Considering the Surly Preamble as my next bike since it ticks a few boxes my current daily driver does not. Leaning towards the flat bar version since it has the lower gearing I'd like, is at an attractive price point, and it looks nice. Unlike the drop bar version though, it has BB5 brakes.
Currently I ride on TekTro Aries, and all told I have not had problems with them in spite of them being the same single-pull type mechanical discs. Cursory glance around online seems to indicate that the Aries are better than the BB5s though.
Long enough timeline I'd probably replace them with hydros or something, but that would probably not be until the pads needed replacing.
Are BB5s bad enough that I should pass on them completely?

Hi everyone,
I am currently working a corporate job and I’d love to have a business I can run on weekends and after work for extra income. My company is also doing massive layoffs so I need to brace myself for a potential layoff. I have been looking at starting businesses for a while. From starting a photo booth business to starting a windshield chip repair business. I’ve kept an eye on my city’s Facebook page and it seems like windshield chip repair, dents, and wheels are in a lot of demand as they are requested a lot and any sort of ads get like 300 comments whereas businesses like the photo booth businesses only get one or two if that. So needless to say I want to go where the demand is. I like the idea of repairing windshield so I figured that I’d buy some windshields, shoot them with my BB gun, and then repair them as practice but it seems like for PDR, you need to attend a school in order to learn it. I have no jobs hiring anywhere near me so that’d be my only option. I know that PDR is cutthroat but so am I. I work in sales so I know how to fight through rejection, burn out, and slow times.
So is PDR school the only way to learn the trade if you can’t find a job anywhere? It definitely seems like one of those trades where you need hands on learning so I’d imagine it’s the only way to go but I was just curious before I started calling up schools for pricing info. And would it be possible to run a PDR and windshield chip repair business? Or is it better to focus on a specialty?

What monitor should I get for my lower end PC?
I wouldn't consider myself a PC gamer, and don't really plan on buying any upgrades. I've really just been living a few generations behind, salvaging parts from my family member's old rigs. After my brother moved out, he got a new laptop and left his desktop behind for me to use, but took his primary monitor, leaving me with just his secondary monitor that's really just a VERY old HP monitor we've had lying around for a while. It has a decent resolution of 1080p and a 60hz refresh rate, but it's main issue is the contrast. This monitor has got me by, but I really think it's a capable secondary monitor at best. The desktop was built almost a decade ago, but yesterday, I decided to upgrade the GPU to an rx 550 from my dad's old rig.
I've been using the PC a little more recently, and it's been very jarring, going from gaming on a 4k monitor when visiting my brother last week, to being back to my over a decade old HP monitor. I think a small upgrade is necessary, and I can use my current monitor as a secondary, as it's been annoying not having one.
I want to again state, I'm not a PC gamer, I mostly play on console, and only really use PC for a few older games, mostly Minecraft. I occasionally use it to emulate older consoles, but that's becoming less and less necessary as more emus are being ported to UWP so I can play them on my Xbox Series S, on my 4k tv. My brother does have a few games in his steam library that I might play if I can run them, but I doubt I'll be playing anything too intense on here at any point. Mainly, I just want to make sure I take full advantage of my current build, while not paying for more than I need. If I do ever actually get into PC gaming, I'll just buy another even better monitor and use the one I upgrade to right now as a secondary.
I'm not super familiar with the capabilities of my current GPU so I don't really know what resolution and refresh rate would be necessary. I should note that I prioritize frame rate over resolution, so if this card is capable of running anything at 1440p or higher, but sacrifices a consistent 60fps, then there's no reason to go any higher than 1080p. I'm working with a low budget of only around $100, but if I can benefit from anything higher than 1080p 60hz, then I'd be willing to save a little more.
I don't know what cpu is in this rig off the top of my head, all I can say is that it's probably one from around 2014-2015. If more information is needed, I can check.

