@5c8e0a6d @4a737d46 I simply can't trust Netanyahu. While his official position is to eliminate Hamas and liberate the hostages, I simply can't trust someone who has openly promised to do anything in his power to delay the implementation of the Oslo accords - and has managed to do so for two decades so far.

And he's in a coalition with Shas (Ovadia Yosef repeatedly cursed the Palestinians and call for the wrath of god against them), Tkuma (which opposes any territorial concessions to the Palestinians), and Itamar Ben-Gvir, whose has made it a political mission to harass anybody who isn't Jew - from provoking Muslims praying in mosques, to defending spitting at Christians as an "ancient Jewish tradition".

I mean, I don't have to see a Roman salute to recognize a fascist. I know that positions like those of Dror Eydar's aren't uncommon among those who currently hold power in Israel. I know that Netanyahu has to walk a thin line - on one side he has Western partners that can be easily alienated if he causes a humanitarian crisis on the doorstep of Europe, and on the other side he has internal pressures from his partners to cause exactly that type of crisis.

Of course he'll say that he only wants to liberate the hostages and neutralize Hamas. But it's not hard to imagine what he says when he talks to his partner - his off-the-record comments on the Oslo accords are a good example of that. 

 @Bowfinger it's not a quote, it's my own personal interpretation of a UN representative wearing a yellow star in order to attract sympathy for his government's genocidal campaign. 

 @4a737d46 "Evil" and "hate" are exactly the words the Israeli ambassador used when talking about Gaza in this clip. He slowly repeats "we have to destroy Gaza" three times, with his eyes fill up with hate. How is denouncing hate and putting the right labels onto it a form of hate itself?

Also note that I'm always careful not to condemn all of Israel. I've repeatedly talked about "Israeli State" as "the current Israeli government", not of Israel as a whole. I know that not all the folks over there support Likud and its far-right partners. I know that many of them have taken to the streets when Netanyahu repeatedly tried to neutralize the judicial power in the past few months. I know that many of them are in favour of opening a line of dialogue at least with the exiled PLO/PA and oppose this war.

Not everybody in Israel is a fascist illiberal colonist who wants to wipe out a whole ethnic group and create a theocratic State, but everybody who politically represents Israel right now falls under that category.

Just like not all Palestinians are terrorists who believe in violence as a legitimate mean of getting back all of their lands, but everybody in Hamas falls under that category.

And I'm also not instigating war. I believe that the '67 UN resolution was the best possible deal, and that the Oslo accords actually came quite close to a durable peace. I believe in a two-State solution. Those who instigate war are those who have spent the past 30 years opposing that peace process - and that applies to both the sides of the conflict.

And I'm definitely not saying that a war against Israel is justified. I'm saying that we should make sure not to give a single helmet or bullet, let alone a US air carrier in the Mediterranean, to a country that has decided to respond to an overall moderate-impact attack by basically wiping out a whole region and displacing millions who will soon knock on Europe's doors. And, on top of that, sanctions against Israel would make perfectly sense if we were really ideologically honest - if we put sanctions on Russia for engaging in a colonial campaign, then why aren't we doing the same with Israel? 

 @4a737d46 my label is a response to what I often hear from representatives and sympathizers of this government - including the ambassador in this interview.

"We need all of that land because the Holocaust <put-victimist-excuse-here>".

It's almost like the evil that they went through allows them to perpetrate the same evil against others. It's almost as if they were allowed to respond with a reaction of the same intensity. How would you call this kind of behaviour and reaction? 

 @4a737d46 sure, words matter. But, in all honesty, how would you label a State whose goal is to completely wipe out a piece of land on an ethnic basis and doesn't seem to care of any of the civilians who live there - and its representatives are also very clear about their intentions?

Forcefully removing people out of their homes to replace them with people of a different ethnic group is called ethnic cleansing.

Confining people in geographical cages with little possibility of movement or integrating into the larger society is called apartheid.

