Dan

Dan
Poggers
Person
Status	Poggers
Political Alignment	Neo Liberal
Qualifications	GED, Honorable Discharge
Occupation	Tech Startups, Real Estate, Seaman (Formerly)
Age	40
Country of origin	USA
Media
Websites	harknesslabs.com
	redact.dev
Twitters	dancantstream
	dbl
Youtube	dancantstream
Manifolds Market	Dan Stock
Other
Awards	2020 Buddy OTY 2021 Buddy OTY
DGG Chat Username	dancantstream

Dan—also known by his online tag Dancantstream—is a prolific Rust player (with over 14,000 hours), CEO of redact.dev, co-host of the Anything Else? podcast with Destiny as well as being the most dedicated cat enjoyer in DGG.

Dan was originally a fan of Destiny, trying to recruit him off of Ustream to Tinychat in 2009 and started chatting around this time. Dan was a frequent guest on Destiny's stream from 2016 to 2022 along with MrMouton, until he took a hiatus during 2023 and later returned in February of 2024 to resume his prominent position in the stream as a frequent guest, eventually announcing that he and Destiny would be starting Anything Else?.

Dan's on-stream role has typically been the foil of Destiny, orbiters and other on-stream guests; as well as sometimes banning or nuking chatters.

Dan used to host the Startups Podcast with Destiny.

Awards

Buddy of the Year

Dan was nominated for the Buddy of the Year award for 4 years in a row, winning 2 times (2020 and 2021) and narrowly losing to Aba in 2022 by 2.6% of the vote. He was not nominated in 2023.

Spin-off Streamer of the Year

In 2020, (the only year the award was presented) Dan received 2nd place in the overall voting for Spin-off Streamer of the Year.

Emotes

Dan poses for the camera to show that PEPE has achieved mainstream popularity, while YEE-posters flounder in their own anguish.

Main Article: Emotes

Dan has several emotes attributed to him and/or used in relation to him.

• AngelThump
• ATAB
• ComfyDan
• LOVE
• Slumlord

PEPE

Main Article: PEPE

To the chagrin of many chatters, Dan is a firm and unwavering PEPE poster, boasting an exceptionally rare 100% PEPE post rate, qualifying him as a pure PEPE Extremist, only referring to the competition as YE*

Notable on-stream appearances with Destiny

The Big Rust Memer Meeting

Load video

YouTube

YouTube might collect personal data. Privacy Policy

ContinueDismiss

The Big Rust Memer Meeting was one of the first on-stream appearances in which Dan was present. Dan makes a minor appearance in the video as his performance in the Rust Group is reviewed by Destiny getting briefly verbally berated for "working" and not mining. Only level 13 .

Esportsbatman is also featured in the video.

Dan discusses Twitch TOS & Nudity with Destiny and Devin Nash

On February 8, 2018, Dan, Destiny and, Devin Nash engaged in an hour long discussion on the topic of Twitch's reformed terms of service. During the discussion, the trio discussed updates to the rules regarding on-stream nudity, clothing, sexually suggestive content, and regulations regarding off-platform behavior. Destiny argued that the language in the new terms of service appeared "very precise," citing the "mall appropriate" stipulation in the rules as an example. In contrast, Devin felt much was still left up to interpretation by Twitch's moderators, especially with regards to what may be deemed "hateful" or "sexually suggestive".

Load video

YouTube

YouTube might collect personal data. Privacy Policy

ContinueDismiss

Destiny and Devin eventually discuss the enformencent of Twitch's terms of service "off-platform". Destiny argues such regulations should warrant the establishment of Twitch partners as W-2 employees. While Devin agrees with Destiny "morally", he stipulates that everything action a content creator makes both on and off-platform, is a function of the platform. Devin cites the need for twitch to remove a content creator poorly conducting themselves off-platform in order to appease sponsors. Devin caveats this position, arguing that Twitch Moderation may be too quick to "pull the trigger" on certain individuals given this new rule.

