Yah, less contagious, but as deadly, which is kinda horrible 😕

Not of it’s neither A nor B ;)
Would you trust ChatGPT to know?

And with some small but non-zero chance dying several years later from SSPE.

You aren’t mistaken.
Afaiu it also saves them from https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subacute_sclerosing_panencephalitis, which is a delayed death sentence.

Your understanding is correct.
Relativistic mass increases the faster the moving object gets. That in turn means more energy is required to accelerate an object the closer it gets to the speed of light.

Fun fact: the speed of light is not as absolute as it might seem when looking at relativistic effects. In media with a refraction index above 1 (only perfect vacuum has a refractiom index of 1), the speed of light equals 1/(refraction index).
For light moving in water that results in a speed of light of around 3/4 the speed of light in vacuum.

I stated the reason for it being phased in: prioritizing transactions.

Tell me how to keep a channel open without risking loss of funds through flood and loot attacks.

Nano has alwas has a computational part associated with transactions. It once was used to prioritize transactions. Nano has evolved to a different prioritization scheme. That computational part will be phased out.
The lightning network is a silly attempt to merge bad parts of cryptocurrencies with bad parts of traditional finance: you need the electric energy guzzling Bitcoin and middlemen just like in traditional finance - or would you care to open and close your own channels, pay watchtowers etc. or “simply” use the channels of middlemen?
And how would you have cheap transactions without those middlemen, if operating your own channels requires transactions on layer 1?

Even if it is (I don’t see your reasoning explaining that) that doesn’t mean the resulting security scheme is objective.

Security is relative - always!
Can you name one consensus scheme that isn’t?

You replied to my comment, which was broader than Bitcoin alone; you could’ve considered that.
Not all cryptocurrencies are bad in my book. Let’s agree to disagree.

So many words Bitcoin and so little about the idea behind it.
Are you aware that not each and every cryptocurrency that was created after Bitcoin is bad?
Although admittedly most are. Yet some took the idea further and implemented better versions of value transfer, that doesn’t rely on middlemen.

No, but some people don’t know Monero and can’t grasp the possibilities that are available now, but haven’t been thought of before 🤷‍♂

Indeed it does use little energy, because its consensus is in some ways similar to PoS, so there’s no mining involved. If you want to know more about it, have a look here: https://docs.nano.org/protocol-design/orv-consensus/
I believe that the Nano network can process around 100 transactions per second; at least that’s a result from throughput tests I remember. That’s way less than VISA can do, but a lot more than most other cryptocurrencies can process.
And in difference to the vast majority of cryptocurrencies, Nano has no built-in limits of transactions per second. As soon as hardware gets more powerful (faster CPUs, faster network connection, faster SSDs), Nano gets faster!

In what way is Ethereum centralized?
The owers of ETH contribute to the consensus.
How would the foundation control any of that?
Mybe you confuse Ethereum with IOTA?

Ethereum transitioned from PoW to Pos.
What’s not to like about that?

I beg to partly differ.
The idea of being able to transfer digital value safely without middlemen is great and has never been available before.
The implementation is bad in the sense that it’s ecologically disastrous and economically unfit.

If you want to have rather green cryptos, you need to exclude those who rely on proof-of-work to secure the network.
Btw. Ethereum showed that a transition from proof-of-work to proof-of-stake is possible.
If you’re not interested in the complexities that a lot of cryptos have, because you just want to transfer value efficiently, have a look at Nano (https://nano.org)

It’s great that the idea got implemented in ways that don’t have the ecological footprint Bitcoin has!
I’m glad Bitcoin brought this idea to life. But it’s about time for Bitcoin to resign.

Right, but that doesn’t consider the part where it’s about

people will suffer who had no say in this or may actually not be eligible for vaccinations.

It’s one thing to risk your own health/life, but an entirely different thing to risk others’ health/lives.

Your reasoning makes sense.
I just wanted to point out a way to use Kobo readers without privacy issues for people who already own them. I should’ve stated that more clearly.
People still looking for an ebook reader should consider leaning onto your reasoning.