[PCPartPicker Part List](https://pcpartpicker.com/list/FJThfv)
​
TypeItemPrice
:----:----:----
**CPU** [Intel Core i5-13600K 3.5 GHz 14-Core Processor](https://pcpartpicker.com/product/LfNxFT/intel-core-i5-13600k-35-ghz-14-core-processor-bx8071513600k) $299.99 @ Newegg
**CPU Cooler** [Cooler Master Hyper 212 RGB Black Edition 57.3 CFM CPU Cooler](https://pcpartpicker.com/product/hHDJ7P/cooler-master-hyper-212-rgb-black-edition-573-cfm-cpu-cooler-rr-212s-20pc-r1) $90.78 @ Amazon
**Motherboard** [Gigabyte Z790 AORUS ELITE AX ATX LGA1700 Motherboard](https://pcpartpicker.com/product/T2H7YJ/gigabyte-z790-aorus-elite-ax-atx-lga1700-motherboard-z790-aorus-elite-ax) $259.99 @ Amazon
**Memory** [Corsair Vengeance 32 GB (2 x 16 GB) DDR5-5600 CL36 Memory](https://pcpartpicker.com/product/4kmmP6/corsair-vengeance-32-gb-2-x-16-gb-ddr5-5600-cl36-memory-cmk32gx5m2b5600c36) $115.99 @ Newegg
**Storage** [Samsung 980 Pro 1 TB M.2-2280 PCIe 4.0 X4 NVME Solid State Drive](https://pcpartpicker.com/product/DDWBD3/samsung-980-pro-1-tb-m2-2280-nvme-solid-state-drive-mz-v8p1t0bam) $79.98 @ Amazon
**Video Card** [MSI VENTUS 2X OC GeForce RTX 3060 Ti 8 GB Video Card](https://pcpartpicker.com/product/N7fFf7/msi-ventus-2x-oc-geforce-rtx-3060-ti-8-gb-video-card-rtx-3060-ti-ventus-2x-oc) $579.90 @ Amazon
**Power Supply** [Cooler Master MWE Gold 850 - V2 850 W 80+ Gold Certified Fully Modular ATX Power Supply](https://pcpartpicker.com/product/tWMTwP/cooler-master-mwe-gold-850-v2-850-w-80-gold-certified-fully-modular-atx-power-supply-mpe-8501-afaag-us) $142.99 @ Amazon
*Prices include shipping, taxes, rebates, and discounts*
**Total** **$1569.62**
Generated by [PCPartPicker](https://pcpartpicker.com) 2023-03-21 17:11 EDT-0400

….some of us just deal with our own personal challenges/personal battles/personal broken parts of our own self…
…while there are some Christian’s that seem to be “so fortunate” enough to live everyday as if they’re winning the spiritual lottery and think those that aren’t like them, that it’s just a quick course correction to be like them…that’s just not how it goes…
…as a Christian, if I didn’t have the hope that Christ gave to this fallen world, I’d be in a pool of my own blood many years ago…knowing life is miserable/I’m miserable and there’s no hopeful future to hold on to…
Maybe I’m just…broken in my own personal ways, that, my life as a Christian, it’s difficult to stay consistently close with the God who adopted me. I can honestly admit, my walk with God, my Father…has its ebbs and flows, mostly valley’s…and short seasons of spurts that I am “strong” in my faith, clinging onto Him with a full heart.
It’s just…being human…we feel things. Broken feelings. Feelings of depression, miserableness and sometimes even despair. It’s not a fun time.
We also don’t make the best choices, so sometimes we reap what we sow. I’m a fool. And I eat my own consequential misery. It’s bitterness in my bones.
I can’t explain why I struggle and fail in the things I do, but I have always been a pendelum swing. I can predict some may think there’s something fundamentally “wrong” with my life at this point and may think a Christian cannot be like this…
…I will not fall for those opinions. I know Jesus. I have the light of life. It’s why I’ve made it this far. Don’t judge me like so, just because you’ve listened to me lament. In this life, there is trouble, Jesus reminded us. Sometimes it’s brought upon us by others, and sometimes by our own doing.
I know Jesus was called “Man of Sorrows” in Isaiah. He knows what we experience as human beings. He knows grief. He knows loneliness. He knows rejection. He knows depression. He knows pain. He was human after all, yet without sin.
I know the bible says, we must “suffer for a little while,” which is what we go through in this current fallen world…
…but man, what a burden. And yes, we feel burdens. Peter said we should lay it on God, so we experience our own personal burdens and this post is just a glimpse into the multi-dimensional complexity that is: me.
Sometimes I just…do nothing. I just feel blank about it. And that doesn’t serve my spirit well. Just being completely honest.
Sigh. Life is a burden. Just stating the truth. I know it’s temporary. I just hope God has compassion for my foolishness.

