Also a little reported fact:
More than 50% of American blockchain developers are expected to die before the age 80. Clearly this field needs regulation.
based on what evidence?
Cryptos are mined, which means over time more and more are added to the available pool. How does this fact fit into a "deflation mode"?
Inflation has a basic component... "amount of x". It is a key principle of supply and demand. More supply = less value. Less supply = more value. Demand has the same model in the opposite direction. If there are only 1000 coins in the market a demand for only 1 of them means its value is low. If there is a demand for 2000 of them then the value is high. Now... if the market flood with 1 million... the value AND demand for 1 or 2000 is low & low.
Dissociated Press (DP) — FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Physicists identify new fundamental particle
May herald a new particle family and restructuring of the Standard Model
Geneva, Switzerland — December 3, 2018
Keywords: hypino, shinyon, blockchain
High energy particle physicists at the CERN (Conseil Européen pour la Recherche Nullité) facility have confirmed the existence of the long-conjectured hypino (hy-PEE-no). It is thought to be the first member of a new class of particles known as shinyons (SHY-nee-ons), distinct from bosons and fermions.
Unlike other subatomic particles, hypinos carry no charge, and have neither rest nor relativistic mass. Their only defining quantum property is spin. Hypinos are thought to be the fundamental unit of marketing hyperbole. To date, hypinos are the only known members of the proposed class of shinyons, which are of especial interest to tech investors and holders of the MBA degree. Dr. Martin Waugh, of the Institute for Advanced Squander, further posits that the hypino may be the carrier of the so-called “weak-minded force”, a mutual repulsion between fools and their money. It is theorized that, upon sufficiently accelerated spin, hypinos transform into super-excited hyperinos, detectable only by Chief Information Officers.
The discovery of the hypino is recounted by Drs. Robert Crawford and Robert Jensen as follows:
“It was a Friday afternoon, and we and our colleagues were returning from a long lunch. Maintenance on the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) was scheduled to start Saturday morning, and the apparatus would be unavailable for two months. We were in a ‘what the hell’ kind of mood, so we thought we'd take a fantasy shot, just for grins and giggles.
“We had a few leftover Higgs Bosons from 2012 on the shelf, so our lowly lab technician, Garth Dennis, breech-loaded them into the beast , set up a blockchain for the target, positioned the extremely sensitive Swindleometer at the intended point of collision, energized the superconducting electromagnets, and let it rip. Upon collision, the blockchain shattered into a shower of the elusive hypinos. Examination of the debris field revealed that the blockchain and all of our cash were gone! Apparently the hypinos were entangled with our funding.”
There may be natural sources of hypinos. The strongest natural emitters appear to be located in Redmond, Washington, and Armonk, New York.
As long as the pool grows, regardless of the rate of growth it creates inflation.
Look at Venezuela and it's hyper inflation. What is growing? The amount of money. Everyone is a millionaire down there but only in the way everyone with $10k are penny millionaires in the USA.
" Inflation isn't just the injection of more supply,"
Correct, but the injection of more supply always guarantee's inflation. Just because OTHER factors can also increase or even LOWER inflation does no mute the basic fact that adding more X to the pool increases inflation.
What you and the other commenters are missing is that you think just because another mechanism can create deflation that somehow can mean that this does not create inflation.
It's simple as explain int he supply and demand model.
If there are 1000 coins and 10 more are created then inflation of 1% just occurred. This inflation may not be immediately felt by everyone but it is there. Additionally, if the demand for a lot of things fall, and cause deflationary effects of 2% that means that deflation was 1%. But if those 10 coins were not added then deflation would have been 2%. This is oversimplified for educational purposes but makes it clear that just because overall inflation is based on multiple things... adding currency to a pool is always inflationary and will never not be, no matter how many other factors offset that inflation.
No, you are just trying to turn my argument into something else and you are getting upset that I am not biting.
I don't care what you think, I only care about the facts. You can sit around the prognosticate all you want, it means nothing in the context of my comment.
Adding more currency creates inflation no matter how many fallacies you use to say otherwise. You are the one blathering about theory. It is very simple math to understand that increasing supply of currency decreases its value and thereby creates inflation. It's not theory, its just a plain as day fact just like gravity. I can't help you if you cannot accept that.
