HN user
Doesn't it leave you shaky? I had similar results but the comedown and the tolerance were deal-breakers. I am completely absent minded but when I take those stimulants it allows me to focus which, I feel, finally puts me on a level playing field with everyone else. It sucks that the drugs have side-effects.
I would need a spource. What's next dude? The Gates foundation is all a PR stunt?
You are confusing yourself. I never spoke about who the most qualified person was for any task whatsoever. That has nothing to do with anything because I don't really think it's in contention who knows more about cave diving. I simply said that rescuing small weak boys who have zero diving experience from miles of submerged cave is basically something that has happened very seldomly. And I am correct.
I said that in relation to my claim that musk wasn't passing up tried and true methods because there were none because this never happens. If you actually have a substantive remark on any of that please let me know.
How would it go down if you told people to shove submarines up their asses?
Actually this rescue was unprecedented from what I've read.
How is any of that relevant when the task has never been done before and there is a deadline? They iterated as much as they could given the deadline, past which the kids would die anyway? Fuzzy thinks ng is abound in this topic.
This is not even indirectly a refutation of what I said. It has nothing to do with what I said. See my comment below.
The product of a group of people is a function of the characteristics of the people. This is just a simple fact.
Some people confuse themselves by pointing to education as a contradiction to this. They say that the presence of education changes the product of society, so it's not just the inherant intelligence of people that matters. This is incorrect because as I stated, it is the characteristics of people that matter and education has the effect of improving characteristics. It is the end result of both nature and nurture that then determines how well a society fares. People who have good "nature" are required though, because they end up doing well regardless of education level whereas naturally dumb people need to be force fed an education which leads to a fragile system where any lapse in educational infrastructure leads to prolonged slump in society overall.
There are complicating factors that make my initial observation difficult to find. Power and influence over the product of society is not evenly distributed over the population. This just means you need to take an integral over the influence levels -- if all of the power is in the hands of very intelligent people then everything will be ok even if there are mobs of stupid people. There are many examples of this.
...
Look at gun rights. If we abstract away the gun we can see that it is really responsibility that is being talked about. Is the population up to the task of owning guns without killing other people? This is not very different from the responsibility to own a car or powerful cleaning chemicals or knives or a million other things, or even the vote. Guns happen to be perhaps one of the most damaging rights in the short term. But I no longer ask whether or not people are ready for guns because if they are not ready for guns they are not ready for the vote or the car or raising children. The result I have come to is that everyone in society needs to be up to the task of having responsibility because if they aren't, the country will collapse. Taking away the guns will stop deaths but it won't solve the root of them problem and it won't stop the slow death of the country.
I think that is probably the biggest theme of my idea. Slow, subtle changes that are difficult to attribute to anything are actually influenced by a very simple thing. Lack of good characteristics will result in a slow and nebulous death manifesting itself as failures of institutions and other things. Injecting good characteristics via education, culture or immigration results in fantastic progress in prosperity and quality of life -- all looking like good luck or a magical combination of law and infrastructure.
Edit
And I have to add that there are countless examples everywhere you look. News for example: people blame news companies for publishing misleading, fake, distasteful, etc stories but really it's the people consuming the news who are at fault. If nobody bought or watched that kind and of news then it wouldn't be published. And there are endless examples like that. Most things that are a national embarrassment like that are a result of the people in general supporting it or being apathetic to it.
There are many small countries that have experienced similar abundance and not done well. Size has absolutely nothing to do with it at all.
The success of Norway lies with the intelligence of of it's population. People attribute it to this or that, some institution or policy. But in reality policies and institutions are concievee of, built, and maintained by the sentiment of the people. They are smart people and they will always be well off considering their circumstances as long as that is true. Furthermore, the intelligence and well-being of the population of every country is the sole source of their outcomes. Endless ruminations on other, higher level things are a complete waste of time.
I used to post rants about how I wanted a laptop that only focused about battery life, crispy graphics and Linux friendliness. Now I find myself wishing I could buy a laptop without CPU vulnerabilities. The hardware market is definitely at it's lowest point ever right now.
This article flat out does not belong on hackernews. It blatently violates not only the guidelines but the culture and values of this place.
I have noticed that this kind of content (inappropriate, not geneder related) is appearing with increasing frequency. I have said it before, this website turns up when you Google "Reddit alternatives." Corrective action is needed if this website is to remain a refuge for intellectuals.
