· Foranstaltninger som social distancering og isolation blev meget populære. I kølvandet på alle disse tiltag henvendte folk sig til online dating-platforme for ikke kun at · Hvordan opfører folk sig på online dating. En andens billeder er havnet i min Google Fotos sky. Kongen_xD En andens billeder er havnet i min Google · Ved at vide, hvordan man opfører sig til en fest er én ting, men det er kun begyndelsen på din rejse til at få succes med kvinder. Hvis du vil vide, hvordan du Leave a Comment on hvordan man opfører sig på en første Date; møde, og omkring halvdelen vil sandsynligvis sige ja (den anden halvdel er bare fibbing). I stedet for at skamme Svar (1 ud af 5): Når folk bliver rige får de mulighed for at opføre sig lidt mere som de virkelig er. * Dem som altid har været nogle show-offs (dem der godt kan lide at vise sig frem) får nu den Missing: online dating ... read more
The SEC helps to slander and try to hinder companies who are filing a complaint about the DTCC or any of their affiliates by dragging their feet, making proposal after proposal with no end in sight refer to congressional hearings blaming it on under staffing. Using new data obtained from both agencies under the Freedom of Information Act, my new working paper demonstrates that the tip-triage function has been outsourced to a group of well-connected, repeat-player, private whistleblower lawyers who are exempt from any meaningful transparency, regulation, or public accountability.
The most notorious example probably involved Peter Sivere, a compliance officer at Chase who years ago went to the S. to complain that Chase was withholding an incriminating email from the agency, which was investigating an illegal trading practice. When Sivere contacted the S. with the documents, he asked if he would be eligible for an award; they told him no, and he gave them the documents anyway. had ratted him out to Chase! It subsequently came out that the S. Since the S.
It came out after the crash, for instance, that the SEC repeatedly ignored warnings of excessive risk-taking at companies like Bear Stearns; they even censored an IG report to conceal, among other things, their history of non-action. When companies or shareholders file complaints against the DTCC, bank or brokerage firm, the victim or victims soon find themselves the target of litigations and investigations and a smear campaign all brought on by the ones who are committing the crimes they use the SEC and Bias courts in order to force the victims through shame and financial pain to drop the case.
Frivolous SEC investigations — Frivolous Investigations of victim companies by the SEC is a surefire way to drop the stock price. In the shorts allegedly compiled a list of approximately ten target companies they actively and aggressively attacked.
This list included Overstock, Krispy Kreme, NovaStar, Pre-Paid Legal and others. After the shorts had taken large positions in these ten companies, eight of them were investigated by the SEC. Preliminary inquiries are supposed to remain secret because the unproven allegations could have a devastating effect on the stock price.
Yet, within a matter of days, the news of the investigation would appear in short-friendly media outlets, to be followed almost instantly by a class-action shareholder suit s. The case of Universal Express is even more disturbing.
Packaging Plus Services was a logistics and transportation firm that emerged from a Chapter 11 reorganization in May as Universal Express. In , Universal needed financing for an acquisition, so they approached an investment banking firm, who they believed to be legitimate, to arrange PIPE private investment, public exit financing. The lenders, who received bonds that could be converted into stock, got their loan repaid from the conversion and sale of their stock.
As the share price drops, the company issues more shares to the lender. Because the newly issued additional shares are less than the market value, the lender immediately dumps them at a profit while further depressing the stock price with the flood of new shares. Concurrently, the lenders short heavily with a flood of counterfeit shares, resulting in additional profit to them and putting more downward pressure on the stock price.
It almost always succeeds in putting the company out of business. One of the most nefarious PIPE lenders, Steve Hicks, put virtually all of his borrowers out of business before the Department of Justice put him out of business. Toxic PIPE lenders prey upon emerging or weak credit companies who do not have access to more traditional capital markets.
Universal fell into this category, although, by their own admission, they were completely unaware of what they were dealing with. The investment banker arranged the PIPE financing with about ten off-shore hedge funds. Volume was the equivalent of the whole company changing hands every three days.
Due to the off-shore domicile and layers of shell corporations, collection of these judgments proved to be difficult. Three weeks later, the SEC sued Universal, falsely alleging that they sold unregistered counterfeit securities as part of a bankruptcy court- approved employee stock incentive program. As of the last writing available, the cases are still pending, but it is reported that some SEC officials have been relieved of duty as a result of their participation in this.
Class Action lawsuits — Based upon leaked stories of SEC investigations or other media exposes, a handful of law firms immediately file class-action shareholder suits. Milberg Weiss, before they were disbanded as a result of a Justice Department investigation, could be counted on to file a class-action suit against a company that was under short attack. Allegations of accounting improprieties that were made in the complaint would be reported as being the truth by the short friendly media, again causing panic among small investors.
Media assault — The shorts, in order to realize their profit, must ultimately put the victim into bankruptcy or obtain shares at a price much cheaper than what they shorted at. These shares come from the investing public who panics and sells into the manipulation.