When the torrent protocol was invented some people believed it could be the new internet. It's obvious by now that it's never going to happen. Torrents are just harder to use than HTTP. They maybe can save some money in bandwidth costs at the expense of being less reliable and harder to use. In practice they offer only one real advantage to HTTP - by the nature of being distributed they allow for the illegal distribution of copyrighted content.
The same thing with the blockchain. The distributed transaction is alway more expensive than the centralized one if compared apples to apples, no exceptions. BlCh offers just one real feature: by the nature of being distributed it allows for circumvention of regulations. And that's the only sustainable use case that was discovered in 10 years of its use. All other use cases are nothing but marketing, FOMO, or fraud.
As for ETH changing the world, here is a question I usually ask when meeting a crypto enthusiast: "Loan me a 10 ETH for two weeks. We will write a digital contract that I'll return 15. Except, when the contract comes to term I will have no money in my purse. What are you going to do?".
You only have six attempts to guess the right password: "If you enter the wrong passcode on an iOS device six times in a row, you'll be locked out and a message will say that your device is disabled."
Good luck with that. And then it will be locked to your iCloud account which is nigh impossible to remove by anyone other Apple service centers. iPhone protection against theft is probably the best in the industry.
Biometrics are better than nothing. In this case the attacker needs to scan your head and 3D print an actual-size model of it, so it's still better than a simple pattern unlock or nothing.
It's all about understanding and evaluating the threat. Facial recognition is a cheap, fast and moderately secure system that will keep your friends and siblings and random thieves out.
People who need real security on their phones use proper passwords.
I wonder about the facial recognition built in to the Microsoft surface devices.
This is close to Dell's headquarters, so this is a great chance for Apple to poach Dell's best employees. As a Dell employee myself (not in Texas), this can be good, as Dell may be pushed to increase pay and benefits.
We don't want the capital of Texas to turn into the bay area.
"We"? Speak for yourself and only for yourself. Your opinion is not widely shared in Austin. People have been moving to Austin in droves precisely because it is a good place to live, the city is (mostly) well run, and there are great jobs to be had there as a tech hub. If that's not your brand of vodka, fine but that's your problem.
You can keep your leftist attitudes and taxes where they are.
A) You being uncomfortable with someone who isn't a conservative is your problem, not anyone else's
B) Evidently you've never actually been to Austin if you think it's overrun by conservatives. Hell I consider it a bastion of sanity in Texas.
C) The notion that Texas is uniformly conservative is a ridiculous myth. At most it's around 58%/42% skewing conservative based on recent election results.
Oh, you mean the low taxes fueled by all that black stuff in the ground. Remove the conservatism and Texas would be doing even better.
What's to prevent Elon being sued for the amount he caused the stock to drop with his brain farts about "funding secured" that triggered the SEC going after him?
From the article:
In early July, Tripp filed a formal complaint with the Securities and Exchange Commission alleging that Tesla made "material omissions and misstatements" to investors relating to its flawed manufacturing practices and handling of scrap at the Gigafactory. Tripp was represented by Meissner Associates in the whistleblower matter earlier, but is now representing himself, attorney Stuart Meissner told CNBC. Meissner declined to comment further. Tripp also declined requests for comment.
Meissner was warned repeatedly that his client was A) out of control, and B) a pathological liar. He appears to have come to the same conclusion.
His client has also apparently fled to Hungary, so then there's that.
Oh, and the point of a large figure (which Tripp obviously can't pay) has nothing to do with Tripp himself. The fun part will be discovery. Because anyone who might have been involved in telling him what data to get or otherwise communicating with him during the theft (Linette Lopez, I'm looking at you) would be soliciting a crime. Like, for example:
Peavy v. WFAA-TV Inc.: The media outlet was approached by an informant claiming that he had information about a local news issue. The media outlet refused to use the information without further documentation, encouraged the informant to obtain that, and advised him on the process (which amounted to an illegal wiretapping). The media outlet was found to have advised and encouraged the illegal acquisition of materials, which it then took possession of and published. The court characterized this as “undisputed participation.” The informant and the media outlet were found to be liable for the illegal acquisition.
