blue_light_man

You are already at limit of infinity.

It's also possible you just think of ETH Zurich as great and automatically associate the people and products as amazing. Could be a circular dependency here.

Top of the funnel.

Also a profound way to waste your life.

Language is mostly used for conditioning people into doing things. People will continue using language to manipulate you into giving your time or money to them. You cannot change others from trying to manipulate you. You can only change yourself and stop taking language seriously.

You assume Alan Turing actually cares about what a bunch of British politicians think of him and the award they choose to give him.

You believe he cares about external validation and things like awards.

You believe he cares about being a billionaire.

You are more or less projecting your beliefs and ideas on what a successful life is on him.

Alan pursued truth throughout his life. Not external validations. He was a scientist not a politician or celebrity or a wannabe make world better startup founder.

Only truth could have set him free. And I hope he found his truth.

That is true. I guess my ego fooled me as well.

I am not trying to educate anyone. I am just asking questions. If you think I am trying to educate you that's your ego again trying to make you miss the point being conveyed here.

How is that relevant? You understood the context and instead choose to focus on the misspell.

I think you missed the majory of public part.

Interesting. So you make decisions based on what the press tells you? Do you believe the news the press choose to report and not to is based on what they think is good for you? Do you believe the press actually can know what is good for you?

1. You assume that what press reports and public opinion is the same thing. It's not.

2. You assume majority of the public actually has an opinion or time to think about whether Sam should run OpenAI. They don't.

3. You assume public opinion is an accurate metric of justice. It's not. We have judicial system for that.

4. You assume Sam makes decisions through his ego and not any other system. You don't know that. Your ego thinks it's true. But honestly you have zero information unless you are really close to Sam in that case you have no reason to make this comment.

I don't know how that is relevant. Many other surveys lying more doesn't make this any more true.

Does this also balances out the fact that these are people who choose to respond to their survey and not random sample of all Americans? Are you saying the list of people who choose to respond to their survey is an accurate sampling of the entire American population?

Also why not say we surveyed 6000 people in our list instead and 30% of them have this view? That is more true than saying 30% of Americans have this view which is quite a big jump. There is ofcourse some lying going on here. What are they trying to achieve by lying here is my question.

They arrived at this conclusion by surveying around 6000 people.

And then made it look like 30% of Americans have this view so that your brain takes the view seriously.

Investigating why they lie to themselves and others to spread this idea is the actual truth here.

My vague guess is they need money to spend on advertising and investments made by Alameda and FTX.

For that, they can't use FTX. They need USD or a stable coin like USDC.

They can't convert hundreds of millions of dollars of FTT to USDC since demand for FTT is relatively small. And a transaction like that might cause a huge decline in the price of FTT.

So they must have used ETH, BTC etc deposited by customers for swapping to USD or USDC.

I guess their theory must have been the surbowl ads, celebrity endorsemens and all would result in demand of FTT going up after some time. And they can later swap them back to customer funds when required.

But then crypto crashed.

Now customers want to withdraw the funds and they don't have it to give back. And nobody wants FTT.

That is a statement one can easily verify through tech and from first principles. For example you can go through the wallet source code and verify the algorithms used.

Trust me we have the funds backed 1 to 1 in our exchange is not unless proven cryptographically.

I should have clarified. By don't trust people I mostly meant people you know from Internet and have never had a meaningful relationships with.

The only lesson I learend from this whole debacle is never trust people and organisations you know from the Internet no matter how famous or humble or good they are. Trust the tech. But never the people. Especially for financial advices.

Be it Sequoia. Or Yc. PG, Chamath, Mark Cuban ,Balaji or the Collision brothers. Tom Brady or SBF or CZ. Never fucking trust people or organisations.

They are all here for their financial upsides.

Only trust the tech. The maths. If you can't do the work you would be fucked by them.

That's all.

I am not saying PG did something shady. I am saying even a well regarded figure like him in this community should not be taken for granted unless they back their claims by sold evidence.

Women are totally fine with marrying and having kids with him even after that. So Elon should just keep going.

Vast majority of media organizations including New York Times are owned by the ultra wealthy.

If you think about it, you don't want Elon to not stop tweeting.

Next time, Elon tweets about buying something, wait for the market to go up, short the stock and make money when Elon eventually backs off?

Does India imports more gas from Russia than EU?

1. India is not alligned to any country. India cares about what it's best interest for its own people. If that means buying oil from Russia so be it.

2. Article 46 of Indian constitution -> "The State shall promote with special care the educational and economic interests of the weaker sections of the people, and, in particular, of the Scheduled Castes and the Sche- duled Tribes, and shall protect them from social injustice and all forms of exploitation."

3. The constitution itself of India was written by Ambedkar who himself is a dalit.

The solution for climate change would come from technology. Not random politicians virtue signalling and signing useless agreements which doesn't make any meaningful difference.

HTTPS is a technology choosen by the free market. Bad example.

So looks like EU knows USB-C is the best port for the citizens. Following the logic, EU should also know what the best charger, screen, CPU, GPU, drivers etc for the phone is since EU is represented by the people.

Clearly, there should be also no reason why EU should not know what is the best way to source these items and manufacture it as well since EU is represented by the people.

So why stop at the USB-C regulation?

Why can't EU manufacturer the phone as well? How do I sign a petition for this?

This is such a short sighted view.

What just happened is, EU, a political organization enforcing the use of a technology on a company which operates on free market. It's Apples best interest to make technology that the consumers want so that they can sell more units of that. A political organization like EU has no say in this. EU citizens already make this decision for themselves by voting with money and choosing to buy/not buy an iPhone.

Today is one of the dark days of EU. In short sight it's a victory. But in long sight it's a hinderence to progress by enforcing a technology on the market instead of letting the free market decide the technology.

What next EU? New law to mandate using space over tabs? How do I send my suggestions?

You don't even know what else could have happened if there was no standardization. Maybe the industry must have progressed without the need of outlets in the first place.

Perfect example of why Brexit makes sense.

A bunch of politicians thinking they know what is best for consumers across dozens of countries better than the companies operating in the free market.