Panic is induced with assistance from the financial media. com, an Internet advisory service that short hedge-fund managers David Rocker and Jim Cramer owned.
This alumni association supported the short attack by producing slanted, libelous, innuendo laden stories that disparaged the company, as it was being crashed. Remember us? The individual shareholders you are supposed to protect? Just wanted to let you know, those people who you keep taking bullets for, well they're the ones behind the trigger Securities and Exchange Commission SEC cannot be challenged under state law.
Because DTCC's Stock Borrow Program SBP , the target of the lawsuit, is explicitly approved by and subject to the ongoing oversight of the SEC, the legal challenge is barred by the U.
Constitution, on grounds of both "field" and "conflicts" preemption. This order is the fourth time in the last year that a court has ruled that plaintiffs are not permitted to sue DTCC or its subsidiaries for carrying out functions that are regulated and overseen by the SEC.
These are among a number of suits that have been brought, largely by bulletin board traded companies, who seek to blame their poor stock performance and failed business models on DTCC and the national market system for clearance and settlement. To date, except for one case where DTCC's dismissal motion is pending, all of the cases either have been dismissed by the courts or withdrawn by the plaintiffs.
There is nothing in DTCC's operating procedures, activities or conduct that justifies these frivolous suits. Goulding, John P. Dorocki and John Serubo. He admits the firm wasn t filing required documentation but he said it could no longer afford to do so and eventually had to defend itself against the SEC. Young said the SEC went after hundreds of companies during the past three years, but Eagletech is the only one he knows of that defended itself. Virtually every one of those companies came from a higher exchange or were once successful or were on the way to being successful and ended up victims of this crime.
The SEC hoped to put companies out of their misery to sweep the evidence under the rug forever. But the SEC was culpable here. Uncovering the evidence As a result of the defense Eagletech undertook as the SEC moved to de-register the company's stock, the SEC was pushed to hand over every record that had been amassed and every investigative material ever gathered with regard to Eagletech.
Why did Medinah Minerals, Inc. tally up million votes at a recent Annual General Meeting when only million existed? Why can't the dozens and dozens of NUTEK shareholders that have been pounding the table for their share delivery for years not get their shares EVEN AFTER FILING SUIT TO DEMAND DELIVERY? WHAT IS GOING ON HERE? Perhaps Regulation SHO should incorporate a rule that if a shareholder's request for the delivery of his certificate has not reached the Transfer Agent's office within 3 weeks time then an immediate cash buy-in must be effected.
Denver lawsuit In a lawsuit filed in Nevada state court, Denver-base Nanopierce Technologies Inc. The small company, which is now called Vyta Corp. In recent trading, the stock has traded around 40 cents. A Nevada state court judge dismissed the suit, which prompted an appeal by the company. DTCC says the roughly dozen other cases against it have almost all been dismissed or not pursued by the plaintiffs.
Nanopierce garnered support from the North American Securities Administrators Association, which represents state stock regulators. DTCC nets the brokerage firms' positions but it is the brokerages that manage their individual client accounts and know which client failed to deliver their stock.
DTCC officials say that Nanopierce had internal business problems--including heavy losses--to explain its stock-price drop. DTCC received support in the suit from the SEC, which filed a brief defending the trade-processing system and arguing that federal regulation pre-empted state-court review.
Other Companies have been bribed and threatened by the DTCC, this has been reported to the SEC and other agencies they have even gone through litigation but as the years go by no enforcement action, no auditing of the DTCC and all is swept under the rug as the crime continues. Another cut another bleed to not only our economy but also to the investors abroad who put their money into the American Stock Exchange. Bribed and threatened In an October meeting between BCIT and the DTCC, the DTCC finally gave BCIT an ultimatum after years of giving BCIT management false promises about lifting the Global Trading Freeze.
BCIT management was told if they ever wanted the Global Trading Freeze lifted they first had to issue enough new shares to cover all the existing Naked Shorted shares the brokers created out of thin air. Issuing new company shares would essentially allow the brokers to cover up all of BCIT shares they counterfeited. This would also allow the brokers to keep all of the money they stolen from the BCIT shareholders without penalty. Furthermore, all the extra shares would severely dilute the share structure and cause even further damage to the stock price.
This is nothing more then BLACKMAIL by the DTCC. When I requested a detailed explanation of why DTC believed the exit fee was justified, I received no response. While we were also assured that DTC would promptly notify Nasdaq Market Integrity when the stock certificates had been received and distributed to the various DTC participants, the promised notice was apparently never sent. owns 75 million shares of Coil Tubing Technology, Inc.
and they wish to dividend out this asset to the owners of their 40 million shares outstanding. For instance, if 10 million shares of Grifco are held in a registered format by their purchasers in certificate form then 30 million would be held in street name at the DTCC and thus 38 million of the book entries held at the DTCC were in a failure to deliver status.
The DTC division of the DTCC acts as the legal custodian of these 30 million shares an estimate and is well aware of the disparity between the 30 million shares in their custody and the 68 million shares held in an electronic book entry format on the books of their participants. They learned of this disparity during the dividend process. Obviously very few would comply as they had legally earned these dividends.
