Something to somehow make my posts interesting.

If you make a different set of assumptions, and draw a different set of conclusions, and don't back it up with the math to show that it agrees with observed experimental results, how do you know where the reinterpretation holds true, and where conjectures and conclusions become more misleading than elucidating?

Would retardmaxxing solve analysis paralysis?

Is this meant as an analogy or do you expect to be able to derive GR in a novel way?

It's an interesting question that I've never really stopped to ask. Among other things, I used my relatively new AI based coding superpowers to make an app that uses my phone's sensors to measure how far I wheelie on my bike. It crossed my mind to put it on Zapstore, but I decided not to waste the space 😆

I feel like most people fail to appreciate just how often the best option is still really bad.

The statement "showing how the absence of a globally enforced structure for time, ..." leave me curious how you deal with time dilation.

You're right, I do need a special "it's time to go to the gas station" outfit.

To be fair to the question asker, they did ask "how much Bitcoin...", not "what does the cuck buck value of my Bitcoin..." Also, if I asked someone a very practical question about retirement planning in the context of the world we live in and they responded with something to the effect of "believe in Jesus and you'll be saved from this vile world", I would not be left feeling particularly receptive to their advice 🙂

I remember, way back when, regularly splitting 3 foot longs for $11 with a friend.

I don't know, if you know how far you are from an asymptote, and the rate of change regarding how quickly you're approaching it...

To me, this somehow has the same vibe as wondering where all the normies are at a furry convention 😁