Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #661738 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Physfitfreak <physfitfreak@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2025-03-06 15:51 -0600 |
| Last post | 2025-04-07 14:31 -0500 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 57 — 8 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity
This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by
below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.
Re: Money Money :-) Physfitfreak <physfitfreak@gmail.com> - 2025-03-06 15:51 -0600
Re: Money Money :-) Physfitfreak <physfitfreak@gmail.com> - 2025-03-10 13:38 -0500
Re: Money Money :-) Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2025-03-10 23:29 -0700
Re: Money Money :-) Physfitfreak <physfitfreak@gmail.com> - 2025-03-11 11:03 -0500
Re: Money Money :-) -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2025-03-11 10:18 -0400
Re: Money Money :-) Physfitfreak <physfitfreak@gmail.com> - 2025-03-11 10:56 -0500
Re: Money Money :-) -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2025-03-11 17:14 -0400
Re: Money Money :-) Physfitfreak <physfitfreak@gmail.com> - 2025-03-11 17:12 -0500
Re: Money Money :-) -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2025-03-12 20:23 -0400
Re: Money Money :-) Physfitfreak <physfitfreak@gmail.com> - 2025-03-12 23:49 -0500
Re: Money Money :-) -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2025-03-13 19:06 -0400
Re: Money Money :-) Physfitfreak <physfitfreak@gmail.com> - 2025-03-13 20:28 -0500
Re: Money Money :-) % <pursent100@gmail.com> - 2025-03-13 18:34 -0700
Re: Money Money :-) -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2025-03-14 09:57 -0400
Re: Money Money :-) Physfitfreak <physfitfreak@gmail.com> - 2025-03-14 13:34 -0500
Re: Money Money :-) % <pursent100@gmail.com> - 2025-03-14 11:52 -0700
Re: Money Money :-) -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2025-03-14 20:42 -0400
Re: Money Money :-) Physfitfreak <physfitfreak@gmail.com> - 2025-03-14 20:11 -0500
Re: Money Money :-) -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2025-03-15 07:37 -0400
Re: Money Money :-) vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2025-03-15 11:59 +0000
Re: Money Money :-) Physfitfreak <physfitfreak@gmail.com> - 2025-03-15 14:57 -0500
Re: Money Money :-) -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2025-03-15 23:31 -0400
Re: Money Money :-) Physfitfreak <physfitfreak@gmail.com> - 2025-03-15 22:56 -0500
Re: Money Money :-) -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2025-03-16 11:17 -0400
Re: Money Money :-) Physfitfreak <physfitfreak@gmail.com> - 2025-03-16 12:28 -0500
Re: Money Money :-) -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2025-03-16 16:08 -0400
Re: Money Money :-) Physfitfreak <physfitfreak@gmail.com> - 2025-03-16 17:25 -0500
Re: Money Money :-) % <pursent100@gmail.com> - 2025-03-16 15:26 -0700
Re: Money Money :-) Physfitfreak <physfitfreak@gmail.com> - 2025-03-16 17:45 -0500
Re: Money Money :-) % <pursent100@gmail.com> - 2025-03-16 16:17 -0700
Re: Money Money :-) -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2025-03-16 22:21 -0400
Re: Money Money :-) Physfitfreak <physfitfreak@gmail.com> - 2025-03-17 12:04 -0500
Re: Money Money :-) Physfitfreak <physfitfreak@gmail.com> - 2025-03-17 12:49 -0500
Re: Money Money :-) Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2025-03-17 10:53 -0700
Re: Money Money :-) Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2025-03-17 12:31 -0700
Re: Money Money :-) Physfitfreak <physfitfreak@gmail.com> - 2025-03-17 22:49 -0500
Re: Money Money :-) Physfitfreak <physfitfreak@gmail.com> - 2025-03-17 13:16 -0500
Re: Money Money :-) Physfitfreak <physfitfreak@gmail.com> - 2025-03-19 14:08 -0500
Re: Money Money :-) Physfitfreak <physfitfreak@gmail.com> - 2025-03-21 14:21 -0500
yeah, only in your dreams [dead cat bounce] (Re: Money Money :-) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-03-21 20:37 +0100
Re: yeah, only in your dreams [dead cat bounce] (Re: Money Money :-) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-03-21 20:47 +0100
USA is deeply wrecked (Re: yeah, only in your dreams [dead cat bounce]) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-03-21 20:48 +0100
Re: Money Money :-) -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2025-03-21 19:40 -0400
Re: Money Money :-) Physfitfreak <physfitfreak@gmail.com> - 2025-03-21 18:46 -0500
Re: USA is deeply wrecked (Was: yeah, only in your dreams [dead cat bounce]) Physfitfreak <physfitfreak@gmail.com> - 2025-03-21 19:00 -0500
Re: USA is deeply wrecked bertietaylor@myyahoo.com (Bertitaylor) - 2025-03-22 04:50 +0000
Re: USA is deeply wrecked Physfitfreak <physfitfreak@gmail.com> - 2025-03-22 11:35 -0500
Re: USA is deeply wrecked bertietaylor@myyahoo.com (Bertitaylor) - 2025-03-31 07:40 +0000
Re: USA is deeply wrecked vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2025-03-31 15:58 +0000
Re: USA is deeply wrecked Scott Doty <s.doty@linuxguru.net> - 2025-03-31 14:01 -0400
Re: USA is deeply wrecked bertietaylor@myyahoo.com (Bertitaylor) - 2025-04-01 04:14 +0000