They did this despite the fact that it was clearly the responsibility of those DTCC participants that were short the stock to match the dividend. In reality Grifco management has no idea of the levels of delivery failures in their shares held at the DTCC or outside of the DTCC in an ex-clearing format.
How can the DTCC with the Section 17A 34 Act mandate to Promptly and accurately clear and settle all securities transactions refuse to settle these transactions after these archaic delivery failures were brought to their attention? Once the enormity of this delivery failure situation was brought to the attention of DTCC management, the correct course of action was obviously to firstly force the perpetrators of this massive fraud to buy-in the shares of Grifco that they'd previously sold, but refused after inordinate amounts of time, to deliver.
Secondly, those that are short the stock on the dividend record date would obviously be on the hook for the dividend shares. This is the type of corruption in the naked short selling arena that U.
investors are up against in the DTCC-administered clearance and settlement system in use in the U. YOU SHOULDN'T HAVE TO GO TO THE EXPENSE AND HASSLE OF FILING SUIT IN ORDER TO RECEIVE A DIVIDEND CLEARLY OWED TO YOU.
Then, almost around 30 minutes - maybe an hour or so after eating ice cream I got really bad lower abdomen pains that came in waves. I got the d out and felt much better but my lower abdomen still feels almost full or very slightly crampy and gassy. submitted by angelqq1 to emetophobia [link] [comments]. So, I asked this girl to homecoming today. I made a sign, even asked her in front of the whole band, to which she said yes.
I find this odd, willingly being a third wheel, but I say yes nonetheless. and basically was making it seem like I pressured her into saying yes. If I did, it was not intentional at all. The asking in front of the band was just supposed to be fun, nothing else. Later, G posts on her snapchat story. G responds by saying they never called me manipulative and they were talking about someone else over a Audio-Call and what not.
Then said how I like to assume a lot. Please let me know what to do if I am. Thank you. submitted by Cr3amyMcCheese to teenagers [link] [comments]. html Tiago Henriques, a seasoned artificial intelligence expert who noticed that news of adverse reactions to COVID vaccines were highly censored in the media, decided to create a Facebook group that lets the vaccine-injured and their loved ones share their stories.
Most Facebook pages on the topic of vaccine side effects and adverse events get removed very quickly by the social media platform, managing to get only a few thousand followers. Members of the private group share personal stories of people they know who have developed serious medical conditions or even died shortly after receiving the COVID shots. And I think this was a great avenue for these people to feel listened to.
He is in the process of creating a separate platform that is not prone to censorship by social media companies. To fund the project, Henriques has set up fundraising campaigns in GoFundMe and GiveSendGo , where anyone who is interested in the cause can donate.
It will give us autonomy and not have to fear being turned off at any time by the powers that be. Hi all. I am a hobby programmer with a long history of making desktop programs. When I write a program I usually make it focused on a single thing that it's supposed to accomplish. For example, Calligrapher AI lets you type text and then "writes" the same text in human-like handwriting while you watch, and lets you save the image. Beep Knobs is just a board with knobs albeit a fancy one that lets you generate customized beeps.
My programs are generally super small. Think 0. They are also easy to use — just double-click the program's icon — and don't require downloading dependencies, installation, or any sort of setup at all. They are also super fast, and run without lag. submitted by GirkovArpa to slavelabour [link] [comments]. A breakdown of the update coming to Ethereum tomorrow and what you need to know if you hold NFTs. Did you know tomorrow is likely the biggest technical upgrade in the blockchain world to date?
After taking notes and sharing hype from foobar 's appearance on Rug Radio about the Merge with the rest of the Mod team, I was met with 'What's the Merge Jelly? What is the Merge? After years of preparation, the Merge is Ethereum's transition from Proof-of-Work PoW to Proof-of-Stake PoS and is happening Wednesday evening Eastern Time ET.
What is Proof-of-Work PoW and Proof-of-Stake PoS? Proof-of-Work PoW : The original blockchain consensus mechanism. A hash function a mathematical function or computer program that can only go one way. It is very easy to take an input and get an output.
However, if you have an output, it is near impossible to figure out what input corresponded to it, unless you generated it yourself--a one way function. PoW says you have to find inputs that correspond to an output with loooots of zeros in them can you hash to a low number? The difficulty, says how low of a number you need how many zeroes in the number and is dynamically adjusted so that the time between blocks is relatively consistent.
In this system, folks buy ASIC's in BTC's case, GPU's in ETH's case, and run them on these hash functions that serves as sybil resistance , making sure no one party can take over the protocol. Proof-of-Stake PoS : An alternative security mechanism to PoW that views security as something that can be more circular and self-contained. Instead of folks putting up GPU hash power to secure the network, they post their own native coin ETH in our instance posted like a jail bond--promising to act honestly and follow the rules of the network and if one doesn't, forfeit the bond.