A discussion on the "exclusivity" requirement for Twitch Partners arises, during which Devin and Destiny discuss the fairness of Twitch Partners being restricted to streaming on one platform. Devin argues that the challenges faced by other streaming services in attempting to "organically" foster a new platform are too steep, especially when faced with a heavily established one in Twitch. Devin goes on to state that no platform exists which offers a compelling enough competitive advantage for streamers to switch platforms. Dan joins the conversation, and asserts that Destiny could potentially capture a whole new audience with a move to another service such as YouTube.

The trio continue to review the new Terms of Service, and take particular issue with regards to the wording of the established harassment standards. While the standards maintain context and intent are key in determining whether moderation action should be taken, the following sentence of the stipulation makes it appear as if context is not a factor. Dan argues that the contract appears to be giving the moderation team much "weasel-room" to interpret situations as they please. Dan then provides the example of Destiny jokingly threatening a duo in a game, and potentially being clipped out of context. Dan later identifies that past content in VODs may be subject to these harassment guidelines, and warns Destiny that he may be forced to delete all VODs both on Twitch and YouTube.

Dan discusses Investment, Real Estate and Stocks with Destiny and Devin Nash

Load video

YouTube

YouTube might collect personal data. Privacy Policy

ContinueDismiss

On October 4, 2018, Dan, Destiny, and Devin Nash, held a brief debate on investment Real Estate and stocks.

The video starts with Destiny expressing his gratitude for being surrounded by many successful people, crediting them for their positive influence on his life, specifically naming Dan and Devin as examples. He attributes his increased reading and more efficient email management to Devin, and humorously mentions that Dan has made him consider investing in real estate. On the topic of real estate, Dan brings up a fellow streamer and securities trader, Reckful. Dan points to Reckful's seemingly inaccurate belief that the rising stock price of Amazon indicates a poor time to purchase real estate. Destiny admits he agrees with Reckful's stance, arguing that given the risky and undiversified nature of real estate, a stock purchase may be safer. Dan and Devin strongly disagree with Destiny's position, arguing that Real Estate is much more risk-averse than stocks, and proceed to spend the remainder of the call arguing with Destiny.

Throughout the call, Destiny questions why more individuals do not invest in real estate if it is such a sure investment as Dan and Devin claim. He values the ability to liquidate a stock at any moment and asserts that real estate assets require much more maintenance in comparison. In response, Dan and Devin argue that Destiny overestimates the intelligence of high-net-worth individuals, particularly those who do not invest in real estate. They contend that real estate management is not as cumbersome as Destiny imagines and that he overvalues the ability to quickly liquidate an asset.

Highlights

3:28 Dan provides his primary arguments for real estate investments over stocks. Dan asserts how most stocks fail to give meaningful dividends, while Real Estates typically have an income stream tied to them, and may even see the asset itself appreciating over time. Destiny waves this line of argumentation off as Dan telling a "story", and proceeds to argue that the inability to quickly liquidate a Real Estate asset creates a massive risk. Dan counters, arguing that Destiny is overvaluing the ability to quickly liquidate an asset, and reiterates the value in generating passive income from a real estate asset, coupled with several governmental measures in place which incentives such investing. 7:37 Dan provides the example of his apartment building in San Francisco, and details how his leveraged investment investment of less than one million dollars in 2010(including remodeling) have resulted in a property now worth over five million dollars. Destiny counters, asking Dan how much money he thinks he could have made investing that same amount into Amazon stock in 2010. Destiny performs a quick google search, and informs Dan he would be up 1,475%. Dan and Devin argue that one would have to know the stock of Amazon would rise to such a degree, while Real Estate is more of a "sure thing". Destiny takes issue with this point, arguing that many people felt the same during the 2007 housing crisis. Devin argues that an individual who held a piece of real estate through the housing crisis, would still likely see a profit today. 10:20 Destiny pointedly states: "Dan is selling me a deal that's too good to be true... that I could just dump a ton of money into real estate and consistently outperform the markets...Then why doesn't everybody do it?" Devin informs Destiny that not everybody has "one hundred thousand dollars in free flow cash" in order to perform such investment maneuvers. 16:04 Dan proposes that Destiny should invest in a rent controlled property in California. Dan goes on to describe how individuals in this area pay incredibly low rent, and how one could see an immense profit in performing such an investment(i.e. purchasing a property where the rent could feasibly increase from two-hundred dollars a month to five-thousand). Destiny once again questions why everybody doesn't make such financial maneuvers if they are such a "sure way" to invest. Devin reiterates that the financial barrier to such investments is quite steep, and there is plenty of "stupid money" out there. Devin goes on to provide Dan as an example of "smart money", pointing out that Dan has managed to keep a surplus of money and grow it in a sustainable way through smart investments. 25:15 Destiny once again questions why such a sure way to invest in money isn't utilized more. Devin provides an example, arguing one could simply invest in the S&P 500 every month, and see a reasonable profit, yet nobody does it. Destiny asserts this example is incomparable, arguing real estate is a more competitive environment, and once again reiterating his uncomfortability with the fact that not none many individuals with a sizable income perform such investments. Devin then argues that Destiny is overestimating the intelligence of individuals with high net-worths.