You are a fool. I am pro musk in this case. The rules of the website decide what is appropriate to post and this does not meet the criteria by any stretch of the imagination. It is a misleading article that touches on an unsubstantive topic that is known to be controversial. It serves no other purpose than to stoke argument.
The endless debate about this man undertaking various projects that will improve society if they pan out is absolutely vapid. This doesn't belong here.
People literally have stepped over a homeless person to get a closer look at the shop window tv covering this story. It represents the worst of humanity -- TV news swarming the cave site because it's going to get them lots of money. People pretending to care about the welfare of others when it's really a morbid reality television show to them -- entertainment.
Why is this here?
MBS is very smart and he has shown an appreciation for precedant in his nudging forward of social reform. I guarantee that he plans to cement his name in history by implementing another very large reform -- the transition of his countries economy from soley oil to no oil at all (in time). His goal is to create a kind of scandanavia of the middle East (economically, not culturally). I know this because I know that he knows that oil is as good as dead -- the transition to renewable energy is so far underway as to be undeniable. The interests of all the biggest economies except Russia align firmly with this transition. There is simply no future in oil and he knows it. The only move that would be characteristic of MBS and the country as a whole would be to rise to the challenge of this transition while maintaining the prosperity and prestige that they currently enjoy. And all of the above leaves little doubt about what they will try to do.
I should clarify. He will try to make SA a source of innovation, investment and so on like the United States, Germany, Sweden, Norway, estonia, and other such countries -- robust, diverse economies that are driven primarily by the high levels of education and training observed by their populations.
Overall I see this as a milestone in SA history. They are anticipating the death of the oil market. Many people think it's unwisw to play games with what is essentially their entire economy. But I guarantee if you knew what SB has planned, you would find it hard to see any other path forward
A lot of people seem to be unaware of switching files within vim instead of exiting and reinvoking.
I wish that you could buy a simple computer where all processing is integrated. The cores form a pyramid with a few really fast ones on top and tons and tons of slow ones below. All is exposed, with no speculation, in a very low level raw API. All abstractions like speculation etc are layers on top ala vulkan
That was intentional when I rounded off 6 cents.
This is not a substantive comment to make but calculating a tip is very easy. 15 percent of course is that standard amount. That is 10 percent plus 5 percent. Finding ten percent is as easy as moving the decimal over one place. If the bill is 15.69 ten percent of that is one dollar and 56 cents. Call it 1.50. we know that five percent is half of ten, so just divide that number in half and add it. So half of 1.50 is .75 and 1.50 plus .75 is 2.25. it's very easy.
This just strikes me as wrong. His chain of logic does not lead to distributed ledgers. Mainframes, PC's, iPhone, distributed ledgers? Before I dive in I must say that the new trend for people to use blockchain as a noun describing the underlying system of Bitcoin and other coins is highly annoying and cringey. None the less, blockchain is not a peice of technology. It's a contract backed up by probablity and the nature of the internet. The contract is a big lumbering thing that has a life of it's own -- for each implementation of this "tech" you are stuck with that beast which, if you are even able to get enough people to feed it, will fluctuate wildly in many capacities before eventually dying. It's not like a new mems accelerometer where once it's out you can now just pump out thousands of units. The nature of Bitcoin (i refuse to use the blockchain noun) lends itself much more to being a global complement to centrally managed monetary systems (or stand on it's own as the world's currency, but I don't think that would be optimal).
What is the goal of essentially reducing the amount of money in the economy?
What does that mean "reducing budget sheet?" Also, what is meant by long and short term interest? I thought the fed only set one universal interest target.
But in the article it says that Starbucks growth in China has fallen significantly behind market growth
I pressed logout by accident and I didn't know the password
Don't mention being down voted. It's against the rules and not very appealing. But I do agree with your sentiment
Starbucks is the defacto mascot of money wasting. People always talk about abstaining from starbucks when they talk about saving money. The frappuccino is often the specific product that is mentioned. How is it any surprise that it's popularity has waned? Star bucks stores feel more like McDonald's stores than anything else, there is almost no atmosphere to speak of which I would guess is rather important to the coffee snobs who buy fraps. What kind of world do we live in when McDonald's is expensive (everything besides the simple cheeseburger is a total insult to value) and when Starbucks is McDonald's?