The indiscriminate bombing of the civilian population on an ethnic basis, and the cutting off their supplies of food, water and electricity, is called a genocide.

And preaching the formation of a State with a single homogenous ethnic and religious group is called theocratic fascism.

Words matter, so we should probably start using the right ones. 

 @Bowfinger hmm I'm just not sure about this article.

Einstein was actually a supporter of the Zionist cause for most of his life and wanted Jews to get back their home land.

It is sure likely that he opposed the creation of Israel if that meant creating a theocratic State that was in a state of permanent war with its displaced Arab neighbours. But it's very unlikely that he ever said words like "the existence of a Jew State with its own borders and army sits at odds with the essence of Judaism", because for most of his life he actually supported that idea. 

 @4ee6556f The Palestinian electoral problem is a bit more nuanced IMHO. True, Palestinians haven't been able to hold free elections since 2007. But the truth is that they wouldn't have much choice either - the PLO/PA has been largely confined to the West Bank, and it became voiceless even against the most brutal evictions in the area, and Gaza hasn't even been given the chance to develop a political alternative.

The existence of Hamas is also in Israel's interests after all. Israeli attempts of getting rid of Arafat became more intense once his political position started to become more moderate and open to dialogue in order to attract international sympathy for the Palestinian cause. If Hamas rules Gaza, the PA is basically exiled and powerless, and Gazans are given no choice, then Israel has a good argument for its ethnic cleansing - "we're bombing Gaza because of Hamas and his terrorists".

About the evacuations of civilians problem - yes, I definitely see that. Israel has also made sure to make it hard for Palestinians to come back to their homes if they decide to flee. But if I were in their shoes I may still opt for a sure exile over or a sure death (or at the very least the loss of their homes).

In an ideal world, the UN should have the power to push for a binding agreement that Israel needs to comply to before any land invasion of Gaza. That would include, at the very least, a plan for displaced Palestinians to come back to their homes (which means at the very least the concession of an ID that grants them a refugee status and greater freedom of movement), and a plan where Israel has to detail why such a military operation is the only available option, what's their definition of success and their retreat plan, and what they intend to do with the Gaza strip in case of success - which include a binding agreement that forces them not to repeat the eviction and occupation program they have implemented in the West Bank.

Unfortunately, we all know that such a sensible agreement would never pass the UN Security Council because of the US veto... 

 @516e4ada I'm happy to use a self-hosted SearXNG instance.

Earlier on I would usually search on my meta-engine, and in that ~15-20% of the cases I couldn't find what I was looking for and I would fall back to Google.

Nowadays, when I don't find what I'm looking for on SearXNG, I may still fall back to Google - just to realize that I get even worse results, sponsored content and other SEO garbage.

My best suggestion is to use SearXNG or any other meta-engine. My instance pulls results from Google, DDG, Brave, Qwant, Bing, Startpage etc. If one of these engines decides to go down the enshittification road, I can just disable it from my settings and keep using the others. 

 @0beb7a0c I guess that all jokes stop being fun once you over-analyze them, but for the sake of not being depicted as a fosterer of stereotypes and ignorant jokes I'll give it another try.

1. Younger millennial/gen Z folks who work in IT often make fun of their parents/uncles/grandparents who regularly beg for help to recover their Facebook account taken over by bots, often after clicking on a random link in an unsolicited conversation with a stranger.

2. Younger millennial/gen Z folks who work in IT eventually fall into the exact same trap after clicking on a random link shared on LinkedIn by a stranger who claims to be a recruiter at Facebook. 

 @0beb7a0c it's a little tongue-in-cheek millennial joke - many of us receive on a weekly basis requests of help from older relatives and friends who clicked on some random links and ended up with bots taking over their accounts. 

 @5ca95688 the zigbee2mqtt devices compatibility page is a good bookmark https://www.zigbee2mqtt.io/supported-devices/

If a device is there, it's basically guaranteed to work with both Platypush and HASS, since both the platforms use zigbee2mqtt as a backend. 