Business Insider was valued at nearly $400M in 2015. If Linette was found to have been involved in the acquisition in any way - or in general failed any of the Bartnicki v. Vopper criteria:
1) The media outlet played no role in the illegal interception
2) The media received the information lawfully
3) The issue was a matter of public concern
Then they're criminally liable for the theft. And BI can't classify it as the actions of a "rogue employee", because when challenged earlier on the theft, BI came to Lopez's defense.
Also to watch out for:
* People who took a short position in TSLA after learning of the story before it was published
* People who already held a short position in TSLA who were involved in the chain of command on any decisions to work with Tripp and to publish
As I mentioned... discovery on this case is going to be loads of fun :) Especially because Tripp has so far proven so wreckless with how he's handled himself in this case (including posting a bunch of self-incriminating tweets - about revenge against Elon, claiming he doesn't know how to program, trying to hide his adafruit, scribd and stackoverflow accounts and then making hilariously bad excuses as for why he did so, chatting with famous Tesla shorts, etc - and then deleting them, as if they'd just disappear from the face of the Earth).
Oh, and fun fact about Business Insider:
Business Insider's CEO and Editor-In-Chief Henry Blodget is a Yale history graduate who previously worked on Wall Street until he was banned for life from the securities industry because of his violations of securities laws and subsequent civil trial, which ended with a $2 million fine plus a $2 million disgorgement and the permanent ban in 2003.
Pull on the thread....
So what's to worry, it's colder than it was before. See? It's not getting warmer, it's getting colder!
(And yes, this is sarcasm. It's actually pretty sad that it is necessary to explicitly say so...)
"it's okay when my house is flooded, because 1 billion years ago it was an ocean"
It's sad to see Slashdot taken over by anti-science scumbags, posting as "Anonymous Cowards" and lying that Global Warming isn't happening even with evidence all over the place. And then there's the overwhelming support for GW in the scientific community. What do they know!
I have to admire the plucky band of billionaires, conspiracy nutbars and oil companies bravely fighting back against all that nasty, evil science. Of course, the downside is that their kids will line up to piss on their graves.
Where the Soviets showcase the glorious developments of Russian ingenuity in an international display of new appliances, where they demo a potato peeling machine. Demonstrating it to the politburo, the inventor picks up a potato from a bucket, throws it into the machine and a few seconds of working very quietly later, a peeled potato is thrown out of the machine. An apparatchik is overwhelmed with joy, takes the bucket and dumps it into the machine, which prompts a rustling and a small door opens where an old babushka looks out and cries "Please, not so many, I'm alone this week".
How is this a news story? It needs to be put through the hype distortion machine first:
In breaking news, the Russians have HACKED a robotics conference to plant FAKE robots. At a time when western nations faces the grave threat of EXTINCTION by the rise of machines, this sort of DECEPTION could only mean we have entered a dangerous new period of RUSSIAN artificial INTELLIGENCE operations.
There, fixed.
Humans pretending to be Russian robots?
What's next, Russian bots pretending to be human?
I can't help but it feels more like the world is turning into a Monty Python skit, complete with Terry Gilliam's art. I'm honestly waiting for a large, naked foot to stomp me.
I also have a few zero volume penny stocks back from gambling... Err day trading penny stocks.
I keep them around as a reminder of what results from hubris and greed.
Most of these cyryptocurrencies will end up the same: no bid.
Don't be a bag hodler.
No the problem is that the value of your CURRENT cryptocurrency is just going downhill and will be worth nothing in the long run. This will happen for all cryptocurrencies and the reason is that people just create new and new cryptocurrency.
The only people that can cash in are the people that originally created the cryptocurrency and they cash in before it becomes worthless. So everyone is trying to create their own cryptocurrency to cash in. Rinse repeat. An endless cycle that will never stop and makes common cryptocurrency useless.
The only way that a cryptocurrency can work, is if it is backed up by a government state so that you are quaranted to have an actual value for the currency based on the trust for the government. We have a name for this it's just called "Currency".
Lottery usually has (a) certain guaranteed odds of winning, crypto has no guarantees. (b) Lotteries are usually licensed with a limited number of licenses at any time. There is literally no limit on the number of possible cryptocurrencies.