[email protected]$1
Total Price: $100
Make and Model: Benchmade Mini Grip
Price Justification: https://www.reddit.com/KnifeRaffle/comments/11qulom/nm_benchmade_mini_grip_95_1/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android_app&utm_name=androidcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button
Timestamp&pics: https://imgur.com/a/3yY58vr Escrow:
Description: PLEASE BE THOROUGH. EXPLICITLY STATE ALL ISSUES : Catch and release on a minty mini grip. No box comes with LNW topo clip and a bugout clip. Action is excellent on this one. I see no marks on blade or blade.
International shipping:

PayPal Info: https://paypal.me/JeffreyFraze?country.x=US&locale.x=en_US
​
Tip BlobAndHisBoy
Number of vacant slots: 60
Number of unpaid users: 3
Number of unpaid slots: 40
This slot list is created and updated by The EDC Raffle Tool by BlobAndHisBoy.
1 bigie1
2
3
4
5
6
7 No_Poet
8
9
10
11 bigie1
12
13
14 nhwob224
15 bigie1
16
17
18
19
20
21
22 No_Poet
23 nhwob224
24
25 bigie1
26
27
28 No_Poet
29
30
31 bigie1
32
33
34 bigie1
35
36 bigie1
37 bigie1
38
39
40
41
42 bigie1
43
44
45 bigie1
46 No_Poet
47
48
49 No_Poet
50
51 No_Poet
52 bigie1
53 No_Poet
54
55
56
57
58 nhwob224
59
60
61
62
63
64 bigie1
65 bigie1
66
67
68
69 nhwob224
70
71
72
73 bigie1
74
75 nhwob224
76 bigie1
77
78
79 nhwob224
80 bigie1
81 No_Poet
82
83
84 bigie1
85
86 bigie1
87 nhwob224
88 nhwob224
89 bigie1
90
91 No_Poet
92
93
94 No_Poet
95 nhwob224
96
97
98 nhwob224
99
100 bigie1

a foundational theme of political zionism's narrative is that if jewish people did not have a jewish state for themselves then the jewish people are in imminent danger and the horrors of the 30s and 40s will be repeated. this is expressed often in corey gil-shuster's interviews of israelis. in one interview a group of jewish women acknowledged that relations between jewish and non jewish palestinians were cordial before the new yishuv came yet believed that the erosion of that coexistence was a small price to pay for the continued existence of the jewish people.
is this propaganda that exploits collective fear and trauma? or is there legitimacy to this claim? must a state exist for jewish people to be protected? if palestine were liberated today would the existence of the jewish people be threatened?
(to clarify, i make a distinction between a zionism and political zionism, as this is how its been explained to me. zionism is the ancient idea that palestine is the homeland of the jewish people, whereas political zionism is a more recent idea developed in europe which argued that jewish people must have political control over palestine, aka their own state).

begin quote {
​
​
What’s wrong? You were only raped for 6 and a half thrusts.
She only gave away 32% of her property to charity? How immoral.
Clearly, Smith is an outstanding fellow as his washing machine is of average size.
How dare him for making $1.602 more than I make!
What is wrong with the arguments above? In each one, a moral judgement is made, be it condoning or condemnation. While the specific arguments here are quite rare, the logical fallacy that they rely on, arbitrary metrics, is disturbingly common.
Within each argument there exists something arbitrary. In the first argument, it is implied that to rape for 6 and a half thrusts is not a sinful (or bad) act. We are left wondering where the speaker draws the line between good and bad, or at least between innocuous and bad. Is rape not wrong, categorically? The argument seems to imply that rape is only wrong when it exceeds some arbitrary value beyond 6 and 1/2 thrusts.
The 2nd argument explicitly states that it is immoral to only give away 32% of one’s property to charity, but is giving to charity not a selfless and good act, categorically? Why would we need to impose an arbitrary metric unto it? And if we do impose an arbitrary metric that decides a value below which to give is immoral and above which to give is moral, then we would have no way of knowing what that special value is, we would have to subjectively define it. Such is the dilemma of using arbitrary metrics for moral judgement.
The 3rd argument states that Smith is outstanding because his washing machine is within the size parameters of the average washing machine. Is it not Smith’s own decision what to do with his own property? If he wants a tiny washing machine or a large washing machine, no washing machine at all, or one of every variety, that is his decision and not our business at all.
Lastly, the 4th argument is quite interesting since it claims that a lack of equality is immoral, which is also an arbitrary argument. Equality is impossible as all men are different and regions have variable resources. Indeed, it can even be shown that it is an impossible goal, yet many statists have used this impossible target as a basis for flawed ethical arguments.
The way in which the public defines the word “monopoly” is based on arbitrary ethics that are no less silly than the four examples I presented.

