StoneToss (allegedly, formerly Red Panels)

[Tacoidiot1955]

Bob barker
Its been said before in this thread, but the issue is that so many people treat political cartoons as like an opinion piece on a blog. The point they want to make would be much better if it was made via text using structured logic and argumentation, instead of just illustration and text bubbles.

Yeah, and some just devolve to masturbatory circle-jerking that relies on the audience still validating their shit opinions, take the not a stone toss copycat sqrlyjack, some of her comics are literally 1: "My enemies are pathetic" 2: "I/people that represent my side are strong/sexy/good/etc"(He or she depending on your opinion on the matter given that it's a transsexual, prefers to depict itself as a busty anthro squirrel with a massive dick because fetishism I guess, as an example, only comparable self insert/"My enemies are all pathetic" type is GPrime85, though a Lil bit tamer and with better art(Sorry for the tangent)) 3: "Violence", this type of shit is bad propaganda at best, especially when you have not won, compare it to peebleyeet copycat Mr pumpkin face, made a similar comic, basically depicting troons like disgusting, dirty, transvestite fetishists who pissed themselves at any opportunity, both of these comics are not very funny, and only a completely deluded person and their audience could think this is good comedy in anyway, I also noticed boulderlug's copycats and the things orbiting them are way more cow worthy than the dude himself.

 

[Just_a_Bored_Guy]

New Format Tulips:​

C: In case you missed it, I’ve released at set of NFT’s for auction that will close in the next 24 hours or so. It’s basically a form of digital art you can claim “ownership” of in a crypto blockchain (in this case, Etherium).
M: Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, as they say.

 

[0 0]

New Format Tulips:​

View attachment 2021664
C: In case you missed it, I’ve released at set of NFT’s for auction that will close in the next 24 hours or so. It’s basically a form of digital art you can claim “ownership” of in a crypto blockchain (in this case, Etherium).
M: Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, as they say.

NFT's are a really weird and rather new thing, lately, and it's as he described. You claim ownership of an image because you have a special blockchain tied to it. That's about the extent of my understanding regarding its inner workings.

People are doing some really scummy things with it, though. Namely, if an artist posts their work online, there are bots which immediately convert it to an NFT claiming it is independent of the actual creator.

If anything, I only foresee NFT's being used for money laundering or tax write-offs similar to art auctions. But Stonetoss likes cypto in general, so it's unsurprising he's behind it.

 

[SITHRAK!]

 

[Erika Furudo]

NFT's are a really weird and rather new thing, lately, and it's as he described. You claim ownership of an image because you have a special blockchain tied to it. That's about the extent of my understanding regarding its inner workings.

People are doing some really scummy things with it, though. Namely, if an artist posts their work online, there are bots which immediately convert it to an NFT claiming it is independent of the actual creator.

If anything, I only foresee NFT's being used for money laundering or tax write-offs similar to art auctions. But Stonetoss likes cypto in general, so it's unsurprising he's behind it.

Call me autistic, but how is NFT different to most crypto? Bitcoin has no real function, it's value is what people pay for it. Just like NFTs. Atleast Etherium has some kind of function with contracts I don't really understand. But I view Eth as more people paying for the coin to encourage the miners to run those contracts to do whatever they are supposed to do. The difference between a bitcoin and a NFT is what people are willing to pay for them.

 

[KateHikes14]

Call me autistic, but how is NFT different to most crypto? Bitcoin has no real function, it's value is what people pay for it. Just like NFTs. Atleast Etherium has some kind of function with contracts I don't really understand. But I view Eth as more people paying for the coin to encourage the miners to run those contracts to do whatever they are supposed to do. The difference between a bitcoin and a NFT is what people are willing to pay for them.

For the answer to this and any other frens questions regarding NFTs: https://kiwifarms.net/threads/nft-art-files-as-crypto-currency.86120/

 

[Cool Dog]

I find peebleyeet to be kinda cringe but not as cringe as left comics are because at least he makes an actual attempt at being funny, like the "just be yourself" strip that made fun of both shitty dating advice and the fact a lot of loveshy losers are actually autistic as fuck. Left comics on the other hand never laugh at themselves because any sort of criticism to their side no matter how little its verbotten. They cant make funny jokes because that could offend someone so they are always walking on eggshells and the result its the most bland boring shit I've ever seen. That or really perverted sick fuck stuff like those sex toy comics some bulldyke on medium does.