The value of major cryptos is unlikely to go to hard zero though. There is utility in BTC and friends which is circumvention of regulations. Someone will always want to launder money and sell drugs.
But it's very unlikely for a legit application of blockchain to exist at all because a distributed transaction with consensus is fundamentally more expensive than a centralized one with a trusted third party. All, and I mean absolutely all with no exceptions, all current companies/products in "legit" space are doing things with blockchain purely for marketing/FMO reasons. All of these apps can be done more efficiently without the blockchain.
There. Done.
When cryptocurrency was opened to the stock market it became doomed to failure. Before that, the "value" was rising because it was useful. Its only intrinsic value is that value it presents for exchanging goods and services. For people who actually "use" cryptocurrencies, it's value needs to be kept stable, or everyone would refuse to use it, and thus it would have zero value
Enter the stock market, and now the market traders all want to make money by trading the currency itself, a thing with no intrinsic value except for what it can do. If the people who use it all cashed out then the stock market price would be $0. The way the stock market "makes money" (actually move money from one account to another) is to second guess what the other traders will think its value will be tomorrow. Buy low, sell high of course. The stock market will not "make money" unless the price/value is volatile. If the price was consistent over time the traders would have zero interest in it, because they can't trick the other traders into valuing it more tomorrow than today, because the price would be stable. In order to make money in trading cryptocurrency, it is in the traders best interest to force the price to become volatile and then to correctly guess tomorrows value. They will try every trick in the book to force wide swings in the "market value", even emplying illegal tricks if they can find a way to make that happen.
See the problem yet? The traders WANT the price to vary, and the users of it DEMAND the price to be stable! The traders will do everything in their power to make the value fluctuate, while the people trying to use it will be moving their share to some other currancy which is more stable, thus forcing the value to further decline. This is a feedback loop biased towards zero value.
When a stock for a traded company does poorly you can sell off its assets and regain some of that original value. When a cryptocurrency tanks it becomes worthless, and nothing can be sold off or recouped from the electronic dust that remains. Its value then is merely nostalga. It has no value beyond what other people think it will be worth tomorrow. If everyone thinks it has zero value, because nobody can trust that value being stable tomorrow, then the cryptocurrency is 100%, without any doubt, completely worthless. At that point you can thank the stock market for making your cryptocurrency wallet worthless.
If you are going to invest in any cryptocurrency my advise is to pick one that states up front that it will never be openly traded on the stock market. That one may have a chance at actually being stable, and you can count on its only intrinsic value, trust in its worth tomorrow being the same as today.
Don't run ships on Windows, for obvious reasons.
Also, not carrying ANY paper charts as a backup? Dumb, dumb, DUMB.
Once it was the wood-eating teredo worm that sank ships, now it's data-eating worms!
Ships are not air-gapped, they are water-gapped!
And everyone knows that salt water conducts.
The rich people will just find ways to avoid paying the tax, or move elsewhere.
Taxes mostly hurt and poor and middle classes.
Isn't pornhub mainly located in Canada? Montreal, specifically. But in any case, that also goes to show that moving out of the USA would probably be a trivial matter.
You can't negotiate with mega companies on your own unless you're one of the top 1% of math geniuses.
I don't know why that would help you negotiate. Negotiation involves understanding your value and having the confidence to ask for it. Confidence is a personal trait unconnected to math ability. And knowing your value is hard for almost everyone.
May I point out that tou are _allowed_ to do things for them? You are also _allowed_ to hire them as employees and provide other benefits.
The point is that if you choose to do certain things for them then the law will decide that you have chosen to hire them as employees. If you don't want to hire them as employees then you must not do certain things for them.
because they can always dangle the threat of turning you into a temp when you get too uppity. Crap like this is why workers Unionized and why companies spend a small fortune demonizing Unions.
You need to be choosier on who you work for. I used to work in a union environment and it was a nightmare. Office politics out the wazoo. I still have friends there and all they talk about is how a third of their coworkers are incompetent and un-fireable, and how it's generally impossible to get anything fix or improved. The people who are lousy at their job get promoted so competent people can fill in the positions that actually do work.