Monopoly vs “Monopoly”

The public, including the media, uses an arbitrary de facto definition of “monopoly”. Many, even those of whom that advocate for small government, claim that a business is a monopoly merely because it has few or no competitors. By itself, this is an arbitrary definition of a monopoly. Whenever a new product is invented, by the definition above the innovators involved would constitute a monopoly since new products necessarily means that no competitors exist yet. Furthermore, due to specialization of tasks, no business is the same even among a similar line of products. Technically, they each can be argued to be monopolies. This may sound silly, but that is the point – if law is arbitrary, it will be used tyrannically. The state could choose who to target; similar to how it chose targets in the public interest era; similar to how statists choose today.
Ultimately, the size of a business is an arbitrary metric that is no less silly than the statement “You were only raped for 6 and a half thrusts.” In fact, as we will see in our economics chapter, the size of a business in a free market is an indicator of how much utility it has provided society as opposed to how evil it is according to the statist.
The sector that a business operates in is arbitrary as well, since it can be defined to mean anything. As mentioned with the specialization of tasks, no two businesses are identical, so the “sector” can be divided up as minutely or as broadly as we like, effectively handing the state the powers to target whomsoever they wish to target.
Finally, the region that a business operates in is arbitrary. A local supermarket is a monopoly by the state’s standards if only we define the street or town that the supermarket exists in as it’s “region”.
By tampering with any of the three arbitrary metrics of size, sector, or region, any individual or business can be defined as a de facto monopoly and subject to antitrust enforcement. The definition literally claims that good-vs-bad hinges on the extent to which a thing exists.
I could propose something truly radical - that what is evil ought to be proven with careful argumentation and that arbitrary metric cannot possibly identify evil.
There is a fourth major issue with the antitrust argument and the idea of the de facto monopoly.
The antitrust scholar, armed with his arbitrary metrics, conveniently excludes a key assumption when forming his arguments. He and his following of statists argue that if a business becomes large enough, it will have little or no real competitors within it’s sector; and thus, it will “price gouge”. His predictions fail, repeatedly. [That is, his predictions fail with the ironic exception of true monopolies, which he ignores. The tech platforms did indeed price gouge, where the price was in information rather than in money, but they did not price gouge simply when they became “large”. They price gouged once they had legal privileges from the state sector.]
The assumption that the antitrust scholar conveniently excludes is the existence of virtual competitors – competitors that do not exist but could in the near future. Time and again, he asks, “What is stopping a de facto monopoly from artificially raising prices?” The de facto monopoly does not do this because it could face retribution from a new rival that does not exist yet. In fact, contrary to what the antitrust scholar claims, larger corporations tend to operate efficiently and lower prices! The Apple Store is a market unto itself that is regulated by Apple and with Apple products being sold in it. Apple literally regulates a market that it also competes in. Why not charge their competitors a ridiculous fee for placing their products in that market? Even before the Google Store and other app-related retailers came into existence, Apple charged a reasonable fee to host other products in their store, because even early on, Apple could be punished by its customers. If outrage grew, some individual would capitalize on that outrage because it would benefit him to steal Apple's customers. Apple, since it is not a real monopoly, has to consider the virtual competitor because Apple cannot exclude competitors by force, which was what a true monopoly was defined as before statists corrupted the term. The existence of the virtual competitor is a feature of the free market, because a person that does not provide some service could freely create that service if he wishes to. Such a simple and praxeologically true assumption is conveniently ignored by the antitrust scholar when he claims that successful businesses will price gouge.
The arbitrariness (size, sector, and region) along with the denial of reality (virtual competitors) of the new definition of "monopoly" (the de facto monopoly) creates an incentive for normal people to disseminate statist propaganda. That propaganda necessarily takes the form of anti-free-market ideas that do not hold up to scrutiny. Rothbard neatly addressed anti-free-market criticisms grounded in the statist’s notion of “monopolies”:

If we define “monopoly” as the “single seller of a product,” we founder on insoluble problems. We cannot identify homogeneous products, except in the concrete day-to-day valuations of consumers. Furthermore, if we consider such monopoly as wicked, we must regard both Crusoe and Friday as vicious monopolists if they exchange fish and lumber on their desert island. But if Crusoe and Friday are not wicked, how can a more complex society, one necessarily less monopolistic in this sense, be at all wicked? At what point in the reduced scope of such monopoly can it be considered evil? And how can the market be held responsible for the number of people inhabiting the society? Moreover, every individual striving to be better than his fellows is thereby trying to be a “monopolist.” Is this bad? Do not both he and the rest of society benefit from his better mousetrap? Finally, there is no conceptually identifiable monopoly or monopolistic price on the free market. ^{Rothbard, p. 1299}

Statist propaganda is any verifiably untrue sentiment (unwittingly or deliberately proselytized) meant to exorcise or expand the state's power to the destruction of prosperity. All one has to do is ask the question: Can market losers (the deal-with-the-devil engineer or the dirty fighter) use this definition and the state's power to serve their special interests? Until the public begins to distinguish between the statist's de facto definition of a monopoly, and the means-oriented definition (a de jure monopoly, or monopoly in law), then antitrust enforcement will lead to lesser freedoms, more state powers, and contrary to the statist’s claims, less competition.

The proper way to deal with evil is first to identify its very principle; only then can this evil be abolished. Intervention and regulation, instead of banishing evil, only institutionalize it, and use public coercion to promote and continue this evil in official ways, instead of dispelling it. If government somehow monopolized the efforts to keep other monopolies in check, the urgent thing to do is not to use this government monopoly, but to abolish it^\71])

If reasoning alone does not suffice, perhaps empiricism will. Antitrust cannot address problems, as was the case with Microsoft in 2000 where illegal activity was not addressed, and legitimate, benign behavior was punished.^\Rideau])
The inefficacy of antitrust results from an arbitrary de facto definition of 'monopoly’ - that a business is a monopoly because it is large and has few or no competitors - and the denial of reality, namely the fact that a business cannot exclude his competitors by force (which enables in the virtual competitor).
If a reader is still not convinced, I urge him to find an example of a de facto monopoly that price gouges or does anything that angers consumers without facing immediate consequences. What inevitably results is a critic will find a legitimate evil occurring, but that evil is the result of a de jure monopoly, a monopoly in law.
In a free setting, no business has ever angered consumers and not faced the consequences unless that business has some de jure monopoly status - status that can only result from government. The reason for this is simple. The de facto monopoly cannot exclude competitors by force, so for it to be successful, it must obey the principle of reciprocity. Only a de jure monopoly can exclude by force. As such, we need to establish a more logical criteria for the word “monopoly” since the statists (socialists, Marxists, socialists-in-all-but-name, conservatives, etc) corrupted the term.

Criteria based on law and other legal constraints define monopolies in law: there is a (quasi)monopoly in law when laws (or any kind of rules enforced by the use of public force) establish a monopoly by preventing customers from seeking providers not blessed by the political power, or equivalently by preventing potential competitors from providing services that compete with those from the protected provider(s). To a libertarian, such laws that promote a de jure monopoly are an assault on the liberties of consumers and competitors, even when they fail to result in a monopoly in fact.”^\Rideau])

