computer

Thank you!

On a general note: my apologies for not including my identity and portfolio; I didn't want this experiment to be the first hit when you google me.

It doesn't need to be on all the time. It can just take however long it wants to start up, connect, and transmit the order.

Looks like a weekly magazine, so this edition would cover April 1st.

Sounds similar to a pyramid scheme, which happens to be a felony.

Do you have any scientific sources for that?

You do: that's the signal that's sent over in 5ms. You then combine it with the local price 5ms ago, and you can construct the exact same instruction the computer in the center would have come up with 2.5ms ago, based on the price in both locations 5ms ago.

Both sides can this way make identical decisions to eachother, at the same time, and identical to those that would have been made by a computer in the center.

Why would you want to place the server in the center? If you have a computer on both ends, then the information from exchanges reaches the other exchange at the same time the instruction from a computer in the center would, so you can have those computers on the ends make exactly the same decision at approximately the same time, using the same data (or newer local data, even)?

Your site says your technology is patent-pending. What's that patent about?

It seems that the CIA actually doesn't know who they are, given that many of those that were tortured for months turned out to be innocent.

I've had that experience (with Cloudflare in general, not DNS). My average response times as measured by Google webmaster tools went from 30ms to 300ms, if I remember correctly. This way ~18 months ago though, so I don't know if it has changed.

And it's to be expected to be slightly slower, at least for dynamic requests, since it's a reverse proxy. I doubt it's limited to the free tier.

I've used the DNS for a few years without any issues whatsoever, so I'd recommend them for that.

0.02 cents and $0.02 are two different things. I was confused by your reply. See [1] for a very frustrating example where Verizon reps made the same mistake.

[1] http://verizonmath.blogspot.nl/2007/08/original-recording-of...

You should probably consider the investment in R&D to invent the licensed IP; it's probably less profitable once you include all of the R&D Microsoft has ever done.

Probably partially because there's stuff (think vitamin B12 for the most extreme example) you can't get or can't get easily from a vegan diet, needing (oftentimes expensive) supplementation.

What's the statistical distribution for the location of the pebble? (Without that, the answer is "it depends"/undefined.)

Note that a uniform distribution isn't possible over an infinite line.

Yes, since it doesn't seem like something that costs billians in R&D and needs a patent for a government-enforced monopoly to make back those costs.

You don't ask for your message back, you ask for the message Snowden sent again. The MITM-party can't have that, assuming that Snowden started with your correct public key.

> Uh, didn't it compromise security by making it possible for someone else to MITM the rest of the emails Snowden received?

Yes. The solution is to make him repeat his original message as well, which couldn't have been intercepted because it was encrypted with our own key.

I'd like to note that an a/b-test saying it's more profitable doesn't mean you should automatically follow it.

A random example: The people who don't download your software because they can't find the price might think very negatively about your product.

It's still fairly alive in the academic community, with things like Sweave/knitr/IPython workbooks/Maple stuff/etc.

So my interpretation of how this works is that there's a server at api.iflix.io[1] which acts as (caching?) torrent client, and the browser just streams from that server. Seems like it probably won't last very long due to copyright issues, and/or will have very high bandwidth costs?

You can use it to download arbitrary torrent files by modifying the URL. For example, a changed link[2] downloads an Ubuntu ISO.

So there's no peer-to-peer work done by client-side javascript. (The server is written in NodeJS.)

[1] http://api.iflix.io/play/_SOME_MAGNET_HERE_/0

[2] http://api.iflix.io/play/b6b8ce579988a85b2a3ec8cd870ccb785d7...

A friend told me their mailing software (or rather, domain registrar email forwarding thing) wouldn't accept an email address with one of the new extensions of more than 3 characters. So I'd be careful using it for serious business for a while.

> When did preventing stolen phones become such a hot button issue?

When phones started being $600+ and carried by nearly everyone. I'm just as much against the kill switches as you are, but I've heard so many cops and high ranking police officers complain about smart-phone theft that I think that they truly believe this would be a major weapon against criminals.

And why wouldn't it be: every phone theft is hundreds of dollars, and there's a lot of phone thefts happening worldwide.

The main issue with that is, that the variable introduced by not doing an experiment double-blind can only be measured by repeating the experiment double-blind.

I think one reason is that many people in the bitcoin market are unsophisticated compared to your normal market traders.

But also, Bitcoin is an asset all by itself. You can't hedge it against other assets, like you can do with corn or tech. You can't easily short it. So, there's no "true" reasonable price range like with most assets, and no normal influences on the price. It's basically truly a bubble of hot air everybody is bidding on, except with the hope that the bubble will never burst, and be used as currency.

You could always make the cable out of balloons. But I guess that would be rather expensive.

What you're describing is basically copy-on-write: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copy_on_write, which is a part of most modern filesystems (ZFS, BTRFS, etc). That makes it software-based, but the idea is the same: you can easily make snapshots, roll back to previous versions, etc.

That's not true-- if you built it into the protocol/client, then transactions from the blacklisted addresses would simply never be accepted into the blockchain; there would not be the possibility to spread them around.

But I doubt any of the main bitcoin (clones) would ever do that.

I personally wouldn't call that position CTO. I prefer to use the C-positions for people who manage others, i.e. who set out the vision and direction, not the ones actually performing all of the lower-level work.

But your opinion is, of course, yours. I would suggest being more specific on these jobs either way, so that people like me will not be scared off on their first read of the job titles.

The grocery store I usually visit shows the price for all of its products both per unit and (much smaller, below it) in price per kilogram. I look at that all the time, and it's often surprising which of the products is actually the cheapest, and how large the differences can be between seemingly very similar products.

Also, the resume says that you were Marketing Director somewhere, and that you were CTO at a company with 2000 employees. Is that actually true? If not, why are you trying to imply it? That's the type of bullshit on a resume that's very easy to see through, and makes people lose trust immediately.