I now work for a medium-sized IT company and, basically, have complete control over how I do my job. Everyone helps each other. If I need any additional resources I get them. I can work from home when I want to, unless there are meetings, which are rare. There are zero office politics, nobody is gunning for anyone else's job. Best of all, my boss, his boss, and HIS boss are all ex-programmers and IT guys. I can walk into any of their offices with any kind of problem and they'll try to get it fixed.
I'm sure such an environment could exist under unions, but I think unionization stems from a bad work environment to begin with. It certainly doesn't seem to help.
* Used to be hip, no dull corporate - check
* A bubble of cult-like culture - check
* Lack of innovation since their one-trick pony - check
* Abusive monopoly power, including antitrust lawsuits - check
* Too much money for their own good - check
* Too big to fade away - check
To be fair, those would also fit many other large corporations. A noticeable difference between Google and Microsoft is that Google has miraculously managed to hold on to their badge of cool-place-to-work, despite all the bad press over the last years. Microsoft never managed to rid themselves of the stigma of shit software and computer crashes and viruses.
I worked somewhere like that ... for three months.
They had a gym/workout center ... in the basement of the building where most of us IT contractors were. I was shown it on my welcome tour, but told that I couldn't use it.
A department was really happy with what I did for them (with their website) so they invited me to a department picnic ... then their secretary called me back sheepishly to un-invite me; said she that wasn't allowed to invite me after all because I was a contractor.
I left in three months because the commute sucked, but the silly and frankly childish stuff like that didn't hurt when making the decision to leave.
A fundamental underpinning of extradition proceedings is the âoedouble criminalityâ principle. If Canada is to extradite, there must be an offence charged in the U.S. that corresponds to one in Canadian law. While Canada has followed the UN with sanctions on Iran as regards nuclear and missile technology, I'm not aware that UN sanctions ever covered the trade in telecoms. Since in Canada sanctions like this emanate from the UN, I doubt there is a matching crime here. There is also the Foreign Extraterritorial Measures Act that spells out that American sanctions cannot operate in Canada -- otherwise 10,000s of Canadians who have visited Cuba could be rounded up.
Which charges would those be? The charge of a Chinese citizen in China not complying with a unilateral declaration of "sanctions" by the USA which isn't even recognized by the UN? That's not a charge, it's a farce and a pretext. US law stops 12 miles offshore. Chinese citizens can do whatever they want under Chinese law while in China.
Your UID tells me you're probably senile, so I'll try to be gentle:
1. The UN doesn't need to recognize US law. As a general rule, the UN does not get involved with the laws of ANY country, though they will occasionally criticise ones which infringe on basic human rights.
2. You have no clue if her crime was commited while she was in China; you're just assuming it. This may be a revelation to you, but Chinese people do actually leave China once in a while. They even travel to the USA now and then.
3. Even if she had never left China, that doesn't mean she couldn't have broken a US law. Canada exports a lot of Canola to China. If I were to contaminate one of those shipments with ricin, I would very much be breaking Chinese law. If I were to then travel to (or through) a country which has an extradition treaty with China, the Chinese would be fully within their rights to demand that I be extradited on the charge of murder.
I can't wait for Saudis to start grabbing American tourists for extradition from Dubai for consuming alcohol, fornication and blasphemy while in the US.
The Saudis do not have laws against US citizens consuming alcohol while in the US. If they did then yes, they absolutely could do that; and the US would advize it's citizens not to travel to Saudi Arabia.
Apple is a massive failure when it comes to designing their own chips.
The are eight generations into their A4 to A12 ARM SoC. It is widely viewed as a big success. By controlling their own design, they can put all customizations on-die thereby cutting component count and reducing PCB size. They can also leave off everything they don't need, thus cutting power consumption.
How come Apple goes after the OSX86 community who wants to run Apple's OSX, but not on Apple hardware?
Apple puts in light roadblocks, but nothing serious to anyone that wants to make a Hackintosh. How do they "go after" such people?
For instance, if Apple really wanted to go after Hackitosh users, wouldn't they disallow Mac App Store use (it would be trivial for them to detect - they do not even try)? Yet the Mac App Store works fine on a Hackintosh.
