SCAM ALERT: There has been a huge escalation lately in airdrop and giveaway scams targetting XRPL users lately. Any such posts you see are likely scams.
Anyone claiming to be me on Instagram, Telegram, or almost anywhere else is likely a scammer.
Stay safe XRP fam
The only thing that we can definitively test for consciousness is ourselves, and we are. The only thing we can indirectly test for consciousness is other living people, and evidence suggests they are. It is perfectly reasonable to extrapolate that perhaps everything is conscious.
Clarification: That we don’t know exactly how consciousness (human or animal) emerged doesn’t mean it’s hard to know *if* we are conscious or *that* something else is not conscious.
We are self-evidently conscious.
And all consciousness we’ve seen has emerged biologically.
There’s no reason to think anything non-biological is conscious.
If you’re positing a non-biological consciousness you better have some insanely impressive argument I haven’t seen anything close to.
Otherwise you’re just like the person who thought the first calculators were conscious because the representations and automated rules they used produced such impressive calculations.
PS Open-ended computers are amazing, I love them, and I place very few limits on what they can accomplish. That doesn’t mean I think they’re conscious.
F · O · U · N · D · E · R · S
The sitcom about how the ripple:native Ledger was born.
Episode 1: "The One Without Mining"
cc @JoelKatz@bgarlinghouse@chrislarsensf
"As Trump punishes media companies because he disagrees with their viewpoint, so Congress must do the same thing and block a merger because we disagree with its viewpoint."
Makes sense if you don't think about it.
As Trump tries to ban CNN from the White House, it would be a massive mistake to cave on the Paramount merger.
The last thing we need is another Trump-controlled media conglomerate abusing its power to stomp out competition.
This is a dangerous merger.
Amusing "denial of service" attack possible on @XahauCards where I look for someone who asked someone else to authograph their card and I autograph it before they can. Each card can only have on autograph. ;)
Alice's rights making it more difficult for Bob to do something that Bob wants to do for his benefit is not the same as Alice's rights requiring Bob to do something for Alice's benefit.
No sooner do I say my hub has been running perfectly than it has two events over the past two days where the peer count dropped and some latencies went up. Investigation seems to suggest these incidents were associated with minor network disruptions and not XRPL
All issues with my hub have been fixed and it has been rock solid for the past two weeks. The two blank spots in the charts are due to a problem with the monitoring system, not the hub.
Riddler (on the phone): So, Batman, can you figure out what you find in an alley ... full of holes?
Batman (sobbing): My .... My parents?
Riddler: Oh, my god! No. A bowling ball. Batman, I'm so, so sorry.
The required showing of actual malice to hold a person liable for defaming a public figure is so close to having to prove actual knowledge of falsity that I don't think there's a single case where actual malice was found despite an undisputed lack of actual knowledge of falsity.
This seems to be incorrect to me. The question is only whether Congress delegated the power to regulate gambling through exchange traded contracts. As Kalshi correctly points out, traditional sportsbook gambling is very different.
CFTC’s rulemaking is DOA.
The major-questions doctrine ensures it.
The Ninth Circuit ruled that any argument that Congress delegated gambling regulation to the CFTC “would create a major-questions problem.”
Circle California federal court on your calendar for APA litigation.
Of course Congress didn't intend to replace State-regulated sportsbook gambling with exchange-traded products outside of State regulation. It meant to create a new, uniform Federal framework for creating exchange-traded products outside of State regulation.
There is no "or is otherwise harmful" exception to the First Amendment. I understand Meta faces the reality of the unfortunate choices of litigation strategy, but this is a gross affront to the First Amendment.