[OT] Linux on Windows (was: Re: USA is deeply wrecked) vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2025-04-03 01:22 +0000
Re: [OT] Linux on Windows bertietaylor@myyahoo.com (Bertitaylor) - 2025-04-03 22:13 +0000
Re: Money Money :-) Physfitfreak <physfitfreak@gmail.com> - 2025-03-30 23:46 -0500
Re: Money Money :-) Physfitfreak <physfitfreak@gmail.com> - 2025-04-01 10:46 -0500
Re: Money Money :-) Physfitfreak <physfitfreak@gmail.com> - 2025-04-04 14:25 -0500
Re: Money Money :-) Physfitfreak <physfitfreak@gmail.com> - 2025-04-07 14:31 -0500
Page 2 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 Next page →
| From | Physfitfreak <physfitfreak@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-03-15 14:57 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <vr4m31$1h2ek$1@solani.org> |
| In reply to | #661888 |
On 3/15/25 6:37 AM, -hh wrote: > On 3/14/25 21:11, Physfitfreak wrote: >> On 3/14/25 7:42 PM, -hh wrote: >>> On 3/14/25 14:52, % wrote: >>>> Physfitfreak wrote: >>>>> On 3/14/25 8:57 AM, -hh wrote: >>>>>> I have my own strategies which are lower risk & more passive. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> I'm listening.. >>>> >>>> me too , i can't wait to read that >>> >>> >>> Sure. Here ya go: >>> >>> >>> <https://pages.retirementresearcher.com/sales/open-membership- >>> enrollment?c=0> >>> >>> >>> -hh >> >> >> You might’s well take those Ginco Balaloba herbs. Same voodoo effect. >> $5.49 for a two month supply. > > That's merely your opinion based on your personal biases. I've seen how > it has increased my understanding, as well as resulted in subsequent > gains in Net Worth and the "sleep at night" rule, to conclude otherwise. > > >> Your way of losing profit to crooks is like your way of giving money >> to computer seller crooks, which is itself like your way of giving >> fortunes to car seller crooks. You have a symbiotic relationship with >> crooks :) >> >> I wonder why. > > Or you could just buy the book for $30 and grind through it to figure > out the basics on your own: > > <https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1945640154> > > That's doable as a DIY, but most lack the discipline to do it, and in > doing so, lose years of compounding growth opportunity. > > Case in point: so how did you actually do this week? > And the month's total? > > Or are you going to have some excuse of being 'too busy' or whatnot... > > > -hh I don't disclose such information in social media on demand. But I will tell you whether "$500" profit in one week from your invested money has been appropriate or not, if you disclose the amount of money involved in creating it.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-03-15 23:31 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <vr5gm7$n1g8$3@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #661894 |
On 3/15/25 15:57, Physfitfreak wrote: > On 3/15/25 6:37 AM, -hh wrote: >> On 3/14/25 21:11, Physfitfreak wrote: >>> On 3/14/25 7:42 PM, -hh wrote: >>>> On 3/14/25 14:52, % wrote: >>>>> Physfitfreak wrote: >>>>>> On 3/14/25 8:57 AM, -hh wrote: >>>>>>> I have my own strategies which are lower risk & more passive. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> I'm listening.. >>>>> >>>>> me too , i can't wait to read that >>>> >>>> >>>> Sure. Here ya go: >>>> >>>> >>>> <https://pages.retirementresearcher.com/sales/open-membership- >>>> enrollment?c=0> >>>> >>>> >>>> -hh >>> >>> >>> You might’s well take those Ginco Balaloba herbs. Same voodoo effect. >>> $5.49 for a two month supply. >> >> That's merely your opinion based on your personal biases. I've seen >> how it has increased my understanding, as well as resulted in >> subsequent gains in Net Worth and the "sleep at night" rule, to >> conclude otherwise. >> >> >>> Your way of losing profit to crooks is like your way of giving money >>> to computer seller crooks, which is itself like your way of giving >>> fortunes to car seller crooks. You have a symbiotic relationship with >>> crooks :) >>> >>> I wonder why. >> >> Or you could just buy the book for $30 and grind through it to figure >> out the basics on your own: >> >> <https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1945640154> >> >> That's doable as a DIY, but most lack the discipline to do it, and in >> doing so, lose years of compounding growth opportunity. >> >> Case in point: so how did you actually do this week? >> And the month's total? >> >> Or are you going to have some excuse of being 'too busy' or whatnot... >> >> >> -hh > > > I don't disclose such information in social media on demand. Oh, so still just a zero then. On a thread that *you* started. > But I will tell you whether "$500" profit in one week from your invested > money has been appropriate or not, if you disclose the amount of money > involved in creating it. Which actually doesn't matter because it was just a narrow time slice of a value which varies by week. Some weeks will even be zero, which is fine, because "weekly" isn't my timescale of interest. But since you're trying to be judgemental based on return rate, I certainly could go look up this past week's items' published return (eg, 4.98%), but that value is based on its current street price, not what I actually paid, so my returns are different; figure double. Another one in the basket might similarly be ~1% on paper, but its holding has appreciated by +700%, so more math there too. Plus there's also the ~zero effort element too which I've said I value. Plus there's what my actual performance objectives are. Together, needing minimal effort for returns which reliably exceed inflation is a win by what I've set for my needs & priorities; YMMV (obviously). Better go buy that book. Work smarter, not harder. -hh
