j_bond

I am curious why go doesn't just vendor dependencies like npm does when confronted with conflicting requirements instead of trying to figure out a version that satisfies all worlds? I always found this to be a nice feature when working with npm.

I am also firm believer in version-pinning/lockfiles. Updating versions should be a separate workflow with first-class built-in tools to support it. I think that is the area where most package managers fall flat. They basically rely on the developer to do all the heavy lifting.

Kim LaCapria I think.

Serious question, why doesn't core switch hashing algorithms at the fork to something ASIC-resistant like Dagger-Hashimoto PoW. Seems like a win-win for them since they don't have to worry about the competitive faction causing havoc on their chain, the miners are more distributed, and there is an army of GPU hashing power that is looking for a place to direct their mining power towards with the Ethereum move to PoS on the horizon.

That is a pretty weak example since it even says in the article that the window dressing maneuver was probably within the GAAP principles and the regulatory bodies were aware of the practice.

It kind of goes to my point that it seem to be more of incentive and business failure than a criminal one. Being aggressive with your company and then failing isn't a crime.

I don't really understand why people say this.

2008 was really the popping of an investment bubble due to business incompetence and exuberance among many actors. I don't really see that as a criminal act. If that were the case, then all VC employees should be arrested for causing the 2001 bubble. The only argument that really has any merit is the one that rating agencies misled investors, so I can see some action being done there.

Whereas here with Uber, there are clear laws being broken - very different in my opinion.

There seems to be a lot of focus on the popular vote and the fact that Clinton won the popular vote but lost the presidency. But is it really useful to look at the popular vote for a close elections like this? I feel like people's behavior would change if the metric to elect the president was solely based on the popular vote. Many people that live in very red or very blue states feel like their vote "doesn't matter" and are not enthusiastic to vote. Not to mention campaigning strategies would be very different. We don't really know how the election would go under a popular vote scenario. It seem kind of disingenuous - like focusing on strikes out in a baseball game instead of the score.