explorer666

Seems like you have an agenda here.

> And that will drive an economy into the ground

A consumerism-based, Earth-killing economy. But it will give raise to more sustainable economies.

> Everyone involved in covering it up should be tried as traitors, as I don't just say that as a hyperbole.

Don't expect them to speak out then.

That's not its intended purpose. Its intended purpose is representing debt. That's why fiat money bills are called IOUs.

Or maybe if so many people didn't want to sound smart with little effort...

> If most things go awry after a war, that's not because of the currency and nobody will care about the currency either

Then why are you bringing this up? You said it yourself: "that's not because of the currency". It's because the things you buy became too expensive or too cheap. If the currency remains stable, you could still buy the same amount of most things in other countries not affected by the war.

Hacker News law of Betteridge's law of headlines in full force today: If the headline is applicable Betteridge's Law will always be mentioned.

Wrong. If you can buy the same amount of most things with the same amount of currency over a period of time, then we say that currency is stable.

That's not hedging. They are paying to kill Bitcoin.

So many new users just to attack you Mike. And all the buttcoin trolls suddenly became small blockers. Evidence of Blockstream hiring shills continues to grow.

Look at the list of investors. Banks invested in Blockstream.

Even if we build a spaceship that can accelerate up to the speed of light and send it to the nearest star, we won't even know what happened to it in our lifetime. Doesn't seem like something the world could agree to donate all its money for.

Where are all the "Betteridge's law of headlines" fanboys now?

(not a physicist) The universe is expanding, which makes the wavelengths longer the farther away the source is.

> It's really not very rich and up-to-date, in my opinion. In my experience, the vast majority of oss PHP projects started a decade ago, and they all keep certain back-compat, so they run with the drag of old paradigms. Actual new contribution to the ecosystem seems almost impossible to find, and there's a lot of areas that simply aren't great.

100% false.

Or because it's a mature language, with a robust, very rich and up-to-date ecosystem.

Mass is also an emergent property.

Time is an emergent property. Ie: fundamental particles don't experience time, but things made of them do.

DayZ is early access and broken too. Not sure if you were saying that, but I wanted to say it.

I like this definition I've heard from Sam Harris (paraphrasing): An entity is conscious if there is something that it's like to be that entity.

But the problem is not computation, the problem is consciousness. I think we all agree that our level of general intelligence can be achieved "simply" by putting stuff together in the correct order. But consciousness? Why is it even there? Why is there something that it's like to be us?

Which is good, isn't it? I mean, how nutty was the idea that matter could bend space(time)? What about time dilation? Black holes? Particle/wave duality? The brilliant dots in the sky being immense balls of burning gas? Big discoveries begin with a nutty hypothesis.

It says conscious can't be divided, but that's not true as far as I know.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Split-brain

"In a more serious effect, the patient may have two different consciousnesses, one on each side of the brain."

Street Fighter has been here for about 26 years, and it's only growing. It's going professional, with sponsors for the players and everything :p

And by the way, I too thought the reactions needed were insane. But after some time, you realize all that is just muscle memory, and the hard part is the strategy. It's a conversation between two minds.

> current election cycle

In the US or where?

You can do all those things and more with other games. Eg: street fighter.

I'm just agreeing with xyzzy4; finding the game fun is more important than anything else.

Personally, I don't like the fact that luck is a bigger factor that chess players are willing to admit. Sometimes you make a move that anyone would consider strategically good, but little did you know, that move would put you in a bad situation many moves later, and only a machine or maybe a grand master could know it.

You mean it would make its price go up, just like with any illegal drug?

By your logic, people starving or being bombed could stop famine and wars because they have more motivation. What actually happens: whoever has more power wins.

I have the power over my browser. I won't consume ads.