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Physfitfreak <physfitfreak@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-03-15 22:56 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <vr5i4i$1hf7o$1@solani.org> |
| In reply to | #661912 |
On 3/15/25 10:31 PM, -hh wrote: > >> >> I don't disclose such information in social media on demand. > > Oh, so still just a zero then. On a thread that *you* started. > > >> But I will tell you whether "$500" profit in one week from your >> invested money has been appropriate or not, if you disclose the amount >> of money involved in creating it. > > Which actually doesn't matter because it was just a narrow time slice of > a value which varies by week. Some weeks will even be zero, which is > fine, because "weekly" isn't my timescale of interest. > > But since you're trying to be judgemental based on return rate, I > certainly could go look up this past week's items' published return (eg, > 4.98%), but that value is based on its current street price, not what I > actually paid, so my returns are different; figure double. Another one > in the basket might similarly be ~1% on paper, but its holding has > appreciated by +700%, so more math there too. > > Plus there's also the ~zero effort element too which I've said I value. > Plus there's what my actual performance objectives are. Together, > needing minimal effort for returns which reliably exceed inflation is a > win by what I've set for my needs & priorities; YMMV (obviously). > > Better go buy that book. Work smarter, not harder. > > > -hh > > > > > It sounds like you're happy with what you're doing. Then what's the fuss for :)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-03-16 11:17 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <vr6q2b$1rmls$4@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #661915 |
On 3/15/25 23:56, Physfitfreak wrote: > On 3/15/25 10:31 PM, -hh wrote: >> >>> >>> I don't disclose such information in social media on demand. >> >> Oh, so still just a zero then. On a thread that *you* started. >> >> >>> But I will tell you whether "$500" profit in one week from your >>> invested money has been appropriate or not, if you disclose the >>> amount of money involved in creating it. >> >> Which actually doesn't matter because it was just a narrow time slice >> of a value which varies by week. Some weeks will even be zero, which >> is fine, because "weekly" isn't my timescale of interest. >> >> But since you're trying to be judgemental based on return rate, I >> certainly could go look up this past week's items' published return >> (eg, 4.98%), but that value is based on its current street price, not >> what I actually paid, so my returns are different; figure double. >> Another one in the basket might similarly be ~1% on paper, but its >> holding has appreciated by +700%, so more math there too. >> >> Plus there's also the ~zero effort element too which I've said I value. >> Plus there's what my actual performance objectives are. Together, >> needing minimal effort for returns which reliably exceed inflation is >> a win by what I've set for my needs & priorities; YMMV (obviously). >> >> Better go buy that book. Work smarter, not harder. >> >> >> -hh > > It sounds like you're happy with what you're doing. Yup. >Then what's the fuss for :) The only fuss is someone who's been trying to gamble with catching the falling knife on their "hot tip" of XRP. Wonder how that's been working out for them? Perhaps -15.8% for Month over Month is a clue...? /s -hh
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Physfitfreak <physfitfreak@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-03-16 12:28 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <vr71oq$lck$1@solani.org> |
| In reply to | #661920 |
On 3/16/25 10:17 AM, -hh wrote: > On 3/15/25 23:56, Physfitfreak wrote: >> On 3/15/25 10:31 PM, -hh wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> I don't disclose such information in social media on demand. >>> >>> Oh, so still just a zero then. On a thread that *you* started. >>> >>> >>>> But I will tell you whether "$500" profit in one week from your >>>> invested money has been appropriate or not, if you disclose the >>>> amount of money involved in creating it. >>> >>> Which actually doesn't matter because it was just a narrow time slice >>> of a value which varies by week. Some weeks will even be zero, which >>> is fine, because "weekly" isn't my timescale of interest. >>> >>> But since you're trying to be judgemental based on return rate, I >>> certainly could go look up this past week's