cannonedhamster

Here's a weird question. Why hasn't the U.S. Government made an electronic cash platform with zero transaction fees yet? This should be something that falls under the treasury, it would help cut down on fraud and provide a backbone for small businesses and large businesses alike. Being able to pay debts is basic infrastructure for an economy and transaction fees are a giant tax on small businesses and large businesses alike.

It's not one person. People with sought after skills get inundated with requests, often completely irrelevant. I get so many help desk job offers that I'm significantly overqualified for and dramatically over salary for. I usually just start any conversation there to end it quickly. People who are looking for my level of skills pay well.

My last job was through LinkedIn, though not through a recruiter. The hiring manager reached out to me in a DM and I ended up being exactly what they were looking for. Switched jobs, but still working with that same person. Ended up breaking into a whole new career because of it.

The article said nothing about making it free, it said that the costs, which were previously in line with competitors, increased by very, very large amounts without any perceived increase in value. Then they looked at options which were commercial offerings which cost dramatically less. They are paying for the service, it's not subsidized or free. It's like you didn't read any of the article.

So basically if you're literally money laundering for cartels like HSBC, it's cool you've got plenty of time, but if you're a bit player for charity you should be blocked? Doesn't sound legit to me.

The problems with crypto-currencies being widely adopted are the same as the benefits. While people who understand the benefits like it, the same could be said for cash, which is widely going away and had far better adoption.

1. Loss aversion - You lose your bitcoin wallet you lose everything. You can't have that with large amounts of money or you'll bankrupt people.

2. Anonymity - Thieves can steal money, and to get it back you have to expose yourself and claim the money, if you're lucky enough to get it back at all. Governments can also very easily track users.

3. Decentralized - You have no one single person to punish when things go wrong, or seek help from. You're alone just like everyone else.

While President Trump may not have billions, he does have multiple aircraft carriers at his disposal and would love a place to put all the immigrants. I would suggest keeping the book away from Fox News or they may give him the idea.

The U.S. Government forced the Cayman Islands to expose people using the Island Nation as a tax haven, thus negating the benefits of the islands and large parts of the clientele have gone elsewhere. Since these are only expected to be a half mile offshore they are going to end up being subject to whatever nation-state they are offshore of. Were they to try this in the deep ocean I suspect rogue waves would be an issue. Either way this isn't likely to succeed politically, although I see no reason why technologically it wouldn't. It's more likely going to end up being a playground for the ultra wealthy to sometimes visit and say they have property on.

Life is entirely a series of random outcomes. You have no choice of who your parents are, you have no choice of what month you're born, what socioeconomic stratum you're born into, your inherent intellectual capacity, your genetic propensity, or your gender, and this is all just at birth.

While hard work can certainly allow you to capitalize on opportunities that come along, you have almost zero ability to create opportunities yourself. My current economic status is exactly because I randomly received an offer and worked my butt off to achieve success. Someone I know who is just as competent as myself isn't nearly as successful simply because he hasn't had the same lucky break. Bill Gates and Steve Jobs both worked hard, but both had random chance heavily weighed by who their parents were at birth which allowed them access to computing in a way that wasn't generally available.

You know...I don't think we really disagree on most points. I really enjoy HN for these constructive, if lively, discussions.

The bulk of my high school peers couldn't afford to go to college, the ones that could were on full ride athletic scholarships. This wasn't recent and it was harder to get in to colleges at the time, and Google wasn't as useful as it is today but thanks for the assumption. Ironically the State University was actually more expensive than where I ended up (and still is pretty expensive). I eventually ended up joining the military and after I was discharged getting a couple of degrees from a school a few towns over that I didn't even knew existed.

It's not that rich people are evil. Rich people control the systems by which money is made and logically reserve as large a portion of that pie as they can for themselves. The problem is that as a group they have made it so that there is not enough at the bottom and policy needs to be changed to reflect that. It's like saying you have a group of two people in a room with a pump that keeps giving them air, but the pump is fed by a room full of 50 people who keep having a dwindling supply of air to breathe. The only thing keeping those two rooms apart is an unlocked door. At some point either the people with all the air share it, or the people in the room without it will open the door by force. It's just a statement of human nature. Imbalanced systems have a way of achieving balance.

Disproportionately is a function of a fact, it's not moral or ethical, it's a statement. I feel bad that you are personally offended by facts.

You keep talking globally without the valid counterpoint. You're mixing American taxation with global outcomes and saying because we have it better off it's not wrong. That's the functional equivalent of telling a person on a sinking ship that they should feel lucky they aren't drowning while you pass by on your yacht. You can always find someone worse off, but wouldn't it be more productive to build the pie by bringing up the bottom rather than pulling up the ladder behind you.

You again don't seem to understand facts. It's simple numbers. If money keeps pooling at the top democracy doesn't function, it functionally can't because of the power imbalance and we've seen it more than once in the United States.

Since you're asking personally questions I donate large amounts of my personal money because I know my station and came up from poverty, but my lack of hypocrisy isn't the point. The point isn't how much you give it's how much you have left after you've given. The United States is one of the most charitable countries in the world, however that means absolutely nothing because as stated prior, the people at the bottom no longer have the funds to go to the hospital. You seem to be woefully unaware of the reality in the United States, many Americans literally cannot or will not go to the hospital or an emergency room due to cost and a not insignificant percentage of those people either die or end up worse off because of it. Right now in the United States we have literally entire towns and cities that do not have access to clean, safe water, much less electricity and running sewage. Add to that infant mortality rates in the United States are worse than most other developed countries, economic mobility is currently anemic in either direction and has been since Ronald Reagan and nearly half Americans are one or two months away from a foreclosure and homelessness. Just what wonderland do you think most Americans are living in?

edit: For terrible, no good, horrible grammar.

