arch_8ngel

That is pretty funny -- but the direct retort on Pop Tarts should have been that a Pop Tart is a type of "hand pie" rather than the ravioli angle Though I would certainly argue that a "hand pie" is potentially a type of sandwich, itself - but then you have to decide if a Calzone is really a gigantic hand pie -- which then comes back around on whether a pizza is an open-faced sandwich. (though most people eating a NY slice DO turn it into a "taco" for easiest consumption) EDIT: got down the examples in the Cube Rule and they cover it by having "calzone" as the fully enwrapped sandwich type

Taco -- involves a tortilla (can have anything as the contents, generally speaking) Sub - involves a sub-roll of some kind (can have anything as the contents, generally speaking) So a taco and a sub are never the same thing since they're defined by the bread/form-factor. But they could certainly have the same contents.

You guys are really butchering the set theory on this topic

You may want to look back at the original post I quoted: you said -- " I know for sure XRP has another $1 to go up because" That sure looks like you said it is "definitely going up" Maybe I misunderstood what you were saying there, though, if your intention was to say you simply "knew that it had headroom to go up because..." Though even then, I'm not sure that's really an accurate analysis, given how many factors are at play.

You thought USA was only twice the GDP of Canada? That's certainly an interesting perspective. (though it is admittedly news to me that Canada's GDP is that low -- though I also didn't realize that Canada only had 37 million people vs our 330 million, so the numbers work out ) As an amusing side-note, if the US GDP was "only" $3T -- vs Canada's $1.5T -- that would put the US GDP-per-capita on par with your typical developing country. That'd certainly be a bad day for the world economy! But to the point, I'm wasn't saying that a past high doesn't demonstrate a POSSIBILITY. (that is basic probabilities-and-statistics that something having happened before at least demonstrates the "possibility") I'm saying that a past high does not provide any fundamentals that would REQUIRE or ENSURE a return to that past high. Your language in the post I originally quoted said that it was definitely going to happen, and that is an attitude that is going to get you into trouble at some point and I'd caution you strongly against it.

It is a bit of a contest of what regional influence biases the Wikipedia writers, versus whether they accept the broad usage.

I mean... when you get down to it, you're talking about fancy spaghetti sauce. Though I have found that a can of "actual" chili topped with shredded cheese and jalapenos does do wonders to reconstitute leftover spaghetti.

Ha! Wasn't speaking the accuracy of the definition, so much as the statement of "quality" associated with Cincinnati interpretations of food.

But it's not called a "hamburger" And they can call it whatever they want -- that isn't really the point. The point is, that a hamburger and a cheeseburger, inherently include a beef patty. (where the bread isn't the defining feature of the sandwich)

No offense, but I feel like we covered that ground a couple years back debating what constituted "chili"

Because your link lists specific sandwich types as well as "generic" broad categories of sandwich (like subs). They aren't properly categorized -- they are just listed in parallel to each other. EDIT: just to be clear -- I don't think anyone is attempting the argument that a philly cheeseteak isn't a "specific" type of sandwich. The argument is that a sub-sandwich is a BROAD category of sandwich that contains philly cheesesteaks as a subtype.

Marketing. Philly Steaks are a specific subset of sub sandwiches. If they only sell that type of sandwich (because that was presumably their biggest seller) -- then why create any market confusion by making it sound like they might sell other types of subs?

I would dispute the notion that anyone can "officially" declare the concept of a "meatball sandwich" as a thing distinct from a hot sub that comprised of meatballs and sauce There isn't some "official" organization that decides what type of sandwich things are.

Bitcoin has a market cap of around $1 T. (entire global crypto market is approx. $2 T) USA GDP is over $21 T. (though this is VERY different from money in existence, or value of other assets/investments) That is pretty damn far from "1/3 of the GDP"... Globally there is around $80T in "money" in existence. But you've completely missed the point of what I posted...

Disagree - a meatball sub is a valid type of sub, which sets the precedent that "form factor" (i.e. a bun longer than it is wide) is generally what defines a sandwich as a "sub".

It's not a "hoagie" because it's a type of "grinder" (but both "hoagies" and "grinders' are types of submarine sandwiches)

A cheeseburger is a type of hamburger. Both are defined by having a beef patty -- the bread is irrelevant (in some parts of the world you eat a hamburger without a bun and use a fork and knife -- but the patty is more-or-less the same) But a "sub" is broadly defined as pretty much any type of sandwich, hot or cold, that you can concoct on a sub-style roll. If you want to get right down to it -- the McRib is probably "technically" a type of sub

I don't think I've seen or had a philly on a hot dog bun in 30 years (back when my mom used to cook Steakums for weekend lunches) But my earlier post in the thread pointed this out as the "real question" -- this is, a hot dog is definitely a type of sandwhich -- but does it meet the requirements of a sub? If it does, then the question in the OP is clearly answered, as well.

Look, it's one thing to say that you feel confident that this could happen -- but there is absolutely nothing fundamental to crypto markets that necessitates XRP "has another $1 to go up because it was already there 4 years ago". That just isn't the way that markets of any type work.

Submarine sandwiches are a form factor (i.e. determined by bread style -- or at least, aspect ratio) with a huge variety of available fillings. (both cold and hot) A "hamburger" is determined by the patty/meat -- it could be on a bun, it could be on sliced bread (i.e. a patty melt), etc. Your attempt at set theory on this was misapplied

Both, and. Sub is the form factor. French toast would be the bread-type

If you want to split those hairs, wouldn't a cheesesteak be a type of "grinder"? (i.e. a meat-based hot sub) All still subs, though

Paypal is really easy to use for this, you just have limited options of which crypto is available, and no ability to move it off of Paypal. (so the "not your keys not your coins" crowd would bemoan that option) If you aren't getting into this stuff from the standpoint of an anarcho-capitalist, though, none of that really matters with the more trustworthy exchanges (Coinbase, Paypal, etc) since they are super-corporations with fiduciary duty to their shareholders and board that would get obliterated by any sort of malfeasance related to crypto handling. If you don't typically file a Schedule D (for a taxable investment account) -- just be wary that swing trading this stuff can complicate your taxes in a hurry.

Absolutely do not view this as any sort of a sure-thing. You are reading accounts of speculation and gambling that happen to have paid off. If you have some amount of money you can "afford to lose", then making asymmetric bets can be a worthwhile risk to take. But if you are on the margin financially -- you have to recognize it is a gamble that you may lose. It is easy enough to get into -- though depending on how much you trade, I'm sure it can considerably complicate your taxes, compared to what you're accustomed to. EDIT: I'd say the important thing is setting realistic expectations. Codemonkey's speculation on 5% weekly returns for 2 years MIGHT pay off -- though it is exceedingly unlikely, because that represents very high real returns resulting in absurdly high market caps for the underlying markets. Much more likely that rates of return either plateau or have some reversion-to-mean, over longer periods of time.