Dan and Destiny debate the Responsibility of Harm with Rem

Load video

YouTube

YouTube might collect personal data. Privacy Policy

ContinueDismiss

On May 28, 2019, Dan, Destiny, and Rem engage in a heated discussion over the responsibility of harm. The conversation kicks off following Destiny's introduction of Peter Singer's "well analogy":

"If you walk past a well, and there was a kid drowning, and you could step in and save them, but it would destroy your $20 pair of pants, would you do it? Everybody says yes, but what if you see the kid the next day, would you do it then? Eventually, at some point you're gonna stop saying yes, because you wouldn't wanna ruin a $20 pair of pants everyday. Or if you say yes you'd do it every single day, why aren't you donating some of that dollar amount to Africa every single day because you could effectively save the life of a kid." - Destiny

Throughout the conversation, Dan maintains that each individual draws a "line in the sand" with regards to what level of personal sacrifice they are comfortable making. Rem largely agrees with this point, but argues that one should look on a "case-by-case" basis to determine when a personal sacrifice aught to be made. The primary contention arises over where "the line" should be. Dan and Destiny argue that moral responsibility often lies with individuals/entity which cause another person's suffering to occur, while Rem contends that the responsibility should be equally shared by those who allow the suffering to occur and individuals who cause it.

Following this conversation, Rem and Dan engaged in several debates on Dan's own stream regarding this same topic.

Highlights

0:13 Rem asks Dan if he truly tried to evict an elderly women. Dan inform Rem that he is mistaken, and he simply chose to end his leasing agreement with the individual in question. 1:51 Rem posits a hypothetical to Dan: If he refused to renew the lease, and the elderly lady in question passed away as a result, would Dan feel responsible? Dan states that he would, but argues this is a failing on the government's part, not his own. 3:23 Destiny introduces the "well-analogy" from Peter Singer. 5:05 Dan argues that every single individual draws a "line in the sand" with regards to how good of an individual they want to be. Dan goes on to assert that there are sacrifices every single person could make in life to, ensure the betterment of another individual's life. While Rem agrees with Dan's argument that that trying to "100% optimize ethics" in one's life is unpragmatic, he counters that one should look on a "case-by-case" basis to determine when a personal sacrifice aught to be made. 7:15 Dan reemphasizes the cost-benefit analysis for personal sacrifice at the betterment of others. 7:34 Rem provides another hypothetical: "If you are in a booth, and you could give $50 to save someone, or it kills them if you don't give $50, would you put in $50?" Dan argues he would not put in $50, Rem scoffs at this. Destiny questions Rem's laughter, asserting that individuals make this same decision every day, arguing that one could potentially donate $50 to an organization every day that may potentially work in saving lives. Rem retorts that most individuals are assholes, to which Destiny responds: "if your ethics is a system that defines like 99% of the population as assholes, is this an effective means of analyzing ethical decisions?" 9:29 Destiny and Rem debate the moral obligation of "allowing" vs "doing". 13:06 Dan and Destiny question why Rem has not began working at a fast-food establishment in order to donate money to save people who may need the money. Destiny then argues that Rem is leaving a "trail of bodies in his wake" as he pursues a higher education degree. 15:42 Rem maintains that the difference between doing and allowing harm is nonexistent. 17:29 Rem argues that a scientist researching a cure for cancer may be somewhat exempt from his proposed moral standards. Destiny and Dan counter that any individual pursuing a liberal-arts degree is, by Rem's standard, commiting murder. 23:00 Dan and Rem get into a heated exchange. 24:09 Dan restates his overarching position. 25:38 Destiny rewords Dan's position for Rem.