 @5ca95688 well I actually started my musical journey with the piano (conservatory and all) when I was much younger.

Over time I've picked the guitar over the piano (and my piano skills also got very rusty as a consequence), but I still try to practice at least once a month. 

 @5ca95688 right now you can just pick any lightbulb that comes with a Zigbee compatibility logo - which is probably the case for most of the bulbs that advertise smart features.

There's hundreds of brands and models on the market, and the Zigbee specification for lightbulbs is (kind of) standardized around the Hue model. zigbee2mqtt (and therefore Platypush) currently supports thousands of devices (https://www.zigbee2mqtt.io/supported-devices/), so you just plug in the bulb, put the dongle in pairing mode from Platypush, and everything should connect automatically. It's almost easier than the pairing process through the Hue app.

I have recently purchased a couple more Zigbee spare bulbs from a random Chinese store - around $10 for white and $20 for color. That's literally 70% cheaper than the equivalent Hue bulbs, they provide the same exact features and look exactly the same way from a software perspective.

A hypothesis is that everyone is now going for these cheap models, as they also come with out-of-the-box compatibility with the Hue bridge and official app, and nobody is spending $50 per bulb - and that's why Hue is trying to make up for their lost revenue with more aggressive data harvesting strategies... 

 @vivab0rg the problem is that he got stuck for too long on the wrong battles.

He kept battling against Tivoization and binary blobs in the Linux kernel, and lost track of the real problem - big tech stealing open projects, running them as-a-service on their private clouds, and keeping everybody as a hostage.

I've seen some of his recent talks where he still talks of binary drivers as the biggest threat to FOSS, while ignoring that out of the room there are some of the biggest companies in the world making a shitload of money by charging people to use installations of Linux, nginx, ElasticSearch or containerd on their machines. 

 @7a8ca6ec the problem is that it's hard to be FOSS all the way down even when hardware is involved - like in IoT.

Look no further than #HomeAssistant: it's an amazing FOSS platform, but 90% of the integrations that it provides are for closed gardens. Whenever something changes in one of the closed gardens, they can rely on a large community of volunteers that just adapts the integration.

This is the reason why I kept working on #Platypush. I realized that you don't need 1000 integrations (often the result of reverse engineering efforts) with closed products developed by companies that are unlikely to keep those APIs running in 2-3 years time (or companies that probably won't even be around in the next 2-3 years).

You don't need 20 different integrations for 20 different Zigbee bridges when you can run your bridge with zigbee2mqtt and get them all for free.

(That's also another thing: even though the products developed by most of these companies act like their own beasts in their own closed environments, the protocols they are based on, mostly Zigbee and Z-Wave, are actually open, and anybody with a USB dongle can create a bridge; and that's also why some of these companies have been pushing for years for Matter, so they can also have full control over the protocol too and lock people out even of the physical hardware with a simple firmware upgrade, no intermediate bridge required; and that's the reason why Platypush hasn't embraced Matter yet, while HomeAssistant has).

The thing is: how many people are willing to go completely pure also on the hardware side - which usually means flashing a Zigbee dongle with custom firmware, or debugging Platypush/OpenHAB logs, or building your own devices based on ESP/Arduino? If the entries barriers for alternative FOSS software products and services are already high, those for hardware products are even higher.

Even in my case, even though I've tried to be as pure as I could, Hue was still my Achille's heel.

I invested ~$1000 a decade ago to buy tens of Hue lights, switches and sensors in my house. Even though I could pair them to my zigbee2mqtt bridge, I have never actually done so - I have some other cheap Zigbee appliances connected to my RPi bridge, but those 50+ Hue lights, tens of switches and sensors and their hundreds of configured scenes and rules have always been living on my Hue bridge for the past 10 years.