Both PoW and PoS require you to buy a resource, and that resource gives you the right to create blocks. In PoW you buy computer chips and the computer chips allow you to produce blocks. In PoS, you buy ETH and that ETH gives you the right to produce blocks. Both mechanisms answer the question who gets to make blocks and who decides what gets to go into them. This is important because who makes blocks and who determines what goes in them could also determine what is censored and what is not or if the blockchain is usable on a day to day basis.
What will this update do? Help combat the climate narrative emissions cut by MEV gets easier for bots this will cause staking yields to go up but can be an issue if you use a wallet or dapp utilizing default RPC nodes , which can lead to sandwiching. foobar mentioned using a private RPC alleviates this concern--however, the GME wallet does not allow RPC to be edited at this time.
What won't this update do? Lower transaction fees: The Merge is a change of consensus mechanism and not really an expansion of network capacity. Therefore, it won't result in lower gas fees since validators will take up an almost similar amount to process transactions. However, with the switch to PoS, is laying groundwork for future scaling via sharding , which will impact fees. Create a new ETH token Allow you to withdraw staked ETH. Staked ETH withdrawals will only be possible after the Shanghai Upgrade - the next major upgrade on the Ethereum network after The Merge.
Newly issued ETH will remain locked and illiquid for several months following The Merge until the Shanghai upgrade is done. Make transactions noticeably faster--transaction speed will remain the same on L1. Cause Network Disruption: that's why core devs have been running the beacon chain in prod for 21 months straight, did 13 different mainnet shadow forks, and 3 live testnet merges Do I need to do anything if I have NFTs?
All you need to do is sit back and wait for the ' Surge, Verge, Purge, and Splurge! For example, ETH-PoW backed by LFG swap the folks behind the Luna foundation is a thing I thought I would clear up some of the most common misconceptions about PoS. I'll basically make this a two piece explanatory, first I'll compare PoW and PoS and go into some details, then I'll answer some of those common misconceptions below.
So you have the option to just see my answers below or read the entire thing and understand why I answered the questions like I answered them. Understanding What's the difference between PoW and PoS? Both systems are intended to form consensus on the current state of the chain. Basically in a decentral project you have to come to some kind of consensus on things.
Who gets to include transactions, what is the absolute order of transactions on the chain to make sure one coin is not spent double, which chain is the legitimate one and which one is the attacker chain. So these consensus frameworks lay down the rules that everyone who wants to participate have to follow.
PoW In PoW this is done via computing power and energy. A computer that finds a solution to a very difficult mathematical problem first has the ability to create a block, include a bunch of transactions in it, secure the chain and its history.
And of course profit from it in the form of a reward, some crypto currency for finding the block called "block reward" and the transaction fees for those transactions included in your block.
The mathematical problem is so hard to solve, that the best known way to solve it is just guessing it while it's hard to solve, it's super easy to verify if your solution is correct. That's what mining basically is, using a ton of electricity and hardware to guess a solution to a really hard problem that has no other use than securing the chain. So in order to participate in PoW you need a lot of graphic cards or even better - specialized hardware called ASICs ASIC companies is another whole new topic, I just like to mention that they usually "test" their hardware thoroughly before they send it to their customers months later.
You can't really produce your own ASICs which is why there's a constant call to open source these blueprints and which is why a lot of other crypto currencies chose mining algorithms that are ASIC resistant to strengthen their projects decentralization.
These things cost real world money, need electricity and lots of it, need a space to put them, produce heat and wear down or brick over time.
Ideally you want to mine somewhere where electricity and cooling is cheap. Now when more miners with more hardware join, blocks would be found much quicker than those 13s average, so we introduce something called the "difficulty" that adjusts the work that a computer has to perform so we are back to an average block creation of 13s. Basically if more miners start mining, it becomes more difficult for everyone else.
So in order to keep your current influence on the chain and your current reward level, you'd have to reinvest in more hardware. To give you an idea, you could sell ETH for dollars and and then just revert your transaction and have both your initial ETH as well as the dollars you earned from the sell.
So in short: Money translates to hardware and electricity. Translates to rewards and influence. PoS Now in PoS we have a system where you don't need hardware or specialized devices, only an ordinary computer and ETH.
ETH is still paid with real world money so both systems ultimately depend on money. Instead of needing fiat money to buy mining equipment and electricity, you need fiat money to buy ETH. So the two systems are very similar in these regards, PoS just cuts out the middle man of having to buy computing power. A stake of 32 ETH makes you a so called "validator". html enter-randao.
Note that while in PoW this was on average 13s there could be 8 blocks in a minute and then just 1 block in a minute , PoS works like a clockwork where a new block is due exactly every 12 seconds. While the block creator earns the block reward and transaction fees like in PoW, those rewards are significantly lower.
Right now you'd get just 0. But the validator has more duties than just blocks. Every epoch your validator is assigned a random block to attest to. Attesting basically means checking the block and their proposer for validity and signing of with a mathematical signature. You can think of it as basically vouching with your 32 ETH stake that this block of someone else is correct and the proposer followed all the rules laid out by the protocol.