His anime memes are normie as fuck, everybody knows the asuka joke because its been going on for over 20 years now, evangelion is in netflix now come on. He might be a furry tho the connection OP makes its kinda weak.

With redpanels you can see how he went slowly from neocon to altright, but like it or not the comparison between the jehova witnesses and orthodox jews is not that crazy, is just another case of people looking the other way because one is a cult and the other a "established" religion, even tho the later still has fucking prehistoric customs, but then again so do muslims

I think that what makes lefties salty about peebleyeet is how he's using the same shitty gotcha arguments and strawmans that the left has resorted to for the past 30 years. When you think about it its the same kind of humor, like when gavin wanted to make a right-wing dailyshow clone on fox

 

[wtfNeedSignUp]

I just can't find myself trusting bitcoin. It seems like a regular pyramid scheme that could get nuked the moment the big corporations decide it's a threat.

 

[Rekkington]

I just can't find myself trusting bitcoin. It seems like a regular pyramid scheme that could get nuked the moment the big corporations decide it's a threat.

How would it be a pyramid scheme?

 

[wtfNeedSignUp]

How would it be a pyramid scheme?

The main profit is for people who got on the bandwagon before the price shot up, and unless you decide to hold for a large amount of time, the volatility makes investment extremely risky. I'm also not confident about how concentrated the bitcoin is around the user base, if a massive chunk is owned by a few bodies (especially if those bodies are corporations) then they can cash out and drive the price to the bottom.

 

[Mepsi Pax]

The main profit is for people who got on the bandwagon before the price shot up, and unless you decide to hold for a large amount of time, the volatility makes investment extremely risky. I'm also not confident about how concentrated the bitcoin is around the user base, if a massive chunk is owned by a few bodies (especially if those bodies are corporations) then they can cash out and drive the price to the bottom.

That's not what a pyramid is. A pyramid is basically a business structure where entryists earn very little doing low margin sales (which are the entirety of the "productive" labor), while the management ranks just take a percentage of their transactions as rent (and earn much more by doing so). Everyone kicks up the chain, and upper managers essentially collect rent off of thousands of people.

Nobody is earning rent off your BTC and you are not performing high pressure sales in order to earn BTC while someone take a percentage. You are simply speculating on some kind of esoteric nerdshit fiat substitute.

 

[Rekkington]

The main profit is for people who got on the bandwagon before the price shot up, and unless you decide to hold for a large amount of time, the volatility makes investment extremely risky. I'm also not confident about how concentrated the bitcoin is around the user base, if a massive chunk is owned by a few bodies (especially if those bodies are corporations) then they can cash out and drive the price to the bottom.

I guess it's good that Bitcoin isn't just owned by a few stakeholders then, and you can literally go buy more now. Someone who bought bitcoin early can have less than someone who gets more heavily into it now.

 

[wtfNeedSignUp]

That's not what a pyramid is. A pyramid is basically a business structure where entryists earn very little doing low margin sales (which are the entirety of the "productive" labor), while the management ranks just take a percentage of their transactions as rent (and earn much more by doing so). Everyone kicks up the chain, and upper managers essentially collect rent off of thousands of people.

Nobody is earning rent off your BTC and you are not performing high pressure sales in order to earn BTC while someone take a percentage. You are simply speculating on some kind of esoteric nerdshit fiat substitute.

Of course it's not the same as the usual pyramid scheme but the base concept of the rich top and poor bottom can still apply, though there is constant pressure to drive the price further up so the recent buyers won't be at a net loss.

I guess it's good that Bitcoin isn't just owned by a few stakeholders then, and you can literally go buy more now. Someone who bought bitcoin early can have less than someone who gets more heavily into it now.

Can you even prove it's not held by a few stakeholders? Plus I still don't understand how a megacorp like Amazon can't just use a fraction of their servers to mine for bitcoins in a pace far greater than all the private owners combined.