Dan takes a trip to Hawaii with Destiny, MrMouton, and Melina

Load video

YouTube

YouTube might collect personal data. Privacy Policy

ContinueDismiss

On June 20, 2019, Dan, Destiny, MrMouton, and Melina, IRL-streamed portions of a trip to Hawaii.

Highlights from the stream include:

• 2:40 As the group walks to their hotel, Dan explains CBD to Destiny, describing it as some "hipster shit" that "doesn't get you high at all".
• 6:15 A family of ducks walks by.
• 7:05 The group enters a restaurant.
• 13:55 Destiny is mocked for spilling something on his shirt.
• 14:43 Dan expresses his frustration with Destiny consistently pointing the camera at him.

Dan discusses the US housing situation with Destiny

On May 29, 2019, Dan spoke with Destiny regarding the present housing situation in the US, Japan, and several other countries. The video begins with Destiny and Dan discussing the legality of Airbnb, while both agree the company is flagrantly breaking the law, Destiny is of the opinion that housing in the US is in an incredibly poor state regardless of such companies. Destiny points to several market failures making it seemingly impossible to allow for the construction of more housing, Dan agrees and argues this being a result of the "tyranny of the majority". Dan then explains Proposition 13 to Destiny, a state amendment which allows homeowners to "cap" their property tax at the time of purchase, resulting in individuals paying property tax on any piece of real estate well below its actual value. From there, the two discuss the tax-advantaged nature of real estate investment, and the "over-obsession" by Americans in wanting to purchase a home.

Dan debates Stop Sign etiquette with Destiny and Devin Nash

On June 28, 2019, Destiny, Dan, and Devin Nash engaged in a fairly heated debate regarding stop sign etiquette. The conversation was spurned on following Destiny's reaction to a twitch clip involving Mitch Jones and KBubbles seemingly breaking several rules involving stop signs at multiple intersections. Following much deliberation between Destiny and his chat, he asserted the following:

An image of the "faulty" intersection according to Destiny.

"Nobody gives a fuck about rolling stops or full stops unless you're fifteen and you're in driver's-ed. I'm talking about treating stop-signs appropriately as though who has the right-of-way, who's allowed to go first." - Destiny

This claim sparked several heated exchanges between Destiny(aided by microsoft paint) and DGGers regarding stop-sign etiquette. Destiny's primary contention being that despite Kbubbles being an overtly "shit driver", the intersection itself appears to be somewhat faulty by an "all-direction stop" standard. Dan eventually joins the call, seemingly ready to debate, and explains the most important factor in all direction stops is the order each driver arrives at the intersection. Dan goes on to argue that if two cars arrive at the same time, the driver "going left" at the intersection(pictured right) takes priority. While Destiny agrees with Dan regarding the "order of arrival" at an intersection taking priority, Destiny takes severe issue with Dan's latter assertion, arguing that the person "going straight" through the intersection in fact takes priority. As a result, Destiny and Dan proceed to debate the order of priority during various stop-sign intersection scenarios, coupled with the practicality of a "rolling" vs "full" stop. While Dan eventually concedes that the person "going straight" does take priority, the debate on rolling vs full stops remained quite contentious with Dan routinely calling Destiny a dangerous driver, and Destiny accusing Dan of being unpragmatic.