You earn some 0. Currently a validator makes around 0. But since your expenses have been cut down significantly compared to PoW remember no heavy electricity consuming devices, no need for cooling or even big physical spaces, no real wear over time except maybe your SSD, you could basically run multiple validators on one single computer that is less powerful than your phone from 4 years ago those lower rewards actually make a lot of sense.
Since we learned that a validator has duties every epoch and an epoch happens every 6. Missing one of these duties during downtime will get you penalized.
Now those penalties are very low though. You roughly loose the amount of ETH you would have earned in this epoch. So if an attestation earns you 0. Since block times on PoS are fixed at 12s and the proposer is chosen at random, the difficulty system like we saw in PoW is not really needed here. But you are still competing against other validators in two things: 1 if more validators join, your chance to be chosen for a block proposal shrinks accordingly.
And with it your annual return. Now what this means is, if Ethereum has too few validators, the rewards for validators increase. If Ethereum has too many validators, the rewards for validators decrease. You want to incentivize enough people to stake to secure the chain, but at the same time at some point the additional security benefit of more validators does not justify a high inflation any more.
So like in PoW, you have protocol level competition with other validators. And in order to stay competitive, you would have to reinvest your earnings and spin up more validators to keep your current influence and reward level. While this all sounds pretty straight forward so far, it will take more to make PoS work though. The very first generation of PoS coins that came into existence around suffered from a flaw called "nothing at stake" including the coin that pioneered PoS "Peercoin".
To reverse a transaction, you'd have to do the work of the last 6 blocks again and build your new chain faster than the one that is being built by the entire rest of the network combined remember, in PoW we follow the chain with the most work put into them. But in PoS, since no work is attached to the creation of a block, a validator can simply replace their own last 6 blocks with 6 different blocks in less than a second.
And if that happens, it costs you nothing to replace the last 6 blocks and attack the chain, which is why the problem is called the "nothing at stake" problem. Modern PoS systems like Ethereum solve this by introducing two simple rules: 1 You cannot sign two conflicting attestations or blocks at the same height 2 You can not signing a block with a source or target that would surround you or get surrounded by another block you made Since every duty you perform is signed off by you with a mathematical signature that cannot be forged, it's super easy to prove whether you violated this rule or not.
You just have to listen to two duties signed off by the same entity for the same slot. That's all it takes for any validator on the chain to include this as proof on the beaconchain that you violated these rules and slash you. Slashing is basically a severe penalty where you end up losing parts or even the full 32 ETH of your stake plus you will be forcefully ejected from the network and can no longer operate as validator.
Now if you try to replace the last 6 blocks you created by signing off 6 new blocks, you'll be slashed and lose your ETH and your validator role. So in short: Money translates to stake. Bad actors get slashed, lazy actors get penalized. Now that we understand the basics, let's dive into the most common misconceptions: FAQ PoS will make the rich even richer If you read my comparison of the two systems, you are probably noticing that those two systems are not really that different from one another in this regard.
In both systems, money means influence. A lot of real world money can get you a lot of mining hardware while a lot of real world money can get you a lot of ETH to stake. On PoW you buy hardware to strengthen your influence, on PoS you provide this money directly to strengthen your influence. On both, you have to reinvest your earnings to keep your position in the network or otherwise see it shrink by the rivals.
Miners due to the difficulty increase, stakes due to the reward decrease and lower chance to propose a block. Both systems give incentives to participate in the consensus in the form of money. While miners in PoW make way more money than their PoS counterparts, they also have way more running operational costs. But you'll earn less while staking than you'd be mining. Using W of power and at an electricity cost of 0.
While staking those 32 ETH right now would earn you 0. Or when comparing annual ETH inflation of those two systems: PoS creates , ETH a year while PoW creates 4,, ETH per year. While the argument holds true that people with money can make more money in PoS, the same holds true for PoW. Or any other capitalist system for that matter. As we've seen with this example, PoW is more attractive to make more money and it does so even faster than PoS. PoW makes the rich richer is actually more true than the other way around.
But PoS requires 32 ETH at stake. PoS is for the rich and therefore not decentral Another pretty common misconception is that you need 32 ETH to stake. While this is true if you want to solo stake, you can also join a staking pool with just 0.
This is very similar to PoW once again since solo mining is not something the average miner can do to turn a profit, so they instead form pools and share their income. This is also true for PoS. PoS has another advantage up its alley since there is yet again another thing that is not possible on PoW, namely decentral staking pools like Rocketpool.
Where ETH is provided to smart contract that spins up a validator once 32 ETH has accumulated. The duties are performed by anyone that wants to be a Rocketpool node operator.
There are also centralized staking pool solutions like they are currently with PoW. The major downside PoS has here compared to PoW is that ETH is currently locked in at these staking pools. I'd encourage people that don't have 32 ETH and want to stake to look into those decentral staking solutions like Rocketpool, since you are actually strengthening the network by making it even more decentral and can profit from it even without having 32 ETH.