Sure, I should have expected that at some point Hue would enshittify as well (Signify B.V. has given plenty of signals in that direction in the past few years), but I didn't expect them to do that so fast and so drastically. It's literally been like "hey, tomorrow y'all will get a new firmware upgrade for your bridge, it'll instantly kill any integration that doesn't support the new (undocumented) login flow, and who f*** cares about the hundreds of apps, integrations and all that hundreds of developers have built against our ecosystem in the past nearly 20 years". 

 @23c0bc4f specifically for the services you mentioned, I've migrated from Dropbox to Nextcloud a while ago and haven't looked back. And from YT Music to Tidal - it's definitely far from ideal, they don't even have a Linux app, but they have an unofficial web API that so far they haven't bothered to switch off, and it works great with mopidy through the mopidy-tidal extension (which I also contribute to). 

 @419e22ee I know - Nextcloud is one of those, and one of the few businesses I still trust, as we seem aligned on the same values and battles.

I also still overall trust Mozilla, even though they've had their share of mistakes in their long history.

But such businesses are increasingly rare. And, even if in some cases I may have the impression that our values align, I can't help kicking that nasty thought from the back of my mind - that, no matter what your values are, money comes first because businesses can't exist, pay bills or salaries without money.

The big problem here is that, in the lack of sufficient public investments, we don't have compelling alternative business models - or, better, no business models alternative to data harvesting, unsustainable VC funding and subscribe-to-everything are appetizing enough to provide a steady flow of revenue.

Until we change that, I will keep assuming that every single tech business will enshittify once they get the first bill that they can't afford to pay. 

 @53c578bc this is an interesting social rather than technological problem.

People got so used to services that retain your information, even when you asked them to delete it, that they get confused when they use a service that actually does what they asked. "Wait, what? I asked you to delete my data and you ACTUALLY deleted it? I'm confused now" 

 @64ca7a31 small correction - Pompeii was buried in 79 AD, so the remains of that road are likely to be from the 1st (not 2nd) century 😉 

 @bdd6b550 @04fc4742 I think that the Netherlands is doing ok in terms of green investments - the latest figure accounts to ~$28B of investments into green projects, and the emissions last year were 30% lower than in 1990: https://www.euronews.com/green/2023/04/27/how-the-netherlands-plans-to-spend-28bn-on-slashing-emissions-by-2030

On the other hand, $28B < $46.4B, so I'm not sure of what's the point of financially nudging the country towards sustainable alternatives while we keep spending more on the unsustainable ones.

The idea would even be simple - just reduce the investments into fossil projects, tax their emissions, and move more of that money towards sustainable projects.

Instead, we apparently prefer to fund Shell (https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/dutch-government-promises-support-shell-cut-co2-emissions-2023-04-13/), whose emissions alone account to 20% of what we should be expected to cut by 2030, and its continued hollow promises of carbon capture and green hydrogen - both of them so far only exist in the PowerPoint deck of some of their PR folks. 

 @b04d9c09 because I wrote things like those in the past to prove my point, and I know that when you do some people may start staring at the finger while you've pointing at the moon. 

 @bca3d3cb Yes, there is definitely waste involved at every step in any economic system. But there's a big difference between the waste involved in the traditional paper-and-coin (or even "traditional digital") economy and that of the crypto economy (at least for the coins still based on PoW).

Outside of the crypto world, the "waste" is a byproduct of the economic exercise that creates friction and should be minimized.

An inefficient service that sucks up a lot of CPU and RAM thrown in the middle of the banking circuit would be seen as a problem. It would result in a slower throughput for the processed transactions, overloaded systems that may require frequent maintenance, loss of service, high bills from the server farm, etc.

In the PoW crypto world, instead, it is a *feature*.

Bitcoin, as of now, can't work without nodes that spend 100% of their CPU brute-forcing hashes. That's because it relies on a delicate balance of algorithmic throughput and supply control, distributed consensus and physical time required to crack numeric puzzles in order to work.

