That seems a rather aggressive response to someone suggesting you read the manual in order to enable a legitimate conversation about the topic. I explained why the shares aren’t given and why benefit still accrues to the public.

	▲	aspenmayer 4 days ago \| parent [-]
		> That seems a rather aggressive response to someone suggesting you read the manual in order to enable a legitimate conversation about the topic. I explained why the shares aren’t given and why benefit still accrues to the public. I disagree, but in the interest of not painting the mods into a corner with my reply, I won't pursue this thread further. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html > Please don't comment on whether someone read an article. "Did you even read the article? It mentions that" can be shortened to "The article mentions that". You didn't quite say that, but it rhymed. The sentence I quoted upthread added nothing to your comment, and that is that part I took issue with.

▲

antonymoose 4 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I think you should write a meaningful reply instead of being a snark, oh learned one.

	▲	bix6 3 days ago \| parent [-]
		> Why are we socializing risk and privatizing profit? >> Everyone benefits from more medicine, weapons, food, etc.

▲

dangus 3 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Everyone benefits from more weapons?

▲

bdangubic 4 days ago | parent | prev [-]

if money can be funneled to DJT - yea. otherwise, nah

	▲	bix6 4 days ago \| parent [-]
		New NSF crypto grants incoming :p