What Rideau is saying here is that a monopoly is forced onto consumers. It may not always result in a de facto monopoly, but it is forced onto them regardless. For instance, a town may have private mail carriers and government mail carriers. A citizen of this town may choose to use the private mail carriers. The government mail carrier is still a de jure monopoly however. Regardless of whether or not a citizen uses it, he is forced to pay for it (taxation) upon penalty of further fines, imprisonment, violence, or death.
Another example is Housing Regulation, which is a de jure monopoly that happens to also be a de facto monopoly. If two parties wish to exchange a house, they must use the state’s Housing Regulation. To not use it bears the penalties mentioned above, and citizens don’t even have the option in this example to use a private analogue to Housing Regulation. In fact, to attempt to use a private regulatory party for a housing exchange bears the same consequences as if the two exchanging parties decided that they did not need the Housing Regulation to begin with. As a result, if housing regulation is a service that people value and would freely choose, it would matter not because for someone to attempt to provide this service in the economic sector is strictly forbidden by the de jure monopoly of government housing regulation, not unlike other de jure monopolies (state agencies, state licensing, state regulation, etc). Ironically, this is one example that the antitrust scholar’s neglectfulness of the virtual competitor actually holds true, yet no such “scholar” is going to analyze true monopolies.
Government licensing and regulation agencies that act as coordinators^\u]) are de jure monopolies precisely because they are third parties that two parties must contract through in order to do business with one another. There are no virtual competitors allowed. Such actions not only decrease the prosperity of society by forcing all of society to pay for them, but also by degrading the efficiency and possibilities provided only by the free market.
For perspective, if an exchange takes place between buyers/sellers, and they choose to use a third party as a security or coordinating measure, the exchange has to absorb the price of that third party – the seller will receive less, and the buyer will pay more because the 3rd party has a cost. This is perfectly acceptable if the two parties freely choose the 3rd party's services, and this scenario reduces down to two separate sets of parties engaging with one another freely. In this way, free market coordination or security obeys the principle of reciprocity and other competitive factors, making these much more efficient and competent services than their government analogs, yet where a government licensing, certification, or agency exists, such free market dynamics are strictly forbidden. Indeed, it is highly hypocritical of the anti-trust scholar to neglect such arguments and to even use arbitrary metrics and illogical arguments to grant true monopolies more power!^\v])
For the de jure monopoly, such as a government regulation, the exchange will nevertheless have to absorb those efforts (taxes and other fees). Now imagine if many, many industries or even entire market sectors had de jure monopolies in them – 3rd parties we are forced to contract with.

Government intervention, subventions, privileges, regulations, taxes, differential treatment, legal discriminations, and all pieces of legislation, are indeed coercive destruction of riches that generate de jure monopolies. Often, this intervention takes the form of laws enacted in the name of the ``public welfare´´, that limit the freedom to contract: the government forces certain transactions to take certain forms, with employers, landlords, retailers and others being bound to conditions not born from the mutual interests of exchangers: minimal and maximal prices, minimal and maximal limitations in the schedule, duration, quality and other conditions of work, of housing, of retail, etc.”^\Rideau])