Destiny reaction to Devin and Dan proclaiming whoever arrives at a four-way intersection first takes priority.

Devin eventually joins the conversation, and backs-up most of Dan's arguments(he later admits his opinion is partially informed by bearing witness to Destiny's "insane" driving from the passenger seat). Following Devin's arrival, Destiny draws out yet another intersection scenario(depicted right), and asks Dan if he believes the drivers in this example should move in a clockwise fashion, or move parallel to one another. Dan and Devin both argue it would depend on whomever arrives at the intersection first, and could certainly see a scenario wherein the drivers move in a clockwise fashion. Destiny responds by screaming in frustration at the pair, and accuses Dan of acting in bad faith.

The trio then spends some time looking through various pieces of stop-sign intersection footage on YouTube. Despite an overwhelming amount of evidence showing instances of drivers both taking the "clockwise" and "parallel" priority approaches, neither party moves from their aforementioned positions, and the call eventually concludes with Dan declaring himself triumphant.

Highlights

0:30 Destiny reacts to a clip wherein a Twitch streamer blatantly drives past two stop signs. Destiny proceeds to get into an argument with several chatters regarding the necessity of full/rolling stops versus acknowledging right of way when at a stop sign. Destiny argues the first stop sign was a flagrant breaking of stop-sign etiquette on Kbubbles' part, while the second instance could potentially be viewed as a "rolling-stop". 2:34 Destiny reiterates that the twitch streamer was wrong to drive past the first stop-sign, as she did not have the right-of-way. 4:53 Destiny proclaims Kbubbles to be a shit driver. 5:07 Destiny creates an illustration in microsoft paint to describe how the intersection Kbubbles stopped at may confuse the average driver. He argues that the orientation of the intersection may make it difficult to discern "who goes left" if multiples lanes are occupied. Following Destiny's explanation, several chatters still question why Destiny thinks the intersection to be faulty. For the next several minutes, Destiny responds by berating the aforementioned chatters, creating even more illustrations in microsoft paint, and giving several heated explanations of proper stop sign etiquette until Dan eventually joins the call. 11:09 Following an explanation of the intersection by Destiny, Dan argues that the most important factor in all direction stops is the order each driver arrives at the intersection. Dan goes on to explain that if two cars arrive at the same time, the driver on the left takes priority. 13:08 Dan argues whoever is last at the stop sign is allowed to proceed through the intersection. 15:15 Following Dan arguing once more that the "person to your left" has the right of way, Destiny counters: "If two people pull up to a stop sign, and they're opposite one another, the person going straight has the right of way over the person going left." Dan argues you can never know who is going right or left, to which Destiny berates Dan for forgetting the existence of turn signals. 16:10 Dan argues the best way to "assert one's dominance" at an intersection is to come to a complete stop upon reaching the stop sign. Destiny then proceeds to shout at Dan for suggesting anything other than a rolling stop. The two then debate the pragmatism of a full stop versus a rolling stop. 17:24 Destiny provides yet another scenario to Dan: Two driver arrive at a stop sign at the same time, and are opposite one another. Dan maintains it would be a "battle of the wits", to which Destiny replies it would be in fact be determined by whoever is going straight. Dan once again maintains it would be impossible to determine what direction the drivers would want to turn, to which Destiny berates Dan once more for forgetting the existence of turn signals. 18:26 Dan eventually concedes that the person "going straight" does in fact take priority, but then asks Destiny who would take priority in a scenario where the driver going straight arrived two seconds prior to the individual taking a left. Destiny jokes that it would be dependent on whether each driver decided to take a rolling or full stop, which reignites the debate on "how to stop" at a stop sign. 19:33 Dan labels Destiny as "dangerous" and an "asshole" for his driving style. 21:49 Devin joins the call as Destiny attempts to STEER the conversation back towards the intersection debate. Destiny argues the drivers going straight have the right of way, and Dan maintains whoever arrives at the stop sign first would go. Destiny reiterates that all drivers arrived at the same time in this scenario, to which Dan argues Destiny's hypothetical is unrealistic. 23:59 Destiny attempts to draw out the four-way intersection once more, and asks Dan if he believes people would drive in a "clockwise-fashion" if every driver arrived at the same time. Dan responds it would be dependent on who arrived at the intersection first, Devin agrees, and Destiny begins screaming at the pair. 25:14 Destiny re-explains the scenario, to which Dan responds it would depend on who arrives at the sign first once more, and argues it could certainly be plausible that the drivers move through the intersection in a clockwise fashion. Destiny then accuses Dan of arguing in bad faith. 26:36 Destiny creates a poll in his chat to determine how they would act in the scenario. As the poll shows more chatters favoring Dan, Destiny becomes even more irate. 27:27 Devin maintains his experiences driving with Destiny somewhat inform his decision to side against him in this scenario. 27:59 Destiny admits that Dan may be correct legally, but argues nobody truly drives in the way he's advocating for. He then reiterates his argument:the cars opposite one another will drive, and then the next two will drive as well. 30:14 Destiny requests for someone in his chat to provide him with traffic camera footage at a four-way stop sign. The group then spends the next twenty minutes reacting to four way intersection footage. 35:09 Upon finding footage of an intersection where drivers fail to move parallel to one another and a crash occurs, Destiny shouts in triumph and begins to gloat at Dan and Devin. Dan counters, arguing that the car who was hit had the right of way, which sparks yet another heated debate. 37:47 Dan shrieks at Destiny. 40:34 Dan requests a note of everyone in chat who stated "destiny was right", so he may add them to his ignore list. 42:27 Destiny reiterates multi-line stop signs are "cancerous". 45:17 As Destiny is combing through youtube videos, Dan accuses Destiny of cherry-picking footage that agrees with his assertion. 46:10 Dan requests that Destiny "walk his fat ass down" and find a four-way intersection in Los Angeles. 49:38 Dan points out that 80% of Destiny's chatroom agrees with him, to which Destiny responds 80% of his chat are virgins and probably have never driven. 51:45 Dan proclaims himself the victor of the debate. 55:16 Dan leaves the call. 59:19 Destiny finally finds an acceptable four-way intersection video, but upon deeming the drivers to be "fucking crazy", he closes out of it.