PoS is way less secure than PoW That's an argument I've seen in nearly every discussion about PoS. Currently there are more than , validators active on the beacon chain with a total value locked of 13 million ether. To attack the chain you'd need more than 6. Plus PoS has limits in place on how many new validators can join or exit the validator set, so even if you were to acquire 6,5 million ETH, the time it would take to convert them to validators would take around days 6 new validators per block, every 12s a block.
We learned that there are slashing mechanisms for bad actors and penalties for offline validators. Another thing that improves security significantly on PoS is the concept of finality. For users and exchanges this means that once a transaction has been finalized happens after 2 epochs or roughly 13 minutes , you can be absolutely certain that this transaction can't be reverted any more.
This is a major security benefit for exchanges and merchants and is something that is not possible with PoW. Contrary to the questions we tried to answer here, PoS offers more security than their PoW counterparts. Lido is somewhat de-central, meaning ETH is locked into smart contracts and pegs their liquid staking token called stETH. The node operation is outsourced to 25 different institutional node operators all across the globe, for example a few Ethereum PoS developer teams are node operators for Lido.
Remember that a validator cannot contradict itself and sign two blocks or attestations with the same height, so should Lido decide to intervene and start operating the validators themselves again after they have been passed on to node operators, those validators would immediately be slashed for contradicting themselves.
While I still discourage to use Lido for their market share, the argument against them is put into perspective when you realize that Lido is basically a pool of 25 different smaller pools. As long as they are committed to onboard more node operators, this won't be an issue. They too rely on clouds like Amazon or Google. But with PoW, Amazon and Google can't do anything since miners secure the chain You may think that miners secure the chain, but in reality the pools are the ones that create the block.
Miners solve the mathematical problem for the pool by creating this blog without knowing what's in the block or without the ability to use the solution for their own block.
Simply put, the mining pool hands the miner a specific problem to solve that only the mining pool can use to create the block.
So if Amazon or Google turn evil, they can attack PoW as easily as they can with PoS by just switching out the problem the miners need to solve to create an evil Amazon or Google block. But miners can switch pool if they get wind of this while in PoS you may not First, you have way more people solo staking from home than miners solo mining from home.
Secondly, PoS entertains the thought of social consensus, basically that the people that use Ethereum have a say in what they think is canon as compared to letting algorithms dictate what the canonical chain is.
Just to illustrate the point though, this is a very unlikely event and would have huge impacts on the entire crypto scene regardless if it happens to a PoW chain or a PoS chain. PoS allows censoring of transactions like we saw with tornado cash This has nothing to do with consensus, censoring is possible in both PoW and PoS.
I know some Bitcoiners like to point that out as a flaw in Ethereum but fail to realize that this is a problem facing cryptocurrencies as a whole and could easily happen to them too. Instead of fighting each other, crypto should stand united against on chain censoring and put tribalism to side for this one. PoS is bad, remeber what happend to Luna? This has again nothing to do with the consensus algorithm. What happened to Luna would have happened regardless of whether they would have run on PoW or PoS.
The flaw was with their stablecoin system and not with the consensus system. Vitalik is the dictator of Ethereum, this makes Ethereum a centralized project If Vitalik decides today to push a hard fork that would give him 10k ETH, no one in their right mind would run this update. Node operators have always the choice to reject an update by not running it. If Ethereum were centralised, there would not be an Ethereum Classic today and there won't be an EthereumPoW after the merge.
People found reasons to reject the update proposed and came together to continue their version and let users ultimately decide which chain they want to be part of.
Also, contrary to for example Bitcoin, where Bitcoin Core is the only de-facto implementation of the Bitcoin protocol, Ethereum is committed to what's called client diversity. Overall there are 4 different execution clients for Ethereum and 5 consensus clients.
Each client has their own dedicated team behind it. If there's a bug or foreign takeover in one client, Ethereum will continue to run thanks to these other clients.
So Vitalik would have to convince four different development teams first to implement his 10k ETH fork and then convince the entire rest of the community, including all the nodes, stakers, exchanges and users to actually run it.
As with Bitcoin, anyone can participate in the development of Ethereum and propose their own changes to the protocol in the form of an EIP Ethereum improvement proposal. Ethereum trades security and decentralization for energy efficiency If you made it through the entire post you already know that this is not true.
PoS offers increased security, more decentralization, consumes less energy and cuts ETH inflation by a huge amount. So no draw backs then? That's rich PoS is an incredible engineering feat that took over 6 years to get right. But this does not come without some drawbacks. For one, PoS is an incredibly complex system. Especially when being compared to PoW, where the simplicity of PoW is arguably the main beauty of it. Developers like to avoid complexity at all costs since it increases the possibility of errors which is why PoS took that long to develop and thoroughly test.
Another drawback is that staking is a far more complicated thing to do instead of mining. There are several steps to run your own validator, there's a requirement for permanent uptime and a wrong staking configuration that could end up costing you parts or even all of your staked ETH. The beautiful thing about PoS though is, that even though it's harder to stake, the protocol is actually designed to work together.
