>since they tolerate it in the leaders that align with their views.
Which one?
685 karma · joined August 14, 2012
Which one?
"The reduction they saw was confined to households that did actually have access to a car"
"They discovered that tightening these laws had no detectable effects on the rate of first and second children".
Also, if i understand it correctly, you have about 50 quasi experiments, one for each state.
Even gold can do that better.
If more hashpower sticks with BCH, I would consider it to be the winner.
It does not matter weather your language compiles to JS or WASM, and it does not matter what the browser executes.
And coinbase keeps the bch (as they announced), so the bird analogy does not fit at all.
That's no how laws work. Not even remotely. Thankfully.
Consider you order somebody (X) to transport your pregnant cow. At the destination the cow arrives. It's not pregnant anymore and X refuses to give you the calf because... well, because he can do anything he wants.
That's theft.
Bch is not a gift. Who should have gifted it? Who is the previous owner? How did the previous owner aquire it? It is a "fructus" of btc. And that belongs to the owner.
This right can be signed away, with life estate or usufructus. But that's a big deal. That can't be somewho implied in a sentence hidden somewhere in a long ToS.
That's wrong, and obviously so. That concept is "possession" and not "ownership".
What they write in their ToS doesn't matter, it does not change fundamentals of porperty law. (Well, as every legal argument on the internet it depends on your jurisdiction and the jurisdiction of the coinbase, as coinbase resides in multiple)
There is a difference between ownership and possion. Technically (in the meaning "how it is realized in computer code") bcc is given to the person possessing btc. But by the law the owner is entitled to the profits of a thing. But coinbase does not own my coins, it merely posses them.
1) At last not legaly binding, that had to be there at the very least in red flashing letters, possibly even then it would have been void.
Imagine a bank anouncing they would keep all the dividends of one particular stock, because the didn't like it. That's what coinbase is doing. It plain and simply theft.
And in Powerpoint the formulas have constantly different sizes and are distorted. I don't like beamer (a latex package), but it the only viable slide show software for me.
For pedagogics there are huge (like 30 pages) formating requirements. The formating requirements itself are incredible ugly and often quite objectively bad. Such as lots of widows and orphans (even in tables!). The document is distributed as a .doc file, and yes it does look like this even in Word, it's not a fault of LibreOffice. Length is measured in pages and the critical limit is the minimum length.
On the subjective side they IMO made the worst possible choices. Arial (or similar), 12 points, almost no margins, 150% spacing between the lines, italic and bold headings.
It looks very bad, is MS Word centric, but they have the nerve to make a style guide longer than a page.
Also, looking at psychology papers, it seems to me that non technical fields have a thing for shitty typography.
If does follow imperative paradigms, as it does, the programming language part is essential if you want to do anything meaningful with it. If exotic task you never need in typesetting, such as multiplication, is hard to implement, something is wrong. And IMO that is why LaTeX is so odd and hackish.
Context is much better, tough.
And, by the way, the unfortunalty dead ANT uses a nice Haskell like language and is still a typesetting DSL.
http://sourceforge.net/projects/ant.berlios/ https://web.archive.org/web/20090310012257/http://ant.berlio...
Esp. ANT would have been a fantastic improvement.
[1] https://web.archive.org/web/20090310012257/http://ant.berlio... [2] http://sourceforge.net/projects/ant.berlios/ [3] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6668551
TeX is not a programming language, it's two programming languages. These languages have a self modifying syntax and is parsed with state machines that can be changed. Changing the syntax into something meaningful other is yet quite impossible. It's meant not meant to be able to read markdown or xml.
These Languages are so odd even division of two variables is non-trivial, yet both are truing complete and servly limited, a classic turing tar pit, even division of two variables is nontrivial.
The hole TeX thing is a huge state machine, and uses imperative paradigms, while declaratives would have been much nicer.
All that leads to a horrible, monkey patching coding style.
On the internals there are other horrible things: Unicode was known when it was invented, font formats are a mess (even with XeTeX; I think I can't have another mapping for my the cursive style of a font then for regular. Good thing is the very verbose documentation for fontspec does mention "mapping" twice)
And I absolutely agree with Linus view on linking. I just tried to install ffmpeg on opensuse on a desktop pc. All I wanted was one statically linked binary. I had to dig a wiki, follow outdated build instructions (not nearly enough dependencies where listed, I had to go back several times, configure runs like 20 minutes), it took hours. For one simple binary. FFmpeg could put on their homepage.