850 karma · joined December 3, 2013
If it's a reserve currency, as the U.S. is, it is also backed by the demand of other states to hold U.S. dollars to stabilize their non-reserve currency.
Indeed, some argue that a reserve currency is not subject to ordinary balance of payments criteria. This is sometimes called exorbitant privilege.[1]
All to say, the U.S. currency is not just backed by assets of the nation, but by demand that other states have for local-currency stability.
Somewhat aside, some argue that this creates a perverted incentive to destabilize the world because unstable states and regions have a higher demand for a reserve currency.
In the age of punycodes this has become particularly important because the human eye cannot visually distinguish between ASCII and punycode lookalikes - many are visually indistinguishable in many fonts.
Basically I suggest dividing the questions into categories of:
1. Timeless: Questions with a timeless best answer, which is unlikely to be improved or updated in the future;
2. Revolving: Questions with a "best answer" today but in the future there will be a "better answer"; and
3. Wiki: Questions that are constantly being improved and updated.
Among a few other notions.
Insofar as it was a problem of interest when I wrote it in 2010, it's only become a more prominent issue since.
I think there is more information than in the article on most favoured nation status that might give useful context. The article discusses a relatively narrow set of tariffs on certain items produced in China, largely tied to human rights violations in China; MFN predates this by quite some time.
Most favoured nation (MFN) and its counterpart national treatment (NT) are cornerstones of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT)[0], which was a product of the World War 2 era treaties designed in large part to prevent the sort of interstate acrimony that could lead to World War 3.
The GATT mandates that signatories — including the USA — adhere to MFN and NT, which respectively oblige states to not apply tariffs to one country and not another, and to not favour domestic industry over foreign by way of subsidy or tariff or other market-distorting unfairness by the state. When a state violates MFN or NT, any harmed state has standing to apply a sort of reciprocal treatment, namely they have the colour of right to apply market distorting tariffs and subsidies of their own.
A recent example is the USA application of a tariff on imported steel from Europe, which entitles the European Union to apply a reciprocal tariffs on imports from the USA, such as bourbon.
The GATT evolved into the World Trade Organization (WTO), which routinely determines the merits and quantum of damages associated with often complex accusations of violations of MFN and NT.
The origin China-USA MFN and NT goes back in principle at least to the GATT, which in turn is based on the failures of the inter-war period that lead to WW2.
Which is all to say, it's not accurate to state that the Clinton administration granted MFN status to China (broadly speaking, anyway), and I'm not certain that in the broader context of the complex history of trade relations that any start of the trade disputes we see today can be so precisely pinpointed.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Agreement_on_Tariffs_a...
I spoke the other day with another core developer, Ryan Niemeyer, and he noted that ko is still a good fit for quick and lightweight dynamics, but with good conventions a solid foundation for really complex Web apps. It's still very solid, and the API largely unchanged since IE6 was around.
Tko, the monorepo for ko 4+, will hopefully make it easier to build frameworks out of the knockout code, so things like routers can be easier to tack on (if we don't build one in).
Incidentally I've just set up a patreon for tko/ko 4 in particular at patreon.com/brianmhunt- it'd be great to be able to have more time to hack at it.
The interesting bit is that historically the strength of sainthood has been tied to the conviction of the advocate for the devil, not the quality of the advocate for the saint.
The application is locked into Google, but that hasn't proven a problem yet and can be designed around if need be.
A better question may be car-related ads.
Law is a process.
Yes. OpenBSD employs several mechanisms that improve the security of every application e.g. W^X and stack protector.
e.g. http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/inflation-canada-outlook-1.4...
A useful integration for some would be using the hardware security/key modules in Amazon, Google, Microsoft, etc.
https://macdaddy.io/apfs-backup-software-developers-perspect...
I'm an international lawyer and savvy developer (currently maintaining knockout.js) and have had a lean/quiet startup for several years now in the legal-augmentation tech space.
We're in the process of partnering with the world's largest law firms.
Feel free to drop me a line - brianmhunt at gmail.com
Fractions are countable. Real numbers are not.
In other words, fractions, integers, positive integers all belong to the set of countable infinities, meaning there is an isomorphic function that bidirectionally maps each positive integer (the count) to every item in the target, countable infinity.
There is no isomorphism between real numbers and any countable set. If you create one before you are 40, you will get a Field Medal.
The isomorphism and the distinction between sets that have them and sets that do not has proven useful.
You could think of infinity as one concept, but it is usefully divided into countable and uncountable versions.