alec_kendall

I had a thought today that entanglement between particles could be the result of strings wrapping around two quantum particles, and that pulling on the string would result in a motion on one quantum particle that is inversely enacted on the other.

The knot around each quantum particle would have to be an inverse of the other knot for this to work. In theory, this idea would also make the entanglement of N-particles possible. Although, it wouldn’t be obvious to determine since for every even number of entangled quantum particles it would look like log2(N) pairs of entangled quantum particles and with every odd number of entangled particles each odd set would look like an even set of entangled quantum particles with an additional particle reflecting some seemingly uncorrelated state.

I do not have a deep understanding of quantum mechanics but wanted to share because my ideas like this often die with the last thought. Although, I am doing an independent study on quantum computing this semester and have found it to be very stimulating.

I’d like to see those two teams eat lunch together

I wonder where within management this decision was made. I can’t help but wonder if decisions like this are made without considering the impact it will have, given their current circumstances.

Let’s say no context, which one would you recommend reading first?

I would recommend inserting the link in the url section for posts. It’s pretty inconvenient to copy that link on mobile and then paste it into a browser.

Just out of curiosity, what is the library you’re using?

Have you heard of upwork? Create a profile on it... and if I were you, I’d focus on marketing yourself for cloud services. Hourly rates range but the experienced contractors charge around $150 and there seems to be a lot of companies hiring off of it (some of the top guys have a couple thousand hours with over $500k earned).

You don’t need VC funds to do this. You need willpower and users to pay their own server and database costs.

I’ve actually been creating a monetization strategy for my online website that lets users purchase map skins in the game.

The viability of using Google maps really comes down to the application. An application with a lot of users that rely on the usage of street view can become very expensive.

Nice quote: “Don't lose out on the potential of tomorrow by thinking too big today.”

This seems appropriate... https://microservices.io/

I moved back home after my university moved my classes to online (mid-march). I’m now paying rent on an apartment I don’t need and have a lease for next school year that I might not use. Even if in-person classes start again, I’ll have to worry about being screwed again next spring. The only other option I could think of was subleasing but unfortunately I signed my lease in January.

I can’t access the material after selecting the “opt-in” button. I am instead routed to a blank white screen.

This is a useful idea. I’m a junior studying CS and I can’t seem to find anyone in my cs department to collaborate on projects with.

I see what you mean. That made me wonder what type of approach they would take for something that can vary so much and here’s what I found:

“EARN IT works by revoking a type of liability called Section 230 that makes it possible for providers to operate on the Internet, by preventing the provider for being held responsible for what their customers do on a platform like Facebook. The new bill would make it financially impossible for providers like WhatsApp and Apple to operate services unless they conduct “best practices” for scanning their systems for CSAM.

Since there are no “best practices” in existence, and the techniques for doing this while preserving privacy are completely unknown, the bill creates a government-appointed committee that will tell technology providers what technology they have to use. The specific nature of the committee is byzantine and described within the bill itself. Needless to say, the makeup of the committee, which can include as few as zero data security experts, ensures that end-to-end encryption will almost certainly not be considered a best practice.”

It seems that it would be in the best financial interests of large tech companies to try and revoke the bill if it’s passed. This is why I believe it will quickly be brought to the Supreme Court.

[0] https://blog.cryptographyengineering.com/2020/03/06/earn-it-...

What's your point?

I also think that partners are well aware of the possibility of Twitch getting rid of them at any time with no recourse; this is why they heavily advertise their social media, Discord, and YouTube channels.

I believe this is just good self-marketing, not paranoia. If you're a content creator in today's age, you're going to be trying to get traction on every major platform. It's like in SEO, make sure all your site pages are linked to each other, aka "Make sure people can access all relevant content". It's a way to increase retention and traction, not a fail-safe for being banned.

At a high level, what the bill proposes is a system where companies have to earn Section 230 protection by following a set of designed-by-committee “best practices” that are extraordinarily unlikely to allow end-to-end encryption.

As diligently stated by Signal, EARN IT makes end-to-end encryption difficult, but not impossible. All relevant companies would like to prevent having to transition their current architecture over to a design that fits the specification laid out by EARN IT. This is quite understandable as this would bring with it a heavy cost, but if push comes to shove, that’s what they’re going to have to do. I expect that we’ll be hearing a lot more about this issue over the coming months. If this bill is passed, it will quickly be challenged in the Supreme Court.

I think that a big reason for placing the trade tariffs on China came from fear that if China was allowed to experience economic growth any further, they would be able to dictate the economic prosperity of the United States. As of now, our economies are greatly intertwined (more so two years ago) but less so as we progress into the future with the tariffs in place. Ending the trade relations strategy with China that was established and nurtured over the past decades effectively stops China short of growing their economy to the same size of the United States. This ensures the United States remains the largest economy in the world [0] and in turn lets the United States retain its control over the global market. With this in mind, I find it hard to believe that the United States is making the trade tariff decisions with small or big businesses in mind, and is instead focusing on its future positioning within the global market. This might look like isolationism from the outside but in act, it's the United States pulling out of the market it was most heavily reliant on, it an attempt to slow down it's economic growth.

[0]https://www.investopedia.com/insights/worlds-top-economies/

“This is the perfect time to top it up: prices are low and we’re engaged militarily in the Middle East. For once, Russia’s loss is our gain,” said Scott Nations, chief investment officer of NationsShares.” [0]

How would Russia’s loss, “For once”, be our gain? Considering the rival interests of Russia and the United States, it would seem that Russia’s loss is usually our gain. What am I missing here?

Unfortunately, I don’t have the finances to do that or the available time. An investor contacted my University and is interested in acquiring my idea from me. I built out my MVP to serve a hyper-niche market and I’d like to familiarize myself with as much information as possible pertaining to other cities so I can form an understanding of the potential scalability of my idea. This meeting is in a week so I’m pressed for time and don’t have the financial resources to go city-hopping.