Waste and friction are required for the system to work, the same way that an electric stove requires a big fat and electrically inefficient resistive unit that sucks up a lot of energy in order to turn in into a lot of heat.

This difference between waste-as-waste and waste-as-a-feature is important to understand which models can scale and which ones can't. 

 @Listens to Baroque while coding murder.exe :newt:  In short, anarco-capitalist is someone who thinks that all government intervention is bad, and the invisible hand of the market must fix the market itself without any direction from above. Which was already naive in Smith's time, let alone in the 21st century. 

 @fa42ddb1 When a bunch of gamers will draw enough electricity with their LAN parties to suck up ~10-20% of the wind and solar capacity of a State and cause rolling blackouts, to the point that they have to get into agreements with the State energy provider to push some energy back into the grid in case of supply shortages and bribed to turn off their machines during a drought, then we can talk about this.

Again, the problem with these comments is that they miss the scale of the problem. Sure, using liquid nitrogen to keep your gaming station cool while you play Baldur's Gate at the highest resolution while there's a drought is a bit despicable. But it still falls several orders of magnitude behind the consumption of a mining farm. 

 @Listens to Baroque while coding murder.exe :newt:  > the government always makes the problems it's supposed to solve much worse

That's an awful generalization that sits at the core of the anarco-capitalist naiveness.

And it leads to curious contradictions.

The argument is that the government shouldn't intervene, otherwise the market can't function properly.

But then it shouldn't intervene even when its inaction actually causes the market to become dysfunctional - like when a single business sucks away resources from everybody else, or it creates a monopoly with high entry barriers for everyone else, or it gets too much lobbying power over democratic institutions, or it concentrates power to the point that the economy is no longer competitive.

It's an awful generalization also because it assumes that every government action is bad, regardless of the action itself. Which is an awful generalization for the same reason why "everything X does is bad" is an awful generalization.

In this case, the government actually identified the right problem (in order to avoid rolling blackouts for everyone, the biggest non-essential consumers of electricity must reduce their consumption during supply shortages), but it implemented the worse possible solution for the problem (instead of suing them or taxing them out of business, and using the tax revenue to expand their strained grid, it bribed them with public money in order to temporarily shut down their gambling den).

Luckily the political doctrine in the US hasn't always been like this. There was a time, a century ago, where the government actually went after corporate abuses, it even enacted the best antitrust regulation of the time that helped keep its economy healthy and competitive, and it invested into big public projects and it created a good welfare safety network that led to the economic boom after WWII.

Nowadays, a President pushing for something like FDR's New Deal, the Marshall Plan or the antitrust regulation of the early 20th century would be seen as an irredimable communist instead. Better let the miners waste electricity on cracking SHA hashes (or bribe them to stop) while everybody else experiences rolling blackouts while it's 40C outside.

I hope that you folks go over this collective anarco-capitalist hallucination soon before inflicting more damage to yourselves and everybody else. 

 @Listens to Baroque while coding murder.exe :newt:  that puts you at odds with almost any other human I know of. Most of them would have been outraged seeing somebody walk away from a supermarket with all the supply of toilet paper in a moment where there was an acute shortage for everybody else.

It also sits at odds with the common sense that our species has built through eons of evolution. We've thrived through collaboration, and even more primitive species than ours are sophisticated enough to realize when a shared vital resource is scarce, and therefore it should be shared more equally with others so the chances of survival can be maximized for the whole species.

So, besides being economically naive and firmly standing in the sociopath field, the theory that everybody can do whatever they want with their money regardless on their impact on others can also safely be labeled as an evolutionary aberration. 

 @Listens to Baroque while coding murder.exe :newt:  this is a naive way of looking at economics.

If something is available in an unlimited supply (or the supply is large enough compared to the demand to be considered unlimited), then yes, if you pay for something you have all the right to get it - as much as you want of it.

That's because your demand is unlikely to trigger a supply shortage, and either push up prices for everyone else, or put heavy constraint on their demand.

