followed tags: 42
followed domains: 0
badges given: 0 of 1
member for: 2350 days
Media houses getting desperate because people don't want to pay for subscriptions, they don't want to see ads, and they won't donate either, and somehow it's Salon that's in the wrong and not all of us?
I watched about half; I'm never getting that 50min of my life back. This has to honestly be one of the worst movies I've seen, and that's saying a lot considering Battlefield Earth exists. It's like the plot is so fantastically stupid just so people can feel smart watching it.
And I'm not necessarily all that discerning: I thought Soldier was great.
So show us the specific claims you think are incorrect. Most of them seem to be backed by actual articles. This just smacks of you not wanting to believe results that you disagree with
Oh hey, SeeFeel sounds nice. Funny how I've managed to miss it despite listening to a lot of WARP folks
Or, rather, we're replacing the need for trust in humans with the need for trust in infrastructure
Good old Tcl. Man, that language just absolutely refuses to die.
I remember learning in sometime in the 90's specifically to use Tk for some personal project or another. What a weird language. Pathologically dynamic where everything can be (re)defined at runtime, including control structures; "stringly" typed, so everything's a string; you can get at the variables in functions higher up the call stack, effectively "transforming the call stack into a call tree".
It's interesting to see that it's still alive and being used, and that TkInter is apparently "a thin object-oriented layer on top of Tcl/Tk.".
I was expecting this to go in a much different direction than it did; I'm happy it turned out, well, happy. My maternal grandmother died (back in the 70s) after slipping on ice. My mom's nearly 80 and slipped just a couple of weeks ago, but thankfully only banged up her head and hip a bit, but didn't break anything. I would imagine she had a moment where she thought "this is how I go."
I'm somewhat convinced there's going to be some major IoT-related hack that'll cause enough damage that we'll have to re-evaluate whether we want to connect everything to the Internet. Having everything and the literal kitchen sink run a full-fedged operating system gives a lot of surface for attacks; why do these systems even have to be Turing-complete?
- You know what's interesting to me? I've probably had a dozen discussions with different people all asking me about cryptocurrency and not a one of them gives the first fuck about utility. They don't care at all what Ripple is good for. What they know is that if they bought some last year they'd be fuckin' rich this year.
- Cryptocurrency is a movement to many of the participants. There's a zeal there that you don't see in equities or beanie babies or anything. And I think it's going to warp the ever-living fuck out of expectations.
This is a good point, although I don't necessarily completely agree. I'd argue that the, uh, less informed zealots (because there are well-informed zealots as well) likely won't have as much of an impact on how things will shape out to be. Less-informed zealots are, for example, immutability maximalists, or the ones falling for the scammy ICO pitches. Well-informed zealots build Hyperledger; they're more likely to produce something actually transformative.
Of course quality and utility doesn't necessarily mean anything, and technologically inferior solutions have won out more than once due to accidents of economy, politics, sociology, psychology, history and so on.
- I think there's this assumption that everyone is going to shuck out of crypto just as fast as they shucked into it without recognizing that people don't do that with goddamn stocks.
I don't know. The situation resembles the old penny stock crazes way back when (just that its effects have been amplified by the availability of instant global communication), and cryptocurrencies are much easier to transact with compared to securities. As you've pointed out, the current prices are mostly driven by people with very little idea of what's actually going on: assuming they'd act analogously to people who've invested in traditional securities seems a bit iffy. The whole market's still in its infancy, and the market forces at play aren't quite where they will be when the actual big players get in the game: a few million uninformed crypto enthusiasts probably won't have voice in what happens then.
Still, it's impossible to say what will happen, and what we're seeing is unprecedented. It'd be stupid to completely discount the "masses"
- The Federal Reserve has a blockchain working group. Most of the big names behind the Ethereum Enterprise Alliance are also backing Hyperledger.
And I think this is indicative of the future. Hyperledger especially is an interesting concept, as it's more of a toolkit for building decentralized systems with a strong emphasis on trust — specifically removing some of the need to trust your counterparty, and replacing it with trust in (or "generated" by, however you want to put it) the infrastructure itself.
- There's no reason Paypal or Venmo or Western Union need to use ACH. They could (and will) use a blockchain of some sort. It's pretty clear that Bitcoin won't be that blockchain but whatever blockchain it is, it has to be prevalent and agile enough that companies sign onto it.
Most current DLT-based systems don't seem viable as tools for the payment services field, due to a variety of reasons — scalability, features, ease of use, and so on. Out of the current batch, I think Stellar / Ripple or an approach like them has a good chance of being a major player in the future. They have a limited and trusted set of nodes that validate transactions and create new ledgers/blocks (basically a Proof of Authority scheme where you can decide which validators you trust, but you can use a default trusted set), meaning the entire network doesn't have to participate in the consensus process. They also specifically target payment service providers and payment gateways by providing features like payment paths and freezing accounts. They also have an on-chain governance mechanism, which a lot of platforms lack. Not to mention that they're already being used by a number of different banks.
It'll be interesting to see where we end up in 5 or 10 years.