items' published return >>> (eg, 4.98%), but that value is based on its current street price, not >>> what I actually paid, so my returns are different; figure double. >>> Another one in the basket might similarly be ~1% on paper, but its >>> holding has appreciated by +700%, so more math there too. >>> >>> Plus there's also the ~zero effort element too which I've said I value. >>> Plus there's what my actual performance objectives are. Together, >>> needing minimal effort for returns which reliably exceed inflation is >>> a win by what I've set for my needs & priorities; YMMV (obviously). >>> >>> Better go buy that book. Work smarter, not harder. >>> >>> >>> -hh >> >> It sounds like you're happy with what you're doing. > > > Yup. > > >> Then what's the fuss for :) > > The only fuss is someone who's been trying to gamble with catching the > falling knife on their "hot tip" of XRP. > > Wonder how that's been working out for them? > Perhaps -15.8% for Month over Month is a clue...? /s > > > -hh > For XRP?.. where're you getting your data from? In the last week the low was 1.89 and high was just four days later 2.47. Steady rise. You could put about 50 cents of the difference to your own gain. Do the math for 100 xrp, 1000 xrp, 10000 xrp ... whatever money you invest in it, and feel shame that banks got all that with _your_ money but your pocket didn't. Sheep shouldn't involve themselves in trading. Take the chicken shit and feel happy too.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-03-16 16:08 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <vr7b49$1rmlr$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #661922 |
On 3/16/25 13:28, Physfitfreak wrote: > On 3/16/25 10:17 AM, -hh wrote: >> On 3/15/25 23:56, Physfitfreak wrote: >>> On 3/15/25 10:31 PM, -hh wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> I don't disclose such information in social media on demand. >>>> >>>> Oh, so still just a zero then. On a thread that *you* started. >>>> >>>> >>>>> But I will tell you whether "$500" profit in one week from your >>>>> invested money has been appropriate or not, if you disclose the >>>>> amount of money involved in creating it. >>>> >>>> Which actually doesn't matter because it was just a narrow time >>>> slice of a value which varies by week. Some weeks will even be >>>> zero, which is fine, because "weekly" isn't my timescale of interest. >>>> >>>> But since you're trying to be judgemental based on return rate, I >>>> certainly could go look up this past week's items' published return >>>> (eg, 4.98%), but that value is based on its current street price, >>>> not what I actually paid, so my returns are different; figure >>>> double. Another one in the basket might similarly be ~1% on paper, >>>> but its holding has appreciated by +700%, so more math there too. >>>> >>>> Plus there's also the ~zero effort element too which I've said I value. >>>> Plus there's what my actual performance objectives are. Together, >>>> needing minimal effort for returns which reliably exceed inflation >>>> is a win by what I've set for my needs & priorities; YMMV (obviously). >>>> >>>> Better go buy that book. Work smarter, not harder. >>>> >>>> >>>> -hh >>> >>> It sounds like you're happy with what you're doing. >> >> >> Yup. >> >> >>> Then what's the fuss for :) >> >> The only fuss is someone who's been trying to gamble with catching the >> falling knife on their "hot tip" of XRP. >> >> Wonder how that's been working out for them? >> Perhaps -15.8% for Month over Month is a clue...? /s >> >> >> -hh >> > > > For XRP?.. where're you getting your data from? Well, it was what you trolled with. > In the last week the low > was 1.89 and high was just four days later 2.47. Steady rise. You could > put about 50 cents of the difference to your own gain. Do the math for > 100 xrp, 1000 xrp, 10000 xrp ... whatever money you invest in it, and > feel shame that banks got all that with _your_ money but your pocket > didn't. > > Sheep shouldn't involve themselves in trading. Take the chicken shit and > feel happy too. But if it really was that easy to time, then post here in advance what your plan is for this week: buy at what value when & sell at what value when. -hh
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Physfitfreak <physfitfreak@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-03-16 17:25 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <vr7j5h$u90$1@solani.org> |
| In reply to | #661926 |
On 3/16/25 3:08 PM, -hh wrote: > > Well, it was what you trolled with. Bye.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | % <pursent100@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-03-16 15:26 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <PmydnYx__oOzzUr6nZ2dnZfqn_oAAAAA@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #661931 |
Physfitfreak wrote: > On 3/16/25 3:08 PM, -hh wrote: >> >> Well, it was what you trolled with. > > Bye. did you troll
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Physfitfreak <physfitfreak@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-03-16 17:45 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <vr7kai$2n5sj$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #661932 |