The tech platforms and the CVE community began as economic traders, but now contain de jure monopoly status since (1) excess coerced funds were gifted to them by the state and since (2) coerced funds were used by the state to provide privileges for the participating businesses and to slander their opposition^\w])
The chosen platforms have de jure monopoly status due to state intervention. Facebook and Google are not monopolies because they are “big”. They are monopolies because they have legal privileges and because their competitors are excluded or discouraged by government action. Their competitors have more legal and political hurdles to overcome than Facebook and Google had when they were being formed. Facebook, Google, Twitter, and the other 54 organizations involved are monopolies because force is being used on their competitors and on their critics. Force is being used to keep them from failing.
anti-trust enforcement {n.} the body of law claiming that voluntary exchanges are evil if certain arbitrary qualifications are met; the body of law that alters the definition of “monopoly” to allow The State to regulate voluntary exchanges^\x])
The answer is not to wield the thing that causes this - de jure monopolies - against Facebook and Google, but to abolish it. Only by abolishing de jure monopolies would we end the tyrannical reign of “big tech” and the CVEs.
Finally, the de jure monopolist (or the government official, be it a proxy or established government official) has a dual interest that the economic trader does not have.
People pursue their own interests to the best of their ability and engage in mutually beneficial exchanges if free to do so. Otherwise, the party being taken advantage of wouldn't participate in such exchanges. Hence, free exchanges must be mutually beneficial, though critics of the free market cannot admit this.
The state sector is still dominated by individuals pursuing their interests as well, but there are two goals of the individual in the state sector: (1) perform the service of the government agency, and (2) maintain one's position in that agency. There is no such duality in the economic sector, because by engaging in an exchange with another party, a person is satisfying his own ends while simultaneously satisfying another’s. For the government official, his ends (maintaining his government position) does not necessarily mean that he benefits the other party (tax payers).
Fundamentally, the problem with the de jure monopoly (government) is that: The government official is insulated from the basic principle of reciprocity.
Two other points to make about the differing interests is that in the economic sector, people can fail and make calculations based on the free market exchange. If the economic trader’s endeavor fails, it is because others did not want to engage with it or were not aware of it; in which case he abandons it, calculates how it can be fixed to provide more utility to others, or calculates how it can be marketed to make others aware of its existence. He fails or re-calculates.
In the state sector, there is no metric (the profit-and-loss test) to gauge the competence of state endeavors because they are de jure monopolies with no competition and/or no free exchange. In fact, if it is faulty, it will receive more funding. As Milton Friedman puts it, "If a government enterprise fails, it is expanded."^\72])
One of the clearest examples of both this duel interest and a feedback loop that creates more government is public testimony at congressional hearings. It has been observed that in certain hearings, the majority of people who testify are government workers – federal administrators, local officials, tax-paid teachers, and congressmen themselves. They can even outnumber citizens (economic agents) at hearings. To be clear, government workers attempt to increase their own funding by showing up to House hearings in order to impact Congressional votes. The larger the state apparatus gets, the more feedback that government will give itself to increase the size of itself.
These people keep their jobs by impacting political votes – not by being good at their jobs. That is a dual interest that a simple de facto monopolist cannot have.
But the corporation has special privileges, right?
Since the nature of the corporate model has been questioned by both libertarians/capitalists and non-libertarians/capitalists, I shall now address the “privileges” of the corporation...
​
​
} end quote The Modern Control of Information: V. The Great Legal Indoctrination
tl;dr only a limp noodle accepts the antitrust argument

Hey all! I created a free endpoint for fetching historical OHLC and real-time crypto prices.
Decided to post here as I have seen some ask about historical ethereum prices before.
I added Github with examples here: https://github.com/martkidex-prices-syve.
I created the endpoint to address some of the issues I had when working / prototyping with free plans of current providers (e.g. coinmarketcap / coingecko). Main things being:
​

• Low resolution (can only get hourly or daily price data but I need 1min or even second data)
• Limited historical data (no historical data or less than 1 year)
• Data is super delayed - coinmarketcap update frequency of OHLC data is something like 5-10minutes
• No data on niche / very small cap tokens (which sometimes I needed)

​
Anyway, hope some of you will find this endpoint useful.
This is the first release but I am planning to expand it more. So feedback / suggestions would be very welcome :)

I currently have a non traditional Sonos setup in my living room where I do not use my 2 SL 1s as rears, but instead as right and left channels under the tv facing the couch and they are grouped with a sub Gen 2. I then use my two Sonos moves as rears at times. This is all in a loft like space so the living room, kitchen, and dining are all one room. In my bedroom I have my Gen 1 beam connected to the television. I recently took my turntable and amp out of storage because I wanted to play vinyl over my system and decided to pre order the Era 300 since it has a line in and is the same price as a used or refurbished Play 5 plus. I love Apple Music and live on my Apple TV. Should I have gone for a Play 5 instead? Should I trade in my beam Gen 1 for a Gen 2 to work with the Era 300?

The Fed is widely expected to raise its benchmark interest rate by another 0.25% on Wednesday, bringing it to 4.75%-5%, the highest since 2006. This move would likely boost the US dollar against other currencies, especially the Canadian dollar which has been under pressure from lower oil prices and weaker economic data.
​
The BoC, on the other hand, appears to be nearing the end of its hiking cycle, as inflation has moderated and growth has slowed. The BoC has raised its policy rate five times since July 2022, but the market is pricing in only a 25% chance of another hike this year. The BoC’s current target range is 3%-3.25%.
​
How will this divergence in monetary policy affect the USD/CAD exchange rate? How much lower can the CAD go against the USD? How long will the BoC hold off before raising rates again or even cutting them?
​
I’m curious to hear your thoughts and opinions on this topic.