You as individual staker earn more rewards if everyone is participating correctly then you would if someone set up their staking machine wrong. So you even have a selfish reason to help this staker to set up their device correct. Plus the people in staking are super nice and friendly, there are entire subreddits devoted to educate people about staking and helping them set up validators or offer advice on how to stake their sub 32 ETH.
The last major drawback to date though is the inability to withdraw your funds. To keep the tight merge schedule, it was decided that withdrawal will be implemented in the first update after the merge.
Which is realistically still months away. The last one, you can not initially distribute a coin with PoS. This is actually something that PoW does incredible well, the distribution of coins at the beginning of a project. Many downsides PoS is criticized for exist in PoW as well. Some things PoS is criticized for is actually worse under PoW.
If you want to learn more, read the entire thing. submitted by Masaca to CryptoCurrency [link] [comments]. Fester er et af de absolut bedste steder at møde kvinder, og der er som regel mange piger der, som er åbne for nye oplevelser. Det er også et fantastisk sted til blot at socialisere, have det sjovt og møde nye mennesker, som senere kan blive dine venner og en del af din stadigt voksende sociale kreds. Jeg vil give dig 10 gode tips, som vil hjælpe dig, hvis du ønsker at socialisere til en husfest eller andre sociale sammenkomster, hvor du kan møde nye mennesker.
Disse tips vil sørge for, at du ikke bliver holdt uden for det sjove — og du behøver ikke engang at kende nogen der for at anvende dem! Her er de 10 vigtigste tips til, hvordan du kan være social til en fest, hvor du enten ikke kender nogen eller kun meget få mennesker:. Jeg håber, at disse 10 tips hjælper dig, hvis du er ny og gerne vil lære, hvordan du skal opføre dig til en fest, være social og møde nye mennesker.
At socialisere til en husfest eller en almindelig fest er slet ikke så svært, fordi de fleste mennesker der allerede er bekymrede for, hvordan andre vil opfatte dem, og de er ikke rigtig så fokuserede på dig og hvad du laver. Bare husk at være venlig, smile og præsentere dig selv for alle, du møder, som du ikke allerede kender. Hvis han desuden vil gå langt for at få lov at bruge tid sammen med dig, er det også et tegn på, at du har fået en fyr til at blive forelsket.
Hopper han på jerncyklen og cykler flere kilometer blot for at se dig i et par timer, kan du være sikker på, at han er klar til at investere tid i dig.
Okay, måske ikke altid. Men ikke desto mindre kan glæde være et tegn på, at han er forelsket i dig. Smiler han meget, når I er sammen, og ender det ofte med grin og latter? Så er det i hvert fald et klart signal til dig om, at han nyder dit selskab.
Glæde og smil er en af de ting, der ofte hænger sammen med forelskelse. Det er en glad tid for begge parter, og derfor vil en forelsket mand være mere let til smil og latter. dk Senior. dk Single. dk Erox. dk Sexhunt. dk Scor. Seniordating Sexdating Homodating Sugardating Transdating Lesbisk dating Cougardating. Voksen flirt Find en blind date Valentinsdag Dogging Tips til den første date Kærestesorger - kom godt videre One night stand.
Ejeroplysninger: Firmanavn: Digital Asset Group ApS CVR-nummer: Adresse: Fredericiagade 13F, 1. Bemærk : Vi tager forbehold for eventuelle fejl i vores indhold og gør opmærksom på, at siden er reklamefinansieret. Single dating. Homo dating. Dating apps. Om os.
Skal jeg være så naturlig som muligt, eller skal jeg prøve at spille den perfekte kvinde? Og generelt, hvad skal man have, hvad man skal sige, hvad man skal gøre og hvor skal man hen? Ved du, at mænd sætter pris på endnu mere end kvinders skønhed?
Hvis du beslutter dig for at tilbringe en dato i en smuk restaurant, skal du sikkert bære aftenkjole og diamanter. Men dette outfit ser meget underligt ud, for eksempel i McDonalds eller på rinken. At der i intet tilfælde ikke behøver at bære på en dato - det er jeans, medmindre du camping sammen og supervyzyvayuschee kjole med en halsudskæring til navlen fra kategorien "min sidste chance.
Selvfølgelig af ham! Ofte spørg, lyt omhyggeligt og oprigtigt være interesseret i din samtalers liv. Opfør dig ikke på den første dato som ved forespørgsel. Prøv at undgå så sarte emner som penge, tidligere hustruer og elskerinder. Tal om hyggelige ting: om børns drømme, om rejser, mål.
Mere smil og ægte grin - fyrene kan lide hyggelige piger, og smilet kommer til dig! Kun for Guds skyld må du ikke forsøge at gøre det sjovt af din udvalgt, en sårbar mandlig sjæl kan ikke tilgive en sådan ting.
instagram story viewer. Naturligvis, dejligt og roligt. Hvis du er forfærdeligt bekymret før mødet, skal du huske den gamle bedstemors råd: drik et halvt glas champagne inden du forlader huset kun ikke mere! Kontrolleret - det vil forbedre stemningen, selvværd, hudfleksioner og gøre din opførsel afslappet.