They've removed the logo since I posted it.

You only need to look at and google the owner of the site. Micheal Sulsenti. https://sapphire.moe/company/ https://www.vocativ.com/news/224320/gamergate-leadership-mod... Or look at the Vivian James logo for the site under services. https://sapphire.moe/

Their logo on sapphire.moe gitgud.io under their services section is a veiled reference to Vivian James, the redheaded clover in hair wearing icon of GamerGate. That's the reference. Also Micheal Sulsenti, one of the people who runs the sapphire.moe account is a self proclaimed "Gamergate leader"

The reason people see it as unfair is because the wealth in the United States goes disproportionately to the top. Of course they are going to be the ones paying they are the only ones left with anything of value and any real disposable income. The money they pay mostly goes to services that benefit themselves anyways. There's a reason that wealthier areas have nicer schools, better roads, always get plowed first. I mean come on if the top 10 percent are only paying 70% then they are underpaying based on the fact that they hold 77% of American wealth. Let's not get into the world. https://billmoyers.com/story/top-10-percent-wealth/

This assumes that they even knew this existed. I can tell you that my parents, nor I knew at the time, however the internet was a bit farther along by the time he went to school.

The fact that you cannot discharge student loan debt is what encourages risky loan behavior. I can say that I got myself into a terrible loan because I was told that the prospects of a career were far better than they were,unfortunately this information was significantly harder to find back in that time. I didn't even know community colleges existed and thought I'd have it paid off in no time. As it is, I don't know how long it will take me to pay off, but it's going to be years.

Internet journalism wasn't "fine". Internet journalism was subsidized by television and advertiser ratings. Then both television and advertising payouts took a hit leading to many newspapers, television studios, and internet news sites to merge or die. Most "news" is basically just filler, and with barriers to entry removed due to the internet it's easy to be ultra-local on Facebook, faster to send news through Twitter, and real long form content takes actual money to produce.

Many internet sites do die all the time. New ones spring up all the time, but it seems to be the good ones that actually die and the garbage that continues to accrue. The reason that clickbait works is because it understand human psychology. I think that says more about humans than people realize.

Citation for Democrats gutting schools?

I've never heard of a single Democrat for cutting public school funding in my lifetime. That's a far right talking point driven entirely under Republican doctrine since Reagan. The Republican party stopped being a sane party once Reagan came in. Democrats haven't had a spine or a heartbeat since Carter lost by being honest.

We do definitely agree on getting corporate and lobbying dollars out of government. I honestly can't believe that this is legal in a democracy and not illegal in the Constitution.

Bitchute is also primarily far right wing/white power vloggers and conspiracy believers. That's probably a second reason that they would get cut off by an established player. They would really need to diversify their user base to become more palatable.

Your last sentence completely missed the point of careful archiving. Because someone "didn't think it was important to keep around" we've lost, permanently, entire parts of history. The western alphabet is based on the Phoenicians and that's a name given to them by the Greeks. The very basis of our language was created by a culture which we don't even know the name they called themselves. I'm confused as to why you think it's a good thing to accept mortality? If anything our past has shown us that reaching past mortality is one of the major reasons for human achievement.

So is your competence judged by your customers, your peers, or random outcomes outside of your control? To put this in software terms. This is like a person in a support organization being provided buggy software and being fired on the number of bugs that get through. They have no control over the developers (parents) and students don't go through QA. Even if the developers were trying their best, if they are constantly distracted and pulled in multiple directions, what do you expect that the result of the software would be?

This seems like a truly terrible situation where when you get what you think you want it's not what you expected it to be, all tied in with a series of unfortunate events that seem somewhat predictable, i.e. delays on new things, people getting illnesses. In their rush to produce it may have been more prudent to get into a solid financial situation with their windfall. Then again this could just have easily panned out and we'd be talking about how this is the great new model for old companies. I think the real lesson is to remember that what separates good times from bad times can often be bad luck and illness. :(

This was way more fascinating than I expected. I'm sad that he's turning down the banana. I absolutely understand why it's happening though. I'm hoping he shares the code some day.

The only ones that really could run afoul of anything are foxy, moby, and charlie. The rest seem pretty unique. Anything is going to start getting congested when you have hundreds and hundreds or startups looking for unique identifiable items.

People forget everything, especially when there's a financial or emotional incentive to do so. This transcends any one field. It's a human trait. :( I've worked very hard personally because I recognized this to never forget the people who help me along the way.

Not entirely accurate. It's cheaper to buy some things in the US than it is to buy in Romania, electronics for example. And if cost of employees were the only factor then you wouldn't see such wide differences in prices in the US depending upon whether or not there is competition. Or cities would cost less since there are more people to subsidize the costs, which we typically see the opposite of right up until competition comes in. Plainly, while location and cost of works plays some part in the cost structure, the vast majority of pricing for Comcast and other telcos is what the market will bear in a monopolistic environment. Were it simply the costs of doing business profit margins wouldn't be as drastic as they are.

Despite the source the following breaks down the profit margins based on the telco's own information that they provide.

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/bruce-kushnick/time-warner-ca...

Amazingly there have been non vegan couples that malnourished their children because they are stupid too. It's only a big deal because people like to hate on vegans. Stupid parents are stupid parents.