GaylordTuring

Pitch bend messages are 14 bit though, right?

I've never understood this. Not attending to an infected tooth can, for example, spread to other parts of the body, ending up with you having a heart attack or something.

Let's crowdsource this :) Please give examples of countries where it would be feasible to pick up five random kids and take them to Pizza Hut without having the cops showing up. I live in Sweden and my feeling is that this is absolutely not possible (but it might just be me who have preconceived notions).

In Sweden, where my opinion of the public health care is that it's useless (unless you're having a really acute problem), I've looked for private hospitals to get help from. No such luck! Finding a specialist to help you, no matter if you have money and are willing to pay feels close to impossible, at least for the things that I've needed help with.

I've never understood why dental care isn't included when you otherwise have universal healthcare. Why single out dental problems? It's about as impossible to just ignore having an infected tooth that needs to be pulled out as it is not doing anything about a broken arm.

Exactly my thought as well. If the phone only was just that, a phone, I would happily lend it out to strangers all the time (at least if it looked like they didn't have the stamina to outrun me :P).

This is how it works in Sweden as well for försörjningsstöd, which is something you can get if you have no income and you actively look for work. However, if you’re disabled, I’m pretty sure other rules apply.

I use Taskpaper everyday, both for To-do:s and to take notes. I’ll gladly switch to Bike the day it can do most of the thing Taskpaper can do. I’ll eagerly follow the development of it.

Sorry, I might have misunderstood you, but can’t you just mute the audio of your device altogether? Or do you want to continue to listen to music in the background or something?

The fact that this comment is downvoted means that at least some people here doesn’t understand how to use the downvoting function. I think the comment highly contributed to the discussion by pointing out what Tether states today (and asking for more information if available). How is this not a constructive comment?

Nothing, but I guess I don’t have to tell you that, since your question seems rhetorical in Nature. However, what keeps BTC from crashing is the same psychological effect that keeps Twitter, Facebook, Nike, or Coca-Cola from crashing: Brand awareness.

Bitcoin sucks compared to many other cryptocurrencies, still it’s the most popular one because it was the first, because people know about it, and because people know that other people know about it.

Even if you could fork Twitter and put it behind a different domain name, for example , Twutter, and you would add some functionality that everybody would like to have (let’s say an edit button), most people would still go to Twitter.

If you could sell the rights to use the name Coca-Cola or Nike, even if you had to make it clear to the customer that the new product that you sold had nothing to do what so ever with old product, the names alone would be worth a couple of fortunes.

So what’s stopping Bitcoin from crashing is the brain virus (or meme if you want) that has infected hundreds of people around the globe and made them believe that other people will know about and believe that Bitcoin is valuable.

And since Bitcoin isn’t hooked up to a doomsday device like Luna and UST was, it can’t destroy itself.

I don't get how they can sell out so quickly. Why won't stores simply raise the price in order to reach parity between supply and demand?

I would be careful using this rule. Women are, in general, most uncomfortable around weak/strange (but totally harmless) men.

Bring your average woman to a Richard Stallman meet-up and then to a UFC match and ask her which setting she found most uncomfortable. I can guarantee you that Richard picking his own nose in a room full of sweaty needs will be more disturbing to her than being close to thousands of jacked-up men cheering while two combatants almost kill each other.

My thoughts wasn’t particularly related to this suggestion. As I said, I’m against it. I’m talking about more or less watching your every move maybe even to the point of not letting you communicate with other human beings at all. Alternatively, we can all be held in some kind of future zoo where we only have access to technology pre Turing machines.

Yeah, maybe I wasn’t clear enough. I’m talking about surveillance on the level of sticking a camera down your toilet and putting you in jail for even thinking that you could send an encrypted message to somebody.

In theory (and in practice today), I’m strongly against this. However, I see a future where you will have to choose between mass surveillance or something close to extinction.

I might be wrong, but as technology progress, it seems almost inevitable that a single individual can do more and more damage. An amount of damage it took half an army to achieve a couple of hundred years ago, one individual can do today with the help of a bomb, a plane or a machine gun.

What happens the day that a few number of individuals can build a super virus (already possible for a few, but it will become more common), nuclear bomb or, heck, create a black hole in their basement? If that day comes, it doesn’t matter how strongly I hold the principle that everybody should have the right to privacy; I will gladly welcome our new AI surveillance overlords just to stay alive.

I agree. There are very few games that I’ll buy on day one without even reading the reviews. This will be one of them.

I’m still disappointed that Darth Jar Jar didn’t come to fruition. It would have been perfect. In episode VII, Yoda is introduced as this ridiculous character that turned out to be a Jedi master, with the moral of the story being that you shouldn’t judge a book by its cover. Even with this seed planted in the original tribology, everyone saw Jar Jar as this clown who shouldn’t be taken serious. It would have brilliant to reveal that it was all a charade that no one could see through, not even the viewers who already had seen one such reveal taking place in the past.

I’m bummed.

True. But nobody wants to use that because the price performance is horrible. And price performance is the only utility that most people care about in crypto.

Many people make an obscene amount of money from this. I think that answers your question why many also put so much time and effort into it.

Yes, it could, if you don’t account for the psychology of humans who might be caught in tragedy of the commons situations, stuck in local maxima, or simply have irrational thoughts across the board. That’s a big if though. For example, we have already “solved” global warming with the invention of nuclear power. The only thing holding us back is the psychology of people who thinks that using nuclear power is bad.

> It still blows my mind people think it is acceptable that the network eat their transaction fee if the transaction doesn't go through, especially when these fees are so high (as if now it can cost $2k to do any sort of NFT stuff).

I agree that this is ludicrous, but I don’t think that people so much accept it as that they tolerate it. Since, for most people (albeit not all), the only utility of cryptocurrencies today is to get rich, it doesn’t really make any sense to abandon a network that sucks from a UX point of view in favor of a much better network, if you believe that the alternative network will net you much less money.

This is my experience as well! On several occasions, when going straight in an intersection, I’ve almost been hit by left turning cars with drivers who haven’t seen me until last second.

Would it be too much to ask for Hacker News to not promote products made in and benefiting evil regimes such as China and Russia? You wouldn’t allow The Nazipad 2000 to be showen here; what’s the difference?

> If you publish an academic paper with quantitative analysis, academics will tear into the details of analysis

This is how it should work, but at least in the type of fields that we're talking about here, in practice this doesn't happen. I've published seminal papers in my field which have been cited hundereds of times. Not even the peer reviewers (let alone any reader) double checked my calculations.

Unfortunately, however, peer review in these fields extremely seldom involve someone actually checking the code/all the calculations/the underlying data.

You mean they aren’t stupid by necessity or that there isn’t a correlation on the population level?

Nobody:

Absolutely nobody:

OP: I'm TiReD oF THe SamE joKEs!1!

(On a serious note, I totally agree with you.)

Thanks for the explanation!

Basically the smart contract could have been written so that this transaction was rejected or so that the money could have been sent back, but that would make inteacting with the contract a little bit more expensive for everybody. Or maybe the developers wanted it to be possible to burn tokens by sending them to the contract address.