That no longer applies when supply is short, or somebody's demand has a strong impact on the supply.

In the first half of 2020, if you saw somebody walk in a shopping mall and buy 50% of the available toilet paper just for its little household, you probably wouldn't have said "oh, if he has the money to buy it then I'm ok with it". 

 @f55632d5 This is the story of the farmer that uses up 1000x more water than everybody else does, and wants us to believe that it's a good thing.

After all, their excessive usage of water helps keep the flow of the river stable, and when there's a drought they are sensible enough to turn off their huge mills, and share some water from their huge tanks with their neighbors.

What a great example of generosity. 

 @Listens to Baroque while coding murder.exe :newt:  Yes, the Texan grid problem was there even before the State became the new haven for miners.

But even a more efficient grid wouldn't solve the underlying problem.

We're talking of **10%** (or more in some areas) of the energy demand of a *whole state* sucked up only by a tiny bunch of businesses and individuals - and all of that energy goes up in cracking pointless puzzles for a distributed Ponzi scheme.

For context, even the former Ilva in Taranto (a huge steel factory that covers a big chunk of the city and gives jobs to ~10-20% of the local population) consumes only a fraction of that amount.

If you make the grid better without changing the mindset, and without cracking down on those who make an irrational usage of shared resources, then all you get is more miners, not a less strained grid.

But Texans are way too scared of socialism to dare to even have a say in how a company should behave. Even when the market goes dysfunctional and a couple of companies start literally stealing from everybody else.

Even when that happens, the State still prefer to pay a bribe with public money to the rich folks to convince them to shut down their gambling den at least for a bit, rather than giving that money to those who need it the most in the middle of a heatwave.

I fully blame all of this on capitalism, yes. 

 @0f3e6888 In these situations it's usually because of two possible factors:

1. The company has deep pockets, and they can take the local government or the energy provider to court for a long time to prove that the rolling blackouts have affected their profits. In this optic, an $32M one-off payment may seem like a better deal a few years in court, with a legal bill that would probably be higher.

2. They participate in a scheme that requires them to share some of their energy back to the grid in case of supply disruptions, and they may threaten to pull out of it if they start to be affected by blackouts. 

 @68b3a022 Sure, but if a household sucked up 10% of the water off a river for their own exclusive profit, while everybody else's usage was 5 orders of magnitude lower, I wouldn't feel like plauding their generosity if, amid a drought, they decided to share some of their water also with their neighbours.

I would still have a problem with all the water that they dry up all the other times of the year, and how that resource could be better shared and invested. 

 @bca3d3cb According to some estimates, the energy cost of a Bitcoin transaction is about equivalent to that of two billion Visa transactions: https://www.marketwatch.com/story/heres-how-many-visa-transactions-can-be-completed-using-the-energy-to-mine-one-bitcoin-11639127573

This report instead seems to set the ratio more around 1:20000: https://www.statista.com/statistics/881541/bitcoin-energy-consumption-transaction-comparison-visa/

And this report 

I always take these estimates with a grain of salt because apple-to-apple comparisons are hard to make and the data is often incomplete.

But it's safe enough to say that the cost of a Bitcoin transaction is somewhere between 4 and 9 orders of magnitude higher than a Visa transaction (even a conservative estimate of 4 orders of magnitude more would be a cause of concern IMHO).

It actually makes sense that a BTC transaction is so much more expensive than a Visa/Mastercard transaction. The traditional circuits are optimized to process the highest number of transactions, while BTC is specifically designed to tightly control supply, number of processed blocks and frequency of processing. If you put such constraints, then your network must artificially introduce friction and inefficiencies. Sending money electronically after running a handshake between two trusted parties and exchanging a couple of messages is (and will always be) more efficient than sending the same money only after you have successfully brute-forced a SHA256 hash that meets some arbitrary conditions and synchronized your block with all the other nodes on the network.

