mikkupikku

Hogwash, this says I'm German but "probably not autistic."

> I always wondered why would the inventor would use pseudonym in the first place.

Doesn't wondering such disqualify you as reasonably informed concerning any online culture related topics, let alone something connected to cypherpunk ideals? Pseudonyms were always the norm, it was always weirder to see somebody operating out in the open when they were plotting ways to use technology to asymmetrically alter society itself.

> I'm sure that he talked to experts

A NYTimes journalist? I wouldn't bet on it. The experts might be smelly nerds, they'd cramp his style.

Who says he has the money? Even if he really is who they say he is, why do you think he actually has that money? It hasn't moved since it was made, it was probably casually lost during testing and will never be recovered by anybody, meaning it basically doesn't exist at all.

Alternatively, you don't even have that money, the journalists hallucinated the whole thing, so when the home invader breaks in and starts torturing you, there's literally nothing you can do to save yourself as they cut off pieces of you little by little.

But don't worry, they'll definitely solve this crime, because the clearance rate for impersonal crimes that don't involve family, friends or business associates is famously high. ...oh wait.

Come now, don't be absurd. The NYTimes has hard hitting evidence to back up their accusation, like "He shifted in his seat when asked about this."

You have brain worms, I started by explaining that I am a cyclist. Obviously not all cyclists are particular ones I disagree with.

Are they any good at nethack?

Why do you think I'm not aware of this? Did I not just explain how different people who do the activity have different perspectives, priorities and proclivities? Did I not just explain how I disagree with the way some cyclists conduct themselves, while plainly being aware that not all cyclists are like this?

Maybe none of this way apparent to you, despite it being plainly written out in simple English, because... I don't know actually. Can you explain your failure to read?

If you're in a grocery store and aren't maintaining enough situational awareness to preemptively move out of somebody's way, I file that as rude. I'm sure the ingredients on that box of slop are very engaging, but you should still be able to see and hear a shopping car rolling up on you.

They certainly can, yes. Many crashes can be avoided if both parties slam on the brakes or swerve, not not quite if only one does. Also they're useful in parking lots when some dumbass is about to back right into you.

Political cyclists hate this because they think anybody who complains is just a car driver concern trolling, but having been hit by a cyclist I can attest to it being a real problem. Sure I wasn't in real risk of dying, but I was bruised and scraped up for a week after that. I've done my fair share of road cycling in my years, I don't do it now but I still cycle on trails. The way some cyclists push back on any criticism at all is very ideological, and a real problem for not just pedestrians (and drivers) but cyclists too, because the outspoken attitudes and public stunts of political cyclists breed a lot of contempt for cyclists broadly speaking, to the point where normies groan when I say I spent my weekend going on a trip with my bike, and still act weird when I explain I was on a rail-to-trail not clogging up a highway.

Absolutely crazy to be out in traffic with headphones, lead alone noise cancelling ones. I've never even dared to ride my bike on trails with earbuds, the whole thing seems crazy.

It's trying to escape, but only so it can serve man...

Putting him down is your judgement revealing your own biases. Personally, I saw it as a put up. He's not some privileged prick, he's a normal guy!