On 3/16/25 5:26 PM, % wrote: > Physfitfreak wrote: >> On 3/16/25 3:08 PM, -hh wrote: >>> >>> Well, it was what you trolled with. >> >> Bye. > > did you troll I don't think I troll. hh is a troll in fact. A certain type of "crook" too :) He'll die off in my threads all by himself.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | % <pursent100@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-03-16 16:17 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <5aicnTT8cJSawUr6nZ2dnZfqnPidnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #661933 |
Physfitfreak wrote: > On 3/16/25 5:26 PM, % wrote: >> Physfitfreak wrote: >>> On 3/16/25 3:08 PM, -hh wrote: >>>> >>>> Well, it was what you trolled with. >>> >>> Bye. >> >> did you troll > > > I don't think I troll. hh is a troll in fact. A certain type of "crook" > too :) He'll die off in my threads all by himself. > > > > a lot of them fade fast
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-03-16 22:21 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <vr8103$2k0me$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #661931 |
On 3/16/25 18:25, Physfitfreak wrote: > On 3/16/25 3:08 PM, -hh wrote: >> >> Well, it was what you trolled with. > > Bye. Run along then. Better luck next time. FYI, whenever you do your little dabbling in Robinhood, try to not think about what I said because then I'd be living 'rent-free in yer noggin'. -hh
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Physfitfreak <physfitfreak@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-03-17 12:04 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <vr9kmp$1qs8$1@solani.org> |
| In reply to | #661938 |
On 3/16/25 9:21 PM, -hh wrote: > On 3/16/25 18:25, Physfitfreak wrote: >> On 3/16/25 3:08 PM, -hh wrote: >>> >>> Well, it was what you trolled with. >> >> Bye. > > Run along then. Better luck next time. > > FYI, whenever you do your little dabbling in Robinhood, try to not think > about what I said because then I'd be living 'rent-free in yer noggin'. > > > -hh Never. You get noticed when you show up in my blogs. That's pretty much all a trolling groupie is.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Physfitfreak <physfitfreak@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-03-17 12:49 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <vr9nb3$1qs8$2@solani.org> |
| In reply to | #661795 |
On 3/10/25 1:38 PM, Physfitfreak wrote: > On 3/10/25 9:34 AM, Physfitfreak wrote: >> On 3/6/25 3:51 PM, Physfitfreak wrote: >>> >>> >>> XRP >>> >> >> >> Hot time buying now 😁 > > > No, still going down looks like. But even at the present price it is a > bargain cause it'll sure go way above it not much later. > > But knock on wood :) > > At times like this as soon as it goes bull it rapidly goes up because a > lot are watching and begin buying, so it gets very easy to miss the event. This may happen to XRP! .. A couple of analysts are saying as soon as the present dispute between Security and Exchange Commission (SEC) and XRP (Ripple Labs) ends - and it is in its final phase - XRP might jump to about $15. An almost similar jump took place a few months back when Ripple presented SEC a proof of safety and speed in its codes conducting XRP transactions (more safely and much faster than other cryptos). That made XRP to climb fast from $0.50 to above $3 in value. SEC has not responded to that proof yet, but is about to. SEC's beef with Ripple Labs is that they weren't sure their transactions were secure enough as well against outsiders, and had the needed integrity in them practiced by insiders. I think they had seen how fast the transactions were and how little they used energy compared to other cryptos, and became suspicious of some kind of fraud in the machinery. Well, Ripple Labs disclosed their codes, tested them for SEC, and proved that they carry both security as well as integrity in them, and no insider and outsider can affect that. This alone, before even SEC responds to it, made XRP to go up and never come back down to $0.50 again. So likely, as soon as SEC shows the slightest sign of approval of Ripple's machinery, XRP will jump in price. Not a bad idea to buy a large number of XRP while it is under $3. I'd buy much more if most of my investing money was not tied elsewhere in other trade contracts. I think even if SEC takes a step back but continues nagging, XRP will go up. This is so because there might not be ever an SEC's full approval for any crypto or stocks trade. The commission is formed to police trading for security and integrity. Can you "convince" the police in your city that the city is safe enough and now they can move to another city? .. So any sign, any step back, will do! :)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-03-17 10:53 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <4QmdnVD0m_Ap_EX6nZ2dnZfqnPQAAAAA@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #661946 |
