HN user
People who aren't self obsessed are becoming rare. It's an interesting development. I guess it must be hard to find a friend who listens and give feedback instead of talking about themselves.
That is so bizarre for me to read this: "83% said they'd spent zero time just thinking" I struggle to turn down my inner dialogue, because I enjoy being in my head juggling with ideas, and I thought I was the weird one for doing it. What is hiding in those people's head that they are scared of being alone in it ?
I think this is confusing efficiency with overfitting. A lot of the problems described in the article arise due to overfitting models to the historical data. We overfited supply chain management because covid doesn't happen often, we overfited credit modeling because chain reaction of default doesn't happen often... We actually weren't efficient enough, we ignored tail events.
That doesn't solve the big part of the problem which is the co-ownership of competing companies. A blackrock manager voting for you or you voting doesn't change anything. Through the fund, you co-own multiple competing companies, therefore you won't vote for policies that would increase competition between those companies.
Why not establish a trading firm in an offshore country with no capital gain tax ? The bookkeeping of crypto txs is hell
I have been working on such a system and it is NOT a huge loss of your time. I've learned so much things in the past year, in market microstructure, in networking (infrastructure, protocols), cloud computing, cloud management (docker swarm, kubernetes), linux kernel bypass, distributed systems, data base, and I've read hundreds of papers on neural networks, gaussian processes, etc... If you are wondering if you should get into this, it is one of the best learning experience you will ever have.
The only times I click on ads is to see what competing businesses are doing / offering. I am pretty sure they would actually save money by stopping showing me ads.
Is it a project that hasn't been released yet ? Or by "clearing layer that can be settled with crypto" you simply mean route ILP payments between two currencies with crypto in the middle ?
I am glad to read this, because it really sounds weird to me that so much people blame AI for not being able to do causal reasoning, while us human don't even do in my sense "strict" causal reasoning. I feel like we just learned a small subset of causal rules just like AI algorithms, by having experienced a lot of events that followed those rules.
The article seems to indicate that those gains are all paper money due to the huge inflation in the stock market. On paper they look richer, but they can't do much with their "money" anyway. I think a more rational measure of inequality is through the possession of "important" assets like real estate, lands, power (political influence, ...). Of course the real problem comes when the lower and middle class sells their real wealth for stocks at the top, and the 1 percenters sell them their paper gains for "important" assets.
It is now pretty clear that those financial institution joined Libra only because they saw it as a threatening competitor in the space. Now that they think that the project is unlikely to be implemented due to strong opposition from govt, they are leaving. I believe they are doing a big mistake, and that Libra will still be successful.
MakerDAO is not decentralised, simply because the ETH/USD price feed isn't decentralised. If the servers providing the feed get hacked, say goodbye to your ETH collateral.
When I was a kid, I learned so much about programming by doing those kinds of "illegal" activities. When you are young you are reckless, adventurous, you want to cheat the system. My first introduction to programming was through a bot for a MMORPG too, which was used to harvest resources. I then started to build bot for mini games where you could win prizes if you had the highest score, and resold those prizes on second hand markets. I also learned about "hacking" because it felt cool and underground. I believe kids should be protected from the heavy legal repercussion you could have by doing those things, as long as the intent was curiosity and a lack of awareness of laws. Every thing is getting more protected/regulated and it has become so easy to ruin your parents life if you are a little bit too curious. I don't really know what the solution is, but I hope my kids will be able to experience like I did !
It's crazy how sociologist and psychologist are trying to find a reason why we do something we were originally built to do.
Given that a 1 square meter solar panel produces 200W, and the energy efficiency of an Ebit E10 ASIC miner is 11100 * 10^6 hash per J, you can compute 200 * 11100 * 10^6 hash per second so no, in an apocalyptic event, the hash rate will hardly be 0.
It strikes me how uneducated people on hacker news still are about bitcoin. In 10 years, people didn't even take the time to inform themselves before posting wrong facts.
Bitcoin is completely dependent on the availability of lots of power Wrong. Bitcoin can work even if only one nuclear power station remains. The difficulty will adjust to the new hash rate, and as long as no single actor can control more of the nuclear power station than the sum of the miners, double spending isn't a problem.
As for network connectivity in apocalyptic scenario, miners would only have to find a way to propagate data to the satellite, and users would only have to find a way to propagate data to miners. That is a lot less than what the current financial system would demand to function.
But at the world level, it's just some of us choosing to consume more than we produce right now, and others of us choosing to consume less than we produce right now.
Isn't it the actual problem though ? When a small portion of people consume a lot less than what they "produce", and another big portion of people borrow from them to consume more than what they produce, isn't it an indicator of rising inequality ? This imbalance can't last forever, and either it provokes a cascade of default and threatens the stability of the economy, or it keeps the big portion of people in an interest rate paying spiral, slowing the growth of the economy. Either way, I don't see it as a good thing at all
I can say from my personal experience that the moments that felt the most lonely in my life were the days I spent going to the university library working on projects / thesis, seeing hundreds of people around me, but not being able to interact with them. Everyday my brain was punishing me for not engaging in possible social interactions.
I spent two months traveling alone and didn't felt lonely at all.
So yeah I think the negative effects of loneliness are just the consequences of a natural mechanism to force us to be social.
The problem as mentioned in [1], is that banks don't necessarily do productive credit creation. They can create money just for people to buy assets, and not to invest in research and development. I think that it is the main idea behind removing them the possibility to create money, so as to reduce loans which inflate assets and create crisis.
[1] https://professorwerner.org/shifting-from-central-planning-t...
He is talking about short selling bitcoin, not selling swap contracts. You don't have to borrow bitcoin to sell swap contracts 100x leveraged. However, to short sell bitcoin 100x leveraged, you would need to borrow 100 times more bitcoins
How far fetched would it be to assume that in the future, facebook would start building a neural network for each of its users, training it to like the same content as you ? With the amount of data generated by the endless scrolling, you could build a fairly accurate neural network of which content produce which emotion, and then generate adversarial images for targeted advertising.
If we are talking about the same thing, Socrates actually said that writing an argumentation was bad because words are fixed and your adversary can give them interpretations that don't fit what you had in mind. I don't think he was against the technology of writing, he just made a point that is still true today. And it is not because technology has been beneficial in its infancy, that it will keep helping us. Current concerns about technology are supported by scientific facts. Before, it was mainly fearmongering and rumors. (Or was it ? If you have scientific study about the negative effects of technology back then..)
I'm sorry you are getting downvoted, maybe it is because of your tone, but coming from someone with an impartial and uneducated view about the subject, it seems like you made a pretty good point.
I wonder why use a screen/QR code to send back the signed transaction. What could an attacker do with a signed transaction you wouldn't want him to do ? It would be more user friendly to send back the transaction to the phone using the customs BLE packets