funkisjazz

Yeap, it gets into a philosophical debate of what comprehension.

One could argue it's not about compression in bits but compression to primitives that makes sense to the human mind. But then the definition becomes to fuzzy because it naturally invites the question "Who's mind?"

The only question I have is: why ?

Seems political an irrelevant to tech.

Also it's clickbaity, it's basically saying that Putin will put the guy in solitary confinement or close to... which seems reasonable seeing as he's a dictator that hates the guy and wished to kill him (then failed).

Yeap, this seems like marketing 101.

Also, looking at the profile, the author seems to be peddling various cookie-cutter "products" he's trying to sell to "entrepreneurs"... I wonder if he read his first link.

A bit off topic, but I like the usage of "social engineering attack" instead of "anything to do with the word computers/cyber/hacking", because it places the onus on the correct parties and the correct systems that failed.

is it practical in any way?

Does the fact that the MSFT president made it make anyone else think it's a fairly worthless statement?

Not trying to bad-mouth MSFT, just saying that presidents are PR.

Presumably no arrests made though means people didn't fight the medical professionals trying to incarcerate them? So I assume most of them went voluntarily.

Not sure it fits on HN, for some reason it really resonated with me though.

Hopefully the article is enjoyable to those that haven't read his blog, I stumbled upon it because I'm a fan on nintil in general, but I think it's interesting even if you aren't familiar with his other writings.

> they have the requisite number of emojis to be perceived as relevant

That is true, and you are right on this front.

That being said, I do have a business accepting card payments and the 2-3% for me is closer to 0.1% past bank fees.

But you're right that from the merchant's perspective, depending on country (e.g. the US) things can be worst.

Then again, from the merchant's perspective cryptos seem to have much larger downsides, after all there's a reason why they aren't widely used, and lack of good supplied for crypto is larger than lack of people willing to use them.

This doesn't seem to serve any purpose other than deception.

Seeing as Robinhood did do something that many of it's users may consider negative-review worthy, after all there's a huge class-action lawsuit gathering steam against it right now. It's not like these were bots that brigaded the app for no reason.

Granted, I wouldn't say what Google is doing is illegal. I think it's good to keep this in mind to reinforce the "reviews are fake" rule of thumb that one should apply to things on the appstore in general. You can be certain less obvious manipulation of these kind happen on a daily basis based on who is giving google ad money.

I'd honestly not be surprised if this action was automatic, simply because Robinhood is a very large ad words customers, and the default policy of the algorithm is to mark negative reviews as "fake" for large customers. Which makes it worst, not better, mind you.

Shows how much they trust what they're selling I guess.

If BTC and ETH are just a replacement for visa and mastercard, they've done a good job, in that they've driven visa and mastercard to be so fast and cheap that it's essentially impossible for any blockchain based solution to be faster or cheaper per transaction.

Heck, my visa card pays me 0.3% nowadays.

So what's the purpose of crypto if it's centralized by a company like coinbase that's regulated by the SEC and all other US law ?

I'm not trying to be a crazy anarcho libertarian here, I'm just saying that the only person for which crypto makes sense is fundamentally, in this day and age, and anarchist or libertarian, or both.

But either of those are not holding crypto with a company that wants to be listed on a public us exchange... so who is !?