gitfan86

This is the biggest problem in cyber security. You can tell someone to NEVER give out their TFA code over the phone and they will still do it when prompted by a phone call from their boss.

1. Crypto is a pyramid scheme. I've been saying this since 2011. And it is very well proven by the flow of money over the past 12 years.

2. How is this a tangent? It is directly related to the problems discussed in the post

Who would have thought that a pyramid scheme wouldn't last forever.

They track EVERYTHING. They know how long you pause while scrolling and a Tate video comes up. They have cookies from other website you visit cross referenced by source IP

The fact that you are bringing them up proves that you engage somewhat with content related to them. There are plenty of right wing people who complain about AOC, and know a lot about her.

This is awesome. The obvious next step here would be integration with the pump to send the correct dose after the user confirms the app is correct in the food they are eating

I was hired at a pretty big startup because I came from a small startup where I had delivered close to 100% uptime.

I pretty quickly realized that their outages were due to their KPIs being based on jira and GitHub statistics only.

The hilarious thing was that after 6 months they started to complain about my GitHub stats. And everytime I asked why they are not tracking downtime since that is why they hired me in the first place. And they basically said it was too hard to track.

Peak oil is only relevant in a world where there is no alternative cheap energy source.

The average poor person doesn't care if oil costs $500/gallon if they have access to very cheap electricity and very cheap and good electric transportation.

But that was the whole logic of crypto.

"The USD is going to go to zero someday so I might as well steal everyone's USD today"

Can a nuke perform manual labor jobs and drive cars 100x safer?

I don't think so, so it isn't a good comparison.

A better comparison would be guns.

There is a valid debate to be had on gun control

Obviously, I'm not sure how anyone could have read my comment and thought I was claiming the people were claiming that every single drop of oil on the planet had been extracted and used within 50 years.

This is a common mistake in predicting the future. Like in the 90s, seeing that oil reserves are getting harder to find and assuming that humans will run out of oil in 50 years.

Trends don't exist in a vacuum. Especially in regards to technology.

AI doomers are expecting everything to stay the same except capabilities of bots, especially to do bad.

I have not run into this attitude in tech from executives. Finance is much more of a heiracy culture I guess.

I have run into this at a peer level though. I've negotiated WFH and extra vacation and have learned to keep it in the down low. They get mad at me, but I'm not the one that is their boss and I couldn't care less if they WFH.

It is like playing the lottery or slot machine. You just keep trying one more time to see if you can hit the jackpot.

90% of dentistry revenue is a scam.

But at the same time it is very important to brush you teeth twice a day and floss weekly. You should also avoid sugary food as much as possible.

Dentistry is much like Realtors, they like to take credit for very little actual work.

"If I'm not here to confirm people are brushing regularly everyone would lose all their teeth"

"I'm so glad I could sell your house for 500k. Without me you may have never sold it"

But seriously, it gets awkward when you can ask the model, "what is the likelihood that this project we are discussing is successful?"

and the model responds

"this project will most likely be cancelled due to the fact that the last three initiatives like this were cancelled and the current project manager appears to be disinterested earlier in the project than last time"

Amazing guy, I've been using vim daily for decades. I donated 5k to his charity a few years ago as a thank you. He sent a personalized thank you email.

https://iccf-holland.org/

A lot of landscaping is conspicuous consumption. Just like a 50k Rolex, people buy it because it makes them seem rich.

The only important caveat here is that businesses and organizations tend to become inflexible over time. For example there are plenty of businesses that still use fax machines today. Obviously that is inefficient and that businesses should be at risk of competitors undercutting them.

But in reality you'll see that poorly run businesses can end up continuing for decades.

So we have entered into this weird situation where Hollywood actors and writers are demanding huge compensation for work that is becoming relatively cheap to produce with new technology. It is going to be interesting to see this play out.

The trick is to get good at identifying the people that are correct and ignoring the people that don't know what they are saying.

It is hard, but once you can do that it is superior to listening to the experts only. The problem with people who are recognized as experts is that they have a high likelihood of wanting status and power. So while they may be experienced and smart their intentions may not be pure.

The good news is that we should know within a few weeks if rock surgery is effective. If that works they can increase the purity and sample size without needing to find a new creation process

Right, but it seems to work for them.

Plenty of people believe that it is better to buy a gas powered Subaru instead of a Tesla because Elon doesn't support cluster bombing European farmland.

ESG is such a obvious scam. It would be like this:

Wife: Have you been cheating on me?

Husband: Lets check my APS score.

Wife: What?

Husband: Adultery, Pushups and Soccer Watching score. Looks like I'm in the 1% of husbands as calculated by the experts. So I don't think you have anything to worry about.

If you cannot simply explain why I am wrong in a short form context, that is fine, but please think about the possibility that I am right.

"Careful" isn't a number though. The wikipedia referenced flights to support her boat trip alone put her carbon footprint above hundreds of millions of people.

https://www.iea.org/commentaries/the-world-s-top-1-of-emitte...

She is most likely in the 90% percentile not the 10% percentile. Which is my point. We shouldn't look to people with huge carbon footprints as role models. Al Gore for example has multiple homes. He is easily in the top 5% of carbon footprints in the world.

If the most alarmist and upset climate activists cannot get their carbon footprint down below the average human, then it is pointless to try. The only fix for this problem is technological acceleration toward clean energy, even if getting there causes short term emissions to increase.

Sorry, I'm not sure where the wikipedia Editor got that information from. I can change my original comment to "travels with a significant carbon footprint" if you would make you happy? Does the carbon footprint section of wikipedia seem up to your standards?

It specifically says she does fly in emergency cases. Did you not read it?

There is plenty of data that suggests societies respond to financial incentives.

As the cost of battery/wind/solar plunge, their use goes up. And fusion has the potential to be much cheaper than those.

A very very small percentage of CO2 emissions is due to people wanting to increase CO2 in the atmosphere. Almost all of it is because that is the cheapest or most efficient way to travel, heat your home, make products, etc...

Well I have been hearing that Electric cars would never be adopted at scale and that Tesla was going bankrupt for over a decade.

Yet here we are and the Model Y became the best selling car in the world this year.

Don't give up hope friend.

Greta and her PR team do not publish details of her carbon footprint, so I don't have exact details her travels but Wikipedia is a fairly reliable source to give some insight.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transatlantic_Voyages_of_Greta...