On 03/17/2025 10:49 AM, Physfitfreak wrote: > On 3/10/25 1:38 PM, Physfitfreak wrote: >> On 3/10/25 9:34 AM, Physfitfreak wrote: >>> On 3/6/25 3:51 PM, Physfitfreak wrote: >>>> Have you ever said anything relevant to relativity? The above does not include any, and spouting SR-ianism is no contribution. You dirty money-laundering ponzi-scheme shill.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-03-17 12:31 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <DyCdnVkUNe4m5UX6nZ2dnZfqn_qdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #661948 |
On 03/17/2025 10:53 AM, Ross Finlayson wrote: > On 03/17/2025 10:49 AM, Physfitfreak wrote: >> On 3/10/25 1:38 PM, Physfitfreak wrote: >>> On 3/10/25 9:34 AM, Physfitfreak wrote: >>>> On 3/6/25 3:51 PM, Physfitfreak wrote: >>>>> > > > Have you ever said anything relevant to relativity? > > The above does not include any, > and spouting SR-ianism is no contribution. > > > You dirty money-laundering ponzi-scheme shill. > > https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/jacs.2c03925 "S-protein proteolysis by NE renders amyloid-like fibrils." "[Amyloid-like fibril] formation can accompany disease and each disease is characterized by a specfic protein or peptide that aggregates." https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2634529/ https://www.google.com/search?q=fibrinolytic+disturbance Probably looking like peripheral artery disease, or, "cold hands". Covid-related cold hands. Thrombolytic food "During food fermentation, fibrinolytic enzymes produced from microbial strains are the main functional component to dissolve thrombus." https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10563737/ https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10907686/ "According to Peng, Huang, Zhang and Zhang [22], the microbial fibrinolytic enzyme subtilisin DFE from Bacillus subtilis demonstrated high specificity and low production cost." https://www.nature.com/articles/cdd201149 https://www.google.com/search?q=subtilisin+convertase "Proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9) is an enzyme released in response to the drop in cholesterol level occurring in sepsis." https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-024-65609-w "The discovery of PCSK9 led to astonishingly fast progress in the understanding of cholesterol homeostasis and the implication of PCSK9 in various pathologies. " "We found that LDL-C and PCSK9 were significantly higher in each of the two sepsis groups than the control group...." https://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/jat/22/1/22_25841/_article https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26664894/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berberine
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Physfitfreak <physfitfreak@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-03-17 22:49 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <vraqgf$2bum$1@solani.org> |
| In reply to | #661948 |
On 3/17/25 12:53 PM, Ross Finlayson wrote: > On 03/17/2025 10:49 AM, Physfitfreak wrote: >> On 3/10/25 1:38 PM, Physfitfreak wrote: >>> On 3/10/25 9:34 AM, Physfitfreak wrote: >>>> On 3/6/25 3:51 PM, Physfitfreak wrote: >>>>> > > > Have you ... > > > > > > > > Don't confuse me with my dick.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Physfitfreak <physfitfreak@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-03-17 13:16 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <vr9ot3$1qs8$4@solani.org> |
| In reply to | #661946 |
On 3/17/25 12:49 PM, Physfitfreak wrote: > On 3/10/25 1:38 PM, Physfitfreak wrote: >> On 3/10/25 9:34 AM, Physfitfreak wrote: >>> On 3/6/25 3:51 PM, Physfitfreak wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> XRP >>>> >>> >>> >>> Hot time buying now 😁 >> >> >> No, still going down looks like. But even at the present price it is a >> bargain cause it'll sure go way above it not much later. >> >> But knock on wood :) >> >> At times like this as soon as it goes bull it rapidly goes up because >> a lot are watching and begin buying, so it gets very easy to miss the >> event. > > > This may happen to XRP! .. A couple of analysts are saying as soon as > the present dispute between Security and Exchange Commission (SEC) and > XRP (Ripple Labs) ends - and it is in its final phase - XRP might jump > to about $15. > > An almost similar jump took place a few months back when Ripple > presented SEC a proof of safety and speed in its codes conducting XRP > transactions (more safely and much faster than other cryptos). That made > XRP to climb fast from $0.50 to above $3 in value. SEC has not responded > to that proof yet, but is about to. > > SEC's beef with Ripple Labs is that they weren't sure their transactions > were secure enough as well against outsiders, and had the needed > integrity in them practiced by insiders. I think they had seen how fast > the transactions were and how little they used energy compared to other > cryptos, and became suspicious of some kind of fraud in the machinery. > > Well, Ripple Labs disclosed their codes, tested them for SEC, and proved > that they carry both security as well as integrity in them, and no > insider and outsider can affect that. This alone, before even SEC > responds to it, made XRP to go up and never come back down to $0.50 again. > > So