throwaway123156

I suppose it would lead to inflation and as long as the inflation is controlled, that's doable.

Effectively, the government is being funded by all dollar holders at that point. It's a wealth tax of sorts imposed on those who hold their wealth in dollars.

The idea would be that the government is being funded by the fact that $100 today, is worth only about $90 last year, and that loss in value is what's funding the government.

It's good to see an audit paper trail is generated by these machines.

If EVMs are to be used, an auditable paper trail is necessary.

Hopefully the Election Commission will audit a representative sample of locations to prevent any irregularities.

Was Bill Clinton appreciably more conservative than Jimmy Carter, the last Dem President before Clinton?

Primaries are not elections. They are private intra party affairs.

Also, as far as I am aware, other than 1 district in Brooklyn whose votes were not counted in time in the Dem primary, there was hardly anything "corrupt" about either party's primary (and even that district went towards the winner anyways, and wouldn't have made a difference if every vote went in the opposite direction).

While not corrupt, or illegal, caucuses in US primaries are extremely undemocratic instruments, however, that is the exact opposite of what is considered the best method of voting in a democracy (secret ballot).

True, but markdown was meant to be readable for a markup language.

Which is likely still less readable than something whose sole purpose is to present to humans, such as HTML/CSS.

Taking that statement out of context reverses its meaning.

The author clearly believes they know why it hasn't taken over the market. That's the entire point of the article, and they start explaining immediately after the sentence you quoted.

I can understand why something happens and still be amazed by it. That's what the author is saying. They understand why, but it still amazes them.

The Fed can easily replicate the benefits of cryptocurrency in seconds. They simply need to come out and say "We will only print X number of dollars, every Y number of months".

There you go. All the benefits of Bitcoin replicated in the USD, which is a far more widespread and versatile currency?

So why doesn't the Fed do it? Because it really is a terrible idea. It's like pegging your currency to gold, which was a terrible idea (although good for its time) and the delay in moving away from it probably cost tons of money and lives.

The comment you were responding to was about electricity, which is clearly a highly linearly correlated marginal cost. I am not sure why you're bringing up average costs at all.

And the comment you replied to did not even mention the other marginal costs that Bitcoin faces (employee costs, land rental, networking costs, etc).

I agree the statistics we have are pretty terrible. However, in this case, I think Waymo's statistic is actually quite useful. It's likely that Waymo's x miles driven statistic is largely driven by the fact that Waymo has tested their cars on a small number of roads, in fairly safe settings. But that paints Uber in an even worse light. Waymo is supposedly ahead, or at least on par with Uber in self driving technology, and they have chosen to limit their testing and driving to safer and a limited number of roads. Uber has not. That seems to underscore the fact that Uber has pushed beyond their tech's capabilities even though their competitors have determined the tech isn't there yet.

Also, if someone had posted a poll a day ago as to which company's self driving cars were likely to be the first to kill somebody, I think the vast majority of people would have predicted Uber. I don't think that's a coincidence.