Why would the POTS modem, that being play old telephone service and modulator demodulator, remain what they are. Seriously one of these in pretty much every house world wide. What else can a modem be, well, router, switch and firewall just for a start. Now typical is file server, coming up web server and even email server and far smarter social media server. The scope for that core family device, taking up similar core roles like the smart TV, will expand and take up a much larger role in the family digital landscape. Apple is making a very smart move and probably started a while ago and is not just making an early announcement, I would guess they are much further along then they are indicated.
In all reality, the broadband modem is probably in need of a name change, to reflect its expanding role.
Try getting a job when no one can follow up with a phone call.
Remember, every government program is an opportunity for people to skim, grant contracts to friends and family or for kickbacks in one form or another. Maybe you have a family member who needs a job, why not hire them to administer some new program and of course pay for the job it of the same pool of taxes collected for that program.
I assume the tax would apply to those services as well. Generally legislation isn't specific as to which service you use.
How's that supposed to work? The two aren't anything alike.
They operate over different networks (cellular vs. cellular, WiFi, and wired). They operate on cellular via different channels (dedicated vs. general purpose). They differ in security (not encrypted vs. end-to-end encrypted). They require different hardware (SIM vs. any Internet connection). They operate on different classes of devices (phones and SIM-equipped laptops/tablets vs. PCs, phones, tablets, and MP3 players). The natively support differing numbers of devices per user (one per user vs. many per user). They natively support different content (texts alone vs. texts + effects, audio/video, typing notifications, tap backs, read receipts, stickers, money, hand drawings, etc.).
And that's all before we even get to the most obvious problem: one costs the end user a monthly fee just to use it, the other doesn't cost anything. Collecting a tax on $0 is a fool's errand.
I'd shudder to think how legislators would define the law in such a way that it could apply to those services in any sort of reasonable way. Aside from how they are visually presented to end users, there's really no similarity at all between iMessages/WhatsApp and standard SMS texting. If anything, the former bears more resemblance to instant messaging than it does to SMS texting. How are legislators supposed to draw a line that puts iMessage/WhatsApp on the same side as SMS without also including IRC, Slack, Facebook Messenger, Google app of the month, e-mail, or really just about any other form of asynchronous communication, free or otherwise?
A user may think that the only difference is that one is a green bubble and the other is blue, but the actual differences are vast.
Taxes are cornerstones of modern society, particularly ones that are used to fund things for the disadvantaged.
Sorry you hate people, be sure to bring that up with your god when you're at the gates, he'll totally understand.
I'm sure you've heard that all taxes are regressive, and bureaucracy propagates bureaucracy. If a government can demonstrate fiscal austerity, responsible spending, and minimal waste on grossly negligent pork products and needs to increase taxation to raise revenue...alright.
You assume that governments automatically know what is best. They don't. You accept that if the government says it needs more money, the first response should be for them to steal more of everyone's money instead of auditing their spending for waste. Have you ever SEEN a CBO report? On how grossly wasteful and financially irresponsible virtually every aspect of our government is?
It isn't people-hating to question bureaucracy, it is civil duty - and while civic responsibility is a pipe-dream in America now, the only people hating is YOU. You hate people so much that you think the government should take their money unquestioned.
I didn't know having a cell phone was a basic human need that government should be getting involved with.
Communications is a basic need to function in modern society, and governments have been involved in that since Henry VIII.
Governments subsidised where needed postal, and later phone services, to cover their countries.
Now in the 21st century, cellular service has become much cheaper than fixed lines to provide, so it makes sense to stop mandating cheap rural fixed-line services, and replace them with cellular. Also, telcos are not allowed to charge more in small towns than in the city. None of this cross subsidy is new.
But this California proposal makes no sense. Why create another micro-tax? Do you have a separate tax for each spending program? Thats ridiculous.
In Australia we pay A$10 (us$7)/month for unlimited calls and 1-2 GB of data. UK is similar. Even homeless people have cellphones. What does a basic service cost in the US?
Those who backed Oculus got way more than what they initially paid for.
Do you believe Oculus kickstarter campaign would have worked had they mentioned up front intent to sell the company to Facebook?
Not only did they get the RC2 version of the headset, which is what was promised, but they also got the final version. So backers got a really good deal.
The final version establishes a persistent connection to Facebook 24x7x365 and sports a predatory privacy policy asserting Facebook has the right to rummage through your system for ANY reason. The reality is they got screwed.
And in another year..