Dan debates flat taxes with Destiny

Load video

YouTube

YouTube might collect personal data. Privacy Policy

ContinueDismiss

On February 7, 2020 Dan and Destiny held a brief debate on the subject of Flat Taxes. Dan argued that flat taxes, particularly those which target purchases rather than sales, could aid in preventing wealthy individuals from amassing massive amounts of untaxed wealth through asset appreciation. Destiny's counter argument was that flat taxes are inherently regressive and ineffective, suggesting it could disincentivize investments since taxes would be paid upfront, possibly leading to decreased market activity. Destiny goes on to point out that such a system could hurt the market's liquidity, as investors might be hesitant to engage in transactions knowing that each would trigger a tax event. The conversation concludes with Destiny and MrMouton laughing and "cringing" at Dan.

Dan discusses Renewable Energy and Physics with Destiny

On September 21, 2020 Dan and Destiny briefly debated the feasibility and economics of nuclear energy. The conversation begins with a discussion on energy sources, particularly nuclear and renewable energies. After being questioned on his stance regarding nuclear energy from a chatter, Destiny expresses ambivalence about the economic viability and safety of the energy alternative, citing improvements in newer reactors but also voicing concerns over catastrophic risks and insurance costs. Dan then brings up Solar and Wind as potential minimal risk energy alternatives. Destiny also voices concerns about these alternatives, pointing to the potential for solar panels to affect Earth's surface temperature and the subtle but significant local climatic effects of wind farms.

