One of the great frustrations in these debates, is the tendency to criticize a messenger who sees a cynical system. Instead of blaming the system for being cynical. Sometimes the most Optimistic people are shut out of debates, because they won't assume the system is optimized for a noncynical purpose. My suspicion is that this ostracization is what grows the cynicism out of control.
I truly don't see what happened in his administration that was unusually awful. (and I didn't vote for him) Given the constant hyperbole on matter, and now, in the aftermath, I think the antics of his detractors just look ... hysterical. Quite frankly, I think it's these antics that would be likely to see him re-elected. Food for thought.
Imo, it's a flaw in our model. If 'fighting them' failed, then, we should join them. Here, that would mean participation in the ipo, in the style of gamestop. Push the p/e ratio to something completely absurd. Maybe it'll fail as a result. (Thus begetting a libre office, response to an open office initiative.)
Thank-you. Candidly, I think 'no car' is what we should be promoting. I got rid of mine earlier in the year. I may find out this plan is wishful thinking. We'll see.
I'm very skeptical that these technologies will be more efficient than incumbent solutions. These products seem to be designed to comport with well intended political goals, rather than consumer preferences.
It may be that these products are taxes-by-another-name, as consumers either shell out more money for inferior solutions (ebikes, I guess), or, turn to the secondary market instead (for gas leafblowers, say).
After seeing what we did with recycling, I would not be so naive going forward, on the claims of environmentalists. (I still have yet to see the research on the electric car co2 implications of producing batteries and offloading co2 output to power plants, when compared to the incumbent solution)
That's the same thing as pricing in dollars. If you haven't noticed, Bitcoin is as valuable as the usd/btc pair. It's why every bitcoiner knows what the price of Bitcoin is every day.
Throughout history, men have bonded by expressing humor, angst, and emotions regarding sex. It may be an outrage by the moral fashion of today. But, you would have a hard time making the case that this behavior is unusual by incumbent standards of collaboration.
I switched away from Quickbooks, years ago, to plain text accounting. Couldn't be happier. I can do everything better using hledger/ledger, git, vim and make. I don't know what value this software has at this point for a community such as we have here on hn.
Average People require average advice. Above average people can figure it out on their own. This piece is fine and good, and I appreciate that it was written. I agree with its thesis.
I think the problems of governance are non-trivial in tenant-owned apartments. Not that they can't work, obviously. But, I think the ability to 'vote with your feet', is a bit more powerful than the ability to reconcile disagreements between owners.
Over-representation assumes that there's an objective taxonomy by which representation can be factored. I find it very amusing that no one thinks of this, and/or can't bring this 'obvious' fact to light. "Imagined Communities" is a good book on some of this, if anyone cares to read more. I suspect that there's a lot of civil religion at work, that causes these taxonomies to not immediately appear assumptive. I would guess that we'll lose these components of the civil religion, over time, as a consequence to these initiatives.
Probably people resent how equal the wealthy are, in terms of dictating public policy. There's a degree of wealth, at which point the government is merely a performance.
I've never understood school either. Now that I'm 40 years old, I understand it less. I think there was a generation of adults who were 'in on the rhetoric' at one point. Telling people that these are places of education, instead of a kind of reformation facility, akin to jail.
"anything but this" is a compelling direction, when people don't subscribe to a least-worst model of governance. 'Anything but this' is an utopian path. There's really no justification or even rationalization, for compromise, online. 'Anything but this' is a form of 'cures whatever ails you'.
Day traders are gambling on surface noise. It's not much different than roulette. Long term investors have some notion of longitudinal value accrual and stability.
That's about how I feel. I think it's worth noting that humans seem to go through cycles of securitization, that makes 'all the sense in the world' in their time. But, which becomes abhorrent, or nonsensical as the fashions change over time.
'intellectual property' is mostly post-modern nonsense. Yet, here we are. If these numbers are property, then, the government will duely regulate it as such.
I agree with most everything you just wrote. But, note that the problem with Proof of Stake, in this thinking, is that you won't be able to buy tokens from your local energy company, when the regulators shut your blockchain down.
It's a trolley problem. Someone gets hurt if you put the mask on, someone gets hurt if you don't put the mask on. You're assuming that there is an objectively good decision here.
Is this really drama? I don't actually care if I'm downvoted. People will always upvote iced cream, and downvote brocolli. It's not hard to see that, or understand why that would be the case. Mostly I find it funny.