I am currently finishing my junior year at Boston University, which is objectively quite a good school. However, due to both physical and mental health reasons, I've decided to move back California (which I'm extremely happy about and is the only decision in this post that is 100% final). I am not able to finish my degree online or take classes to fulfill my degree at BU, so really my only option is to transfer, which I'm fine with. But I'm not sure the best route to take.
Here are my options (I will be most likely living in North Hollywood general area):

1. transfer to Cal State LA or Northridge (or even Long Beach, but would be a commute), which accept Spring transfers - so I'd be able to resume school in Spring of 2024
2. transfer to UCLA, which only accepts Fall transfers - so I would not be able to resume school until Fall of 2024

So my problem is that ideally I'd like to resume school as soon as possible, so waiting until fall of 2024 seems too long to take off. Then I'd probably still have 1-2 more years until I finally graduate. But, the Cal States I mentioned are definitely not as "good" of schools as BU or UCLA. So, what do you guys think? Is it worth it to wait longer so I can try and get my degree from a "better" school like UCLA? Or should I just go for the Cal State so I can start sooner, even though they're "worse" schools than BU/UCLA? Any thoughts are appreciated!

I’ve studied drivers education for about two months to prepare for my second attempt, from: the history of cars/driving/ signs, to basic maneuvers, driving laws in my state, and the signs. I practiced so much just to get fucked in the ass by poor service.
The bitter old hag I had last time didn’t examine me herself, but had my annoying relative fill in and fail me because “they talked when they weren’t supposed to.” Then why have a passenger in the car???? Wtf?
They tried to make me take a U-turn inside of the cones that I’ve parallel parked in, and have set them up so close for me to NOT hit one cone. I’m sorry but this is just too much—- I’m going to a better dds building for my third attempt.
The first fail was quite understandable, I had a hard foot on the gas and didn’t do certain task in simple maneuvers- but this is fucked. The bitch asked if I didn’t understand English after not articulating clear directions for me to park in the clutter of cones

CREDIT PROFILE
​

• * Current credit cards you are the primary account holder of: Amex BCE $3000, 03/2021; Discover It $3000, 04/2021; Chase Freedom Unlimited $3000 02/2022; Chase Sapphire Preferred $12900 05/2022
• * FICO Scores with source (see note on FICO score sources below): Experian 742, Discover 759
• * Oldest credit card account age with you as primary name on the account: 2 years
• * Number of personal credit cards approved for in the past 6 months: 0
• * Number of personal credit cards approved for in the past 12 months: 1
• * Number of personal credit cards approved for in the past 24 months: 3
• * Annual income $: 31000

CATEGORIES
​

• * OK with category-specific cards?: No
• * OK with rotating category cards?: Maybe
• * Estimate average monthly spend in the categories below. Only include what you can pay by credit card.
  • * Dining $: 50
  • * Groceries $: 400
  • * Gas $: 150
  • * Travel $: 175
  • * Do you plan on using this card abroad for a significant length of time (study abroad, digital nomad, expat, extended travel)?: No
  • * Any other categories (examples: phone/internet, insurance) or stores (example: Amazon) with significant, regular credit card spend (the more you specify, the better): $100 on Amazon. Also, would put around 4-5K on my credit card while buying a new car. So hopefully looking for a 0% APR intro offer with a card that might give me a 4-5K credit limit. Even 3-4K would work.
  • * Any other significant, regular credit card spend you didn't include above?: $0
  • * Can you pay rent by credit card? If yes, list rent amount and if there's a fee for paying by credit card: No

MEMBERSHIPS & SUBSCRIPTIONS (delete lines that don't apply)
​

• * Current member of Amazon Prime?: Yes
• * Current Verizon postpaid customer?: No
• * Current member of Costco or Sam's Club?: No
• * Currently paying $13.99/month or more for Disney Bundle (Disney+ / Hulu / EPSN+) or other Hulu services?: No
• * Current member of Chase, US Bank or any other big bank?: Chase
• * Active US military?: No
• * Are you open to Business Cards?: (these are an option if you have any kind of side gig, such as selling on eBay or Etsy) No

PURPOSE
​

• * What's the purpose of your next card (choose ONE)?: (first credit card, balance transfer, saving money, travel rewards): Travel rewards – American Airlines/Delta
• * Do you have any cards you've been looking at?: CapitalOne VentureOne Rewards. Looking to get the into CapitalOne system since I have read online that it’s easier to get into CapitalOne with a leaner profile.