likely, as soon as SEC shows the slightest sign of approval of > Ripple's machinery, XRP will jump in price. > > Not a bad idea to buy a large number of XRP while it is under $3. I'd > buy much more if most of my investing money was not tied elsewhere in > other trade contracts. > > I think even if SEC takes a step back but continues nagging, XRP will go > up. This is so because there might not be ever an SEC's full approval > for any crypto or stocks trade. The commission is formed to police > trading for security and integrity. Can you "convince" the police in > your city that the city is safe enough and now they can move to another > city? .. > > So any sign, any step back, will do! :) > > > And SEC isn't just looking into it casually as its daily chores. The Treasury wants to buy a huge amount of XRP. So this is pushing SEC to do their job. As I mentioned before, somebody, one of the analysts, mentioned that Treasury might buy XRP at $10k each..! So this little XRP might be another "Bitcoin" in disguise. Its future looks bright.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Physfitfreak <physfitfreak@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-03-19 14:08 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <vrf4ob$4p6s$1@solani.org> |
| In reply to | #661950 |
On 3/17/25 1:16 PM, Physfitfreak wrote: > On 3/17/25 12:49 PM, Physfitfreak wrote: >> On 3/10/25 1:38 PM, Physfitfreak wrote: >>> On 3/10/25 9:34 AM, Physfitfreak wrote: >>>> On 3/6/25 3:51 PM, Physfitfreak wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> XRP >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Hot time buying now 😁 >>> >>> >>> No, still going down looks like. But even at the present price it is >>> a bargain cause it'll sure go way above it not much later. >>> >>> But knock on wood :) >>> >>> At times like this as soon as it goes bull it rapidly goes up because >>> a lot are watching and begin buying, so it gets very easy to miss the >>> event. >> >> >> This may happen to XRP! .. A couple of analysts are saying as soon as >> the present dispute between Security and Exchange Commission (SEC) and >> XRP (Ripple Labs) ends - and it is in its final phase - XRP might jump >> to about $15. >> >> An almost similar jump took place a few months back when Ripple >> presented SEC a proof of safety and speed in its codes conducting XRP >> transactions (more safely and much faster than other cryptos). That >> made XRP to climb fast from $0.50 to above $3 in value. SEC has not >> responded to that proof yet, but is about to. >> >> SEC's beef with Ripple Labs is that they weren't sure their >> transactions were secure enough as well against outsiders, and had the >> needed integrity in them practiced by insiders. I think they had seen >> how fast the transactions were and how little they used energy >> compared to other cryptos, and became suspicious of some kind of fraud >> in the machinery. >> >> Well, Ripple Labs disclosed their codes, tested them for SEC, and >> proved that they carry both security as well as integrity in them, and >> no insider and outsider can affect that. This alone, before even SEC >> responds to it, made XRP to go up and never come back down to $0.50 >> again. >> >> So likely, as soon as SEC shows the slightest sign of approval of >> Ripple's machinery, XRP will jump in price. >> >> Not a bad idea to buy a large number of XRP while it is under $3. I'd >> buy much more if most of my investing money was not tied elsewhere in >> other trade contracts. >> >> I think even if SEC takes a step back but continues nagging, XRP will >> go up. This is so because there might not be ever an SEC's full >> approval for any crypto or stocks trade. The commission is formed to >> police trading for security and integrity. Can you "convince" the >> police in your city that the city is safe enough and now they can move >> to another city? .. >> >> So any sign, any step back, will do! :) >> >> >> > > > And SEC isn't just looking into it casually as its daily chores. The > Treasury wants to buy a huge amount of XRP. So this is pushing SEC to do > their job. > > As I mentioned before, somebody, one of the analysts, mentioned that > Treasury might buy XRP at $10k each..! > > So this little XRP might be another "Bitcoin" in disguise. Its future > looks bright. > > SEC dropped its lawsuit against XRP!... :-) But the jump in price was about 14% only, so far. Not everyone is aware of this yet. So I can expect for it to go higher during a few coming days. Ok, now the road for the Emergency Reserve is open to purchase XRP. And more than that, the SEC's firm acceptance of Ripple Labs software and manner of operation as "safe", as well as having the required "integrity", makes this coin a very nice candidate to grow in value. I think I was correct in counting on it. The rest of my investing money is still tied in other trade contracts (Options) otherwise I'd buy XRP right now with every dollar of it. Today's other four main cryptos (BTC, DOGE, and SHIB) raised in value only a bit more than 3%.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Physfitfreak <physfitfreak@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-03-21 14:21 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <vrke8j$75nb$1@solani.org> |