Load video

YouTube

YouTube might collect personal data. Privacy Policy

ContinueDismiss

The New Portal Debate - Physics Questions w/ Dan

After discussing energy alternatives, the two spend the remainder of the call debating Energy, Work, and Thermodynamics. The kickoff for this topic was based off a hypothetical posited by Dan:

"If you have a one-thousand watt computer in a box, is that gonna heat the box the exact same amount as a one-thousand watt space heater?"-Dan

Destiny, drawing on answers from DGG physicists, initially asserts the temperature would be different between the two boxes due to the fact that the computer might not convert all its energy into heat. However, after further questioning by Dan, Destiny searched online for more information and eventually found evidence suggesting that his initial claim might have been incorrect. Following this, Dan and Destiny debate several variations of potential-energy/kinetic-energy related hypotheticals before a donation posits yet another hypothetical to the two: If a ship sinks in a fixed body of water, does the water level rise or fall relative to when the ship was floating? Destiny argues it would depend on how much empty space is in the boat that was submerged before going under, while Dan argues it would also depend on the density of the boat.

Highlights

Nuclear Energy 1:25 A chatter asks Destiny to give his rationale for his aversion to nuclear energy. Destiny expresses his ambivalence, citing economic feasibility and insurance costs as significant hurdles. He references a mix of opinions and articles, which leave him undecided but leaning towards the necessity of exploring nuclear options further. 2:11 Dan discusses the safety improvements in newer generation nuclear reactors compared to older designs. He points out that newer reactors are reportedly safer due to advancements in technology, including better fuel types and more robust containment systems. These improvements purportedly minimize the risks of catastrophic events caused by natural disasters like floods or earthquakes. 3:20 Destiny argues that having multiple failsafes within a Nuclear Power plant may breed complacency. Environmental effects of renewable energy 3:45 Dan brings up solar energy as a potential alternative energy source, however he expressed concern for the potential environmental impact. Destiny mirrored this concern, and speculated on the potential for large-scale solar panel deployment to affect the Earth's surface temperature. 4:46 Destiny gets angry at DGG chat and begins painting an explanation of the albedo effect. 6:11 Dan brings up wind turbines, as a potential alternative with minimal downsides. Destiny takes issue with this alternative as well, arguing that the energy alternative poses significant concerns. Destiny argues wind turbines could affect local temperatures and weather patterns by altering wind currents and mixing atmospheric layers. Destiny goes on to reference a study indicating that wind farms could make it warmer at night and cooler during the day in nearby areas, which might have implications for agriculture and local ecosystems. Computer vs Space heater 9:03 Dan posits a hypothetical to Destiny: If one has a 1000 watt computer in a box, would the temperature in the box be the same as a 1000w space heater? Destiny argues the temperature would be different, asserting that while a space heater directly converts all its energy into heat, a computer uses energy for various processes, which may not all convert directly to thermal energy. 13:57 Destiny looks at a Quora response to Dan's hypothetical. Upon seeing that the answer stands in contradiction to his previous assertion, Destiny questions the validity of the graduate Physics students in his classroom who pushed him towards that position. 18:50 Dan posits another space heater hypothetical to Destiny. Would a one-thousand watt motor pumping the same amount of energy into two rooms, one room with a space heater and the other lifting an incredibly heavy rock. Both would use the same amount of power, would the room with the rock create "free-energy" as the rock is being lowered down? Destiny argues no free-energy would be created, and the two deliberate for some time several variations of this hypothetical. Ship sinking and water level 27:30 A donator provides a hypothetical involving a sinking ship and water level: If a ship sinks in a fixed body of water, does the water level rise or fall relative to when the ship was floating? Destiny initially states this is a trick question, as it would depend on how much empty space is in the boat that was submerged before going under. Destiny elaborates later: "If the total volume of the top of the boat exceeds the open air volume that's submerged underwater, then the water level would rise if the boat were to sink. But if the total volume of open area beneath the surface of the water in the boat exceeds the total volume that would be occupied by the mass on top of the boat, then the result would be different." 32:05 Dan counters by stating that the outcome of the hypothetical depends more on the boat's volume. He explains that the sinking of a boat affects water levels based on whether the boat's internal volume is filled with water instead of air. Dan details that while a floating boat displaces water equal to its weight, a sinking boat that fills with water displaces water based on its volume. He further articulates that if such a boat were to sink, the water level might actually drop slightly because the volume of water the boat displaces when completely submerged and filled with water is less than when it was floating.

