somjeed

I'm skeptical of a few things in the medium post, for instance if you compare the etherium's ERC20 defi ecosystem to bitcoin, you will get more git repositories because there are simply more coins. Secondly, more is not always better, and measuring developer activity by git repositories is like measuring lines of code as a metric for the amount of work being done.

Miners want to maximize transaction fees. So more is better. But there is a massive tradeoff, being every transaction must be stored to verify later.

There are many other considerations that make a transaction possible. If you remove them, then a transaction wont have much value. For instance, security of chain's history or censorship resistance are required. These features can fall apart quickly with incentive misalignment. They are tail risks and easy to ignore until it happens

NFTs imply there is a platform which supports the contract and blocks all non-ownership AND people will use no other platforms

top signals for 600, Alex

Here's a nice source of revenue from google ($9 billion/year): https://finance.yahoo.com/news/google-reportedly-pays-apple-...

yes it is.

Lindy effect. Sure you can copy it, but the original remains. The scarcity exists inside the network, and in a sense you cannot copy it, because the copy is just that - there is no use in copying it.

your stonks liquidity is dependent on constant injection, so your "making" more than $60k may be temporary

umm, just use the Apple App store then... and let others have a choice

He could argue it's for experimentation/faucet. I doubt this goes anywhere, but still shady. This dude has a massive ego and gives off charlatan vibes

edit:seems he is trying to actively to list this on exchanges, so yeah if he does that he has lost all respect in my eyes

Are we just going to pretend like this election was not different from every other election? Something very unique occurred in this election and I don't appreciate the media and leaders declaring a winner when the other candidate is still contesting it. Why shouldn't we wait to be certain?

guilty of not reading article... but who could have guessed slicing an enormous code base and replacing it willy nilly would lead to mistakes

buying journalism one journalist at a time is too expensive.

I think this closed view is partially do to how we consume media as a service vs. a cheap one time payment/view. I'm not sure if substack is a solution or if micropayments will ever kick off, but I don't see how it is more expensive to pay the journalist directly if the mass publishing mechanism is solved.

it is more than wishful, it is pragmatic, as all attempts before it were shut down by very powerful forces. The purpose of PoW is to create anti-fragile, unstoppable signals using opportunity costs. How society decides to dictate those costs is up to them. Very cool.

second reply (a2dp mentioned) worked for me: https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/437468/bluetooth-he...

sudo nano /lib/systemd/system/bluetooth.service

Change

ExecStart=/usr/lib/bluetooth/bluetoothd

to

ExecStart=/usr/lib/bluetooth/bluetoothd --plugin=a2dp

Likely projecting their own existential fear of loneliness. Fear is not a good place

The opportunity cost of electricity, what you call waste, is the most apolitical and ungameable resource available. Every other example to "vote" I've seen quickly devolves into another political game.

And there's also plenty of us that recognize what some are certain is best for the community, may not be. E.g. politicized forced vaccination

Why not then put it on the iPhone too. Considering Apple's stance on aesthetics and non-moving parts, seems unlikely

"We don't have a formal proof for this, and only have empirical evidence, measured on a large number of test instances. More on this in the paper. The learned algorithm is not entirely opaque. I'd argue it is easier to understand its behavior than that of a neural net." https://mobile.twitter.com/liyuajia/status/12815201991083089...

agreed, this is kind of backwards research

If the work proof additionally became useful, it would develop a secondary market, and the difficulty would reset to that new cost. In other words, the useful problem solving would just obfuscate cost. It misses the point of proof of work, which is to display a costly signal that market participants will understand.