4512124672456

> As high profile as Musk is, something like that account is a real threat to his personal safety in my opinion.

People who want to actually harm Elon Musk don't need that Twitter account to do so. I don't see how it is a threat to his personal safety, when this data is easily available elsewhere.

This whole article is about private information. The flight data is, as enough people already told you, not private information. For good reason.

> someone dares to say uncomfortable reality-based everyone-who-lives-outside-in-real-world heresies

How is that applicable here? The poster they responded to simply claims something they most likely cant prove (and neither can you), else they wouldn't have started their argument with "willing to bet" - which in turn means that their opinion is most likely based on bigotry, else they would have simply posted the source as an answer to the original article.

> Then why do you get mad when China or the Middle East bans material they find objectionable?

There is a difference between banning content that is objectively harmful (e.g. child porn) and banning content to control and suppress minorities. Just because they can doesn't mean it's good.

> So that must obviously mean censoring of LGBT is a pathetic lie

I never argued this.

People (or NPCs/bots, like you call them) downvote you because not only is it a bad take and does have questionable grammar, it's also full of misinformation.

Let's take your first point for example. If I go on Fox News right now and search for articles about the 2020 election being stolen, I get plenty of articles and opinions talking about it. How exactly was it censored, and how is it comparable to censorship in China?

Besides, censorship is not inherently bad, and most stable democracies with a functioning legal system will have some form of censorship, to protect minors, for example.

> Trustlessly

With cryptocurrencies, you need to trust:

* The exchanges (and other ramps for getting useful money into the system and out of the system)

* The developers of the chain

* The developers of the smart contracts

* The developers of wallets

* The miners

* The internet providers

* The hardware manufacturers

* The government (yes, they could punish usage of cryptocurrencies hard if they wanted to)

> Your will that declares what assets go to your children. The deed to your home. The lease for your car. Certificates. Art. Tickets. Contracts. Money.

Which can all be lost or stolen easily without a central authority and a judicial system. Do not underestimate the power of phishing, especially if it is directed towards specific people.

Inflation is not something central bankers use to rob people of money for their own enrichment.

> It's possible to be both rational and religious.

Except the person who is religious will always have a limit to their rationality, because they choose "believe in magic" instead of "knowing and not knowing".

> It stands to reason that someone who is a part of a strong religious community would have a much better social life, support structure, and network.

Remove "religious" from this sentence and it is still true. Now the question remains whether a religious community is better than other communities. I doubt it, because religion usually comes with a lot of extra baggage and can become outright dangerous.