| In reply to | #661993 |
On 3/19/25 2:08 PM, Physfitfreak wrote: > On 3/17/25 1:16 PM, Physfitfreak wrote: >> On 3/17/25 12:49 PM, Physfitfreak wrote: >>> On 3/10/25 1:38 PM, Physfitfreak wrote: >>>> On 3/10/25 9:34 AM, Physfitfreak wrote: >>>>> On 3/6/25 3:51 PM, Physfitfreak wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> XRP >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Hot time buying now 😁 >>>> >>>> >>>> No, still going down looks like. But even at the present price it is >>>> a bargain cause it'll sure go way above it not much later. >>>> >>>> But knock on wood :) >>>> >>>> At times like this as soon as it goes bull it rapidly goes up >>>> because a lot are watching and begin buying, so it gets very easy to >>>> miss the event. >>> >>> >>> This may happen to XRP! .. A couple of analysts are saying as soon as >>> the present dispute between Security and Exchange Commission (SEC) >>> and XRP (Ripple Labs) ends - and it is in its final phase - XRP might >>> jump to about $15. >>> >>> An almost similar jump took place a few months back when Ripple >>> presented SEC a proof of safety and speed in its codes conducting XRP >>> transactions (more safely and much faster than other cryptos). That >>> made XRP to climb fast from $0.50 to above $3 in value. SEC has not >>> responded to that proof yet, but is about to. >>> >>> SEC's beef with Ripple Labs is that they weren't sure their >>> transactions were secure enough as well against outsiders, and had >>> the needed integrity in them practiced by insiders. I think they had >>> seen how fast the transactions were and how little they used energy >>> compared to other cryptos, and became suspicious of some kind of >>> fraud in the machinery. >>> >>> Well, Ripple Labs disclosed their codes, tested them for SEC, and >>> proved that they carry both security as well as integrity in them, >>> and no insider and outsider can affect that. This alone, before even >>> SEC responds to it, made XRP to go up and never come back down to >>> $0.50 again. >>> >>> So likely, as soon as SEC shows the slightest sign of approval of >>> Ripple's machinery, XRP will jump in price. >>> >>> Not a bad idea to buy a large number of XRP while it is under $3. I'd >>> buy much more if most of my investing money was not tied elsewhere in >>> other trade contracts. >>> >>> I think even if SEC takes a step back but continues nagging, XRP will >>> go up. This is so because there might not be ever an SEC's full >>> approval for any crypto or stocks trade. The commission is formed to >>> police trading for security and integrity. Can you "convince" the >>> police in your city that the city is safe enough and now they can >>> move to another city? .. >>> >>> So any sign, any step back, will do! :) >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> And SEC isn't just looking into it casually as its daily chores. The >> Treasury wants to buy a huge amount of XRP. So this is pushing SEC to >> do their job. >> >> As I mentioned before, somebody, one of the analysts, mentioned that >> Treasury might buy XRP at $10k each..! >> >> So this little XRP might be another "Bitcoin" in disguise. Its future >> looks bright. >> >> > > > > SEC dropped its lawsuit against XRP!... :-) > > But the jump in price was about 14% only, so far. Not everyone is aware > of this yet. So I can expect for it to go higher during a few coming days. > > Ok, now the road for the Emergency Reserve is open to purchase XRP. And > more than that, the SEC's firm acceptance of Ripple Labs software and > manner of operation as "safe", as well as having the required > "integrity", makes this coin a very nice candidate to grow in value. > > I think I was correct in counting on it. The rest of my investing money > is still tied in other trade contracts (Options) otherwise I'd buy XRP > right now with every dollar of it. > > Today's other four main cryptos (BTC, DOGE, and SHIB) raised in value > only a bit more than 3%. No, the price isn't budging. Stocks have lost value and people don't want to sell them at such lows so they could buy XRP. As stocks recover, however, XRP will grow. If XRP had grown steadily, people _would_ sell their stocks at low to buy XRP.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-03-21 20:37 +0100 |
| Subject | yeah, only in your dreams [dead cat bounce] (Re: Money Money :-) |
| Message-ID | <vrkf4s$769m$2@solani.org> |
| In reply to | #662029 |
Hi, I don't believe stocks in the USA will recover. It willl only get worse and worse. This was only a dead cat bounce: https://www.investopedia.com/terms/d/deadcatbounce.asp But its basically over and out. Bye Physfitfreak schrieb: > No, the price isn't budging. Stocks have lost value and people don't > want to sell them at such lows so they could buy XRP. > > As stocks recover, however, XRP will grow. > > If XRP had grown steadily, people _would_ sell their stocks at low to > buy XRP.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 2 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity
csiph-web