Dan debates power supplies with MrMouton and Destiny

Load video

YouTube

YouTube might collect personal data. Privacy Policy

ContinueDismiss

Politicon 2018 - Post-debate Debate with Hasan Piker.

On October 25, 2020 Dan, Destiny, and MrMouton debated the usefulness of power supplies, particularly for gaming setups. Following a disturbing recollection from MrMouton describing how he forced himself to vomit after consuming a bagel that had sat out for two hours, Dan asks Destiny what his plans are for the day. Destiny responds he's going to be doing a sponsorship for an Uninterruptible Power Supply(UPS): The APC UPS 1500 VA for Gaming. Dan criticized the "gaming" label on the sponsorship as merely a price increase tactic, arguing that one could simply buy a "life-sized anime plushie," place a UPS inside it, and get the same result. Dan then linked a "business-level" UPS, which Destiny and MrMouton mocked for its "boring" appearance.

The conversation continues, and Dan questions what the hold up is on Lithium powered UPS's. Dan suggested thats that while more expensive, Lithium batteries could offer longer-lasting power compared to traditional batteries used in UPS systems. Destiny speculated that Lithium batteries may not be able to hold a large amount of charge for an extended period, and safety may be a concern. Dan then argues that one could utilize an 18650 battery to power the UBC as a cheaper alternative-slightly safer-alternative. MrMouton suggests that Dan should develop this product if he's so sure of it, to which Dan states he has "too many pots in the fire" and is currently working on redact.dev.

A chatter then informs Destiny that he is able to run a very power demanding setup for at least an hour on a $160 UPS. The three then discuss the loading times of their respective UPS's. Following this, another chatter inquires on the benefits of UPS's. Destiny responds that it's nice to be able to save one's work in the midst of a power-outage, Dan chimes in and adds that an abrupt power outage may also damage one's PC. Destiny takes issue with Dan's response and the two deliberate(heatedly) for some time the potentiality for a power-outage to damage one's PC. Following a similarly heated debate on the ability of a surge protector to protect one's PC setup, Destiny watches a clip of Dan misspeaking, and the call concludes.

Highlights

0:00 Destiny gives a PSA regarding COVID-19. 1:11 MrMouton discusses forcing himself to puke after eating an old bagel. 3:14 Destiny discusses his power supply sponsorship. 3:45 Dan mocks the gaming label on the sponsorship, links a "business-level" UPS and is mocked for linking a upc that "looks like shit". 7:08 The trio discuss Lithium batteries. Dan questions why they aren't utilized in UPS's, Destiny argues they may be too dangerous. 10:35 Dan explains how one could make a more affordable Lithium powered UBC. 11:07 Dan discusses redact.dev. 11:50 A chatter informs Destiny that a $160 UPS he was looking at is able to run a very power demanding pc for an hour. The trio then discuss UPS loading times. 14:20 Destiny and Dan discuss the benefits of a UPS. 16:50 Destiny and MrMouton mock Dan for having a "Taiwanese power supply". 18:30 the trio discuss the benefits of surge protectors. 20:16 Destiny watches a clip of Dan misspeaking.

Dan talks with Destiny(Responding to Criticism, The Boys, Crypto, DGG coin, Helping Biden) WIP

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xDhD4pNOY8o

Faceblindness

This list is incomplete, you can help by expanding it.

A list of random people that Dan has (usually) erroneously compared to others.

Faceblindness

Person of comparison	Doppelgänger(s)		Source	Chat poll
Corey Comperatore	Arnold Vosloo		[ CLIP ]	—

Notable Memes

• He misspoke
• Fur Palace
• Disarm immediately
• Dan vs. the iguanas

External Links

• Redact.dev
• Twitter
• Twitch