 

[AltisticRight]

New Format Tulips:​

View attachment 2021664
C: In case you missed it, I’ve released at set of NFT’s for auction that will close in the next 24 hours or so. It’s basically a form of digital art you can claim “ownership” of in a crypto blockchain (in this case, Etherium).
M: Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, as they say.

Mail full resolution pic please, for eh, a friend wants it.
Cringe joke

 

[Rekkington]

Of course it's not the same as the usual pyramid scheme but the base concept of the rich top and poor bottom can still apply, though there is constant pressure to drive the price further up so the recent buyers won't be at a net loss.

Can you even prove it's not held by a few stakeholders? Plus I still don't understand how a megacorp like Amazon can't just use a fraction of their servers to mine for bitcoins in a pace far greater than all the private owners combined.

Prove to me it's held by a bunch of stakeholders and Amazon. We explained in detail why it's not a pyramid scheme like you said, you're now just saying "but what if it was bad and exploded, or bad and used for evil?"

 

[KateHikes14]

There's probably not going to be any convincing someone whose clearly made up their mind, but

Of course it's not the same as the usual pyramid scheme but the base concept of the rich top and poor bottom can still apply, though there is constant pressure to drive the price further up so the recent buyers won't be at a net loss.

That's a complaint that is common to literally every store of value, the biggest difference is that it is not minted by a singular entity like fiat currencies.

Can you even prove it's not held by a few stakeholders? Plus I still don't understand how a megacorp like Amazon can't just use a fraction of their servers to mine for bitcoins in a pace far greater than all the private owners combined.

Every wallet is viewable because the entire ledger is viewable. If Amazon were to seek a monopoly on the currency they would be sqouze as they bought and people would be unwilling to continue to hold an asset which Amazon has full consensus on, so they would depart for other pastures while Amazon still paid for the currency at above market rates.
I'm unsure if you think you are so smart that you can see an obvious and glaring flaw, or you think everyone else is so dumb that they've never thought about a currency they have many many thousands in.

 

[pleasegoaway]

Technophile

Description: Get owned, Reddit
Mouseover: Silicon Valley? More like Lolicon Valley, amirite?
http://stonetoss.com/comic/technophile/

 

[0 0]

Technophile
View attachment 2027422

Description: Get owned, Reddit
Mouseover: Silicon Valley? More like Lolicon Valley, amirite?
http://stonetoss.com/comic/technophile/

This is a good one.

 

[AnOminous]

Of course it's not the same as the usual pyramid scheme but the base concept of the rich top and poor bottom can still apply, though there is constant pressure to drive the price further up so the recent buyers won't be at a net loss.

You obviously don't know what cryptocurrency is, don't know what a pyramid scheme is, or don't know what either thing is and are blathering like an idiot.

 

[wtfNeedSignUp]

There's probably not going to be any convincing someone whose clearly made up their mind, but

That's a complaint that is common to literally every store of value, the biggest difference is that it is not minted by a singular entity like fiat currencies.

Every wallet is viewable because the entire ledger is viewable. If Amazon were to seek a monopoly on the currency they would be sqouze as they bought and people would be unwilling to continue to hold an asset which Amazon has full consensus on, so they would depart for other pastures while Amazon still paid for the currency at above market rates.
I'm unsure if you think you are so smart that you can see an obvious and glaring flaw, or you think everyone else is so dumb that they've never thought about a currency they have many many thousands in.

I do want to know the answer to those questions, but usually asking them get very aggresive accusations rather than actual answers. The crux of my question is whether bitcoin is protected from strong economical bodies who might want to sabotage the coin's value like, for example, flooding the market and causing its price to massively drop (since in the end, Bitcoin's worth only holds if investors has belief in it). Logically this can only happen if the coin is distributed unequally among the userbase, which seems to me to be unverifiable since a big part in bitcoin is the annonymity it provides (unless I'm mistaken and there is a requirement for things like personal identification which can be globally tracked). ie, what would happen if Amazon owns 90% of mined coins and decide to sell them all at once?
Plus I have to say that having an obvious and glaring flaw didn't stop a good chunk of causes for economic disasters.