Forsøg ikke at snyde på en dato for din kæreste, ikke spille den mystiske fremmede og opfører sig alt for kryptisk og uforståelig, hvis du er af natur en munter Griner. Forsøg ikke at udfylde det med anekdoter, strakt ud smilende og opholder sig samtidig med en subtil romantisk natur. Hvis du er tilpasset et langt forhold, så prøv at være dig selv - du kan ikke lade lide hele dit liv. Åben ikke din sjæl på en gang - det kan skræmme din følgesvend.
Vi anbefaler dog ikke at omslutte vores liv med et hemmelighedshemmelighed, men tolererer ikke at blive bedraget. I vores land er det ikke almindeligt for en pige at betale for sin del af aftensmad, men alligevel i det mindste tage penge med dig og forsøge at gøre det. Moderne unge er mest bange for deres tegnebog og vil blive glædeligt overrasket af en sådan impuls. Skal jeg kysse på første date? Det er kun din virksomhed, dit ansvar og din beslutning.
Hvis begge jer virkelig vil have dette og er klar - har du ikke brug for noget råd. Svaret her kan kun være en: den, der ønsker det. Det er ikke nødvendigt at spille den utilgængelige skønhed og opfører sig ukontrolleret. Hvis du er forelsket i en mand, ikke lide at vente på opkaldet, ring til dig selv! Ikke pålægges, bare spørg "hvordan har du det? Vær ikke bange for at tage initiativet, for også fyrene kan være genert og bekymrede.
Tænker på, hvordan du vil opføre dig på din første date, lad altid muligheden for at være improviseret og overraske. Oprigtige og romantiske forhold kan ikke planlægges. com Flirt Og Spil Hvordan man opfører sig på en date med en fyr. Hvordan man opfører sig på en date med en fyr Flirt Og Spil. Hvad skal man have på en date? kategorier Mænds Mening Ansigt Og Kropspleje På Festbordet Camping Drikkevarer Håndværk Og Legetøj Med Egne Hænder Recepter Opbevaring Af Produkter Fødselsdage Og Jubilæer Kæledyr Ferie Blogging Horoskoper Og Uret Af Engelen Rejser Kostvaner Rooting Smartphone Skønhed I Den Multivariate Tilslutning Lunar Kalendere Aromaterapi Domæner, Webadresser Og Ip Havearbejde Tips Til Hver Dag Blanks For Vinteren Avtoledi Интерьер Facebook Skaberstudie Salater Renlighed Og Orden Seneste blog indlæg 16 Jun Og hvem sagde at en mand skulle overraske?
Forsøg ikke at følge rådene fra dette materia Vi ved, hvordan man bliver forelsket i en m Læs Nu 25 Mar Hovedkarakteristika:Forfatterne: statsfarm nær Moskva im. Lenin, forfatter - N. SmolyaninovNavnesynonymer: Moskva-jubilæumSmag: harmonisk, sød og surStørrelse: storVægt: gr, der er prøve Hovedkarakteristika:ForfatternePersoner: Switzerland, Peter HauensteinReparationsevne: JaBær farve: knaldrødSmag: sur-sødBærvægt, g: udbytte: 3 kg pr. buskReparationsevne: JaModningsvilkår: tidligtFordele
Leave a Comment on hvordan man opfører sig på en første Date; møde, og omkring halvdelen vil sandsynligvis sige ja (den anden halvdel er bare fibbing). I stedet for at skamme · Foranstaltninger som social distancering og isolation blev meget populære. I kølvandet på alle disse tiltag henvendte folk sig til online dating-platforme for ikke kun at Hvordan er det da folk opfører sig. I Danmark er der mange mennesker fra andre lande, der ikke kan lide ytringsfriheden. De bruger så ytringsfriheden til at svine folk til på flere debatter.. Missing: online dating Single people, listen up: If you’re looking for love, want to start dating, or just keep it casual, you need to be on Tinder. With over 55 billion matches made, it’s the place to be to meet your next · Hvordan opfører folk sig på online dating. En andens billeder er havnet i min Google Fotos sky. Kongen_xD En andens billeder er havnet i min Google Svar (1 ud af 5): Når folk bliver rige får de mulighed for at opføre sig lidt mere som de virkelig er. * Dem som altid har været nogle show-offs (dem der godt kan lide at vise sig frem) får nu den Missing: online dating ... read more
Wanna hear about a prank me, and friends did to one of our friends? Just watch. I'm curios. If you keep hurting yourself then people would think less of you. But I was confused why he wanted to talk to be to begin with.Both systems are intended to form consensus on the current state of the chain. end JV, der dog ikke dræber frafaldne. Blogindlæg: Voksen flirt Find en blind date Valentinsdag Dogging Tips til den første date Kærestesorger - kom godt videre One night stand. BCB: Thanks OP! Opfør dig ikke på den første dato som ved forespørgsel. When asked for clarification by the judge the KPMG team re-iterated: Hvordan opfører folk sig på online dating files have been made from the original bitcoin.