and ending with the Cuban Missile Crisis.

Castro hated the Internet, so Cubans created their own.

diego says...

re: Internet/totalitarianism/control of information, every single government tries to control information, the media, public opinion, and uses the internet as a tool for that goal (just like tv, radio, print, etc). The internet/access to information in and of itself does not guarantee greater accuracy/truth of that information, and unless the population is educated, respectful, and capable of critical thinking it can easily become little bubbles of echo chambers and a playground for griefers. What good did widespread internet availability do for the last US election? has the internet made americans more free, or more easily monitored and controlled? what good is it for cuba for cubans to have access to world of warcraft, so they can neglect their children who starve to death while they grind up to the next level? has the internet prevented mainstream media from fabricating news / pushing their agendas, or has it given more people a platform for fabricating news, anonymously? yeah, im not saying the internet is all bad, of course there are other very useful applications for it, but its not a magic "improve society" wand.

final thing i want to say, I have several friends who studied in cuba as exchange students in the late 90s, early 00s and yes, they had to make treks to specific places for access but they were able to send emails and such, so this piece is not factually accurate. If the cuban govt was so dead set on stopping people from communicating, im pretty sure they would identify network cables hanging in the middle of the street and easily follow them back to your apartment, not to mention detect wifi networks setup all over their tiny island.

ant (Member Profile)

lurgee (Member Profile)

The history of the Cuban Missile Crisis - Matthew A. Jordan

radx says...

The argument of "defensive measures" sounds quite different if you take into account:
1) Operation Mongoose, 2) the history of US-led terror campaigns and regime changes in Central America (Guatemala, anyone?), 3) the killing of Soviet technicians on Cuba by Cuban exiles, armed and trained by the US, 4) the century-long almost pathological need by the US to control Cuba. Not to mention of the Soviets had knowledge of the secret deployment of missiles to Okinawa just months earlier.

Don't make JFK out to be a man of peace. He signed National Security Memorandum No 181 in August of '62, which detailed regime change followed by an invasion of Cuba. He put into place a terror campaign against Cuba to bring them back into line. A terror campaign that was resumed a mere week after the crisis by blowing up a factory, causing the death of 400+ on November 8th.

Also, the offer came from Khrushchev, not the other way around, if I remember correctly. And while the Soviets didn't wage a terror campaign against Turkey or Italy once the outdated Jupiter missiles had been removed, we all know what has been done to Cuba over the following decades.



Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists

Beggar's Canyon