Proof-of-Stake instead of Proof-of-Work is an obvious solution to the problem, since it replaces the energy-intensive hash cracking with the concepts of stakes and consensus, but it slowly pushes the pendulum back towards centralization. And, anyway, it'll never be really welcome in an industry made of cowboys who have invested a lot of money in big server farms, and who just want to keep mining rather than figuring out how else they can run their machines for a profit. 

 @17973f91 Well it's one of the many contradiction of hyper-capitalism.

If the government is never supposed to intervene into the market for the market to function properly, then it's not supposed to intervene even when the market is actually getting dysfunctional. 

 @bca3d3cb yes, the problems with the Texan grid long predate the Bitcoin mining issues.

But just increasing supply and improving the quality of the grid won't change things. Without a change in mindset when it comes to public investments, and without a crackdown against miners, a more efficient grid with and greater supply will only make electricity even cheaper, attracting even more miners to the land that has become the new mining paradise - after China and Kazakhstan kicked the industry out of their borders. The extra capacity will just be absorbed by more mining enterprises.

And cutting wasteful usages is even more important when a grid with limited supply has demand peaks caused by extreme weather. You can't tell people to turn off air conditioning when it's 35C outside, but you can tell miners to turn off their servers.

Bitcoin in Texas consumes somewhere between 12% and 20% of the power baseline produced by renewables. Somebody who uses so much energy in order to create value literally only for the 0.001% is almost the textbook definition of wasteful usage. 

 @17973f91 This article from a few months ago was actually quite interesting: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-03-09/solar-power-rising-heat-and-bitcoin-are-wild-cards-for-texas-grid

Long story short, Texas is the State with the highest energy produced via renewables (~40 GW of installed power), but it also has a baseline of ~5.3 GW (with estimated peaks of ~10 GW) of power required just by Bitcoin miners.

Give renewable energy to an oil-digging sociopath cowboy, and they'll waste sun and wind to get even richer in the dumbest possible ways, while they keep digging oil.

The Bloomberg article (which was published in March) actually made an almost prescient forecast. "Given a spike in energy demand due to an upcoming record-breaking summer, and given how much of the energy baseline of the State is sucked up by miners, will Bitcoin collapse the Texan grid?"

The answer, a few months later, is yes - to the point that ERCOT had to pay the miners for turning off their servers, instead of suing them for literally stealing energy when everybody needs it. 

 @troy ada I have written in my post that cryptobros and anarco-capitalists are the worst kind of sociopaths and evolutionary aberrations that lack any kind of empathy and ability to cooperate through common sense.

Thanks for proving my point.

"If cryptominers want to push up the prices of electricity by literally wasting it on their gambling den, they're free to do that, and who fucking cares if somebody can't afford to keep themselves cool when it's scorching hot outside, if hospitals must run rolling blackouts while miners don't (and when they do they get refunded by the State, unlike the poor family who gets zero support), and if other people will die. If you care about anybody who's not a greedy sociopath jerk, then move to Venezuela".

I hope that people like you never reproduce. First, the world doesn't need more human manure like you who believes that supporting the greedy and the wasteful who doesn't add any value is more important than supporting the needy and the weak. Second, someone who doesn't believe in mutual cooperation and protection of the weak will be an awful parent who will raise another sociopath.

If by any chance you end up having some kids, I'm wondering if you'll actually be sociopath enough to teach them the same values - i.e. that greed is all that matters, and who fucking cares if it pushes up the prices of indispensable commodities and people die because of it. Refunding a miner for their lost revenue is more important than giving a roof to a homeless when it's 40C outside, after all.

Seriously, read again your comment, find the nearest mirror, and spit against the human abomination that will appear in front of you, you despicable scum of the earth. 

 @troy ada is it fair to raise the price of milk for everyone just because a couple of weird folks like to buy all the supplies at the mall so they can bath in it every day?

In other words, is it fair to increase the price of something for everyone when you can easily cut the excesses and keep the prices fair?