throwhauser

> Crypto has many examples of people leaving $100m+ on the table so they can properly fix a vulnerability.

It all comes back to trust.

What exactly on that page indicates that "we'll fund it back up" has occurred?

How many claims have they paid out?

> “ETH will be added over the next hours to ensure wETH is backed 1:1,” the protocol wrote.

Where would the ETH come from?

Why not?

I don't think it's necessarily the sounds, but what the article describes, "bringing the pleasure of playing a musical instrument to everyone". New ways of creating music end up in the hands of people that otherwise may not have gotten started, and new styles emerge.

> The evolution of true vertebrates proceeded from this condition by neoteny

Thanks for the explanation! Slightly less freaked out now.

It freaks me out that tunicates are chordates. How can a creature's body plan get that bizarre, from a starting point similar to vertebrates? They're not just dissimilar to familiar animals, they're barely recognizable as animals.

Days late and this will probably go unread by anyone, but further evidence that GDPR compliance is complicated, and it's difficult to avoid fines:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30135264 "GDPR penalty for passing on of IP address to Google by using Google Fonts"

It's absolutely true that using Google Fonts will cause a user's IP to be shared with Google, and that this is a violation of the GDPR. But having to review content at this level of detail is burdensome for individuals or small organizations putting anything onto the internet.

> Don't interact with contracts directly unless you 100% know what you're doing.

But if you use any of the exchanges you described, you have to trust that they 100% know what they're doing.

It seems safer to avoid smart contracts and cryptocurrencies altogether.

I don't know about that, see section Q K5 here:

https://www.irs.gov/credits-deductions/2021-child-tax-credit...

To me it reads like Letter 6416 is meant to add specificity to "the letter" in the previous sentence.

EDIT: I've found other examples of Letter 6416 online on non-IRS websites that do have a phone number at the upper right. I'm not sure if the phone number's absence from the sample PDF on the IRS website means it has been removed, or if non-sample copies would have a phone number.

I've been wondering why login.gov wasn't the choice in the first place, and the only thing I can think of is that id.me seems to portray itself as a fraud-busting identity service, whereas login.gov is simply a sign-in service. So presumably anyone contracting with id.me is convinced that they can help prevent being defrauded.

What I don't understand is why any customer of id.me believes id.me's characterization of how much fraud there is, and how effective they are. How many of id.me's claims have been independently verified?

I've been wondering just how mandatory id.me is. Out of curiosity I tried to find if there was a way to address the problem you mentioned without using id.me. Buried very deeply in the Q & A via a link called "alternative options" it says

If you can’t verify your identity online, you can call the telephone number on the letter you received from the IRS telling you that you may be eligible to receive advance Child Tax Credit payments (Letter 6416)

But... the link to Letter 6416 goes to a PDF that has no phone numbers on it at all.

So although id.me might not be strictly speaking mandatory, in this case it seems impossible to avoid, since the "alternative option" isn't really there.

It's a Kafkaesque nightmare.

The point isn't to convince cryptocurrency users, the point is to convince the average person ("the public").

It actually is mysterious though. Not mentioning the mystery would be click-repellent.

> The societies telesilla and Blahah are referring to are not ones where a housekeeper works 40 hour weeks Mon to Fri and gets PTO

Nor is the "high-growth" tech sector, which is notorious for long hours and de-facto little time off. The money might be good, but the lifestyle can be miserable.

You're working for billionaires instead of millionaires, but you're still in a situation where a "?" from the top means you've got to hustle.

Because you've combined two concerns, the amount of money people make, and what level of stratification is involved in making it. You can study, train, and improve your economic security considerably, but still end up essentially doing menial tasks for rich people, just for more money.

(EDIT: That said, upward economic mobility is always desirable and education is essential to achieving it. It's an escape from poverty, but it's not a foolproof escape from hierarchy).

> Because the better way to spread opportunity is to use that money to pay for poorer people to get an education so they do not have to do menial tasks for richer people.

...and then a data scientist with an advanced degree spends the day hand-crafting SQL to root-cause a customer complaint after Bezos sends a one-byte email, "?"...

(EDIT: I may have focused on one aspect of the parent's point at the expense of the other, clarified below).

> Are you making this more complicated than it needs to be?

I'm not sure. I guess if one trusts the default logging settings on the server software to be compliant, and only uses static HTML, maybe that's adequate? But as soon as any third-party code or data provided by some other server gets involved, it's hard to know what might be logged elsewhere as a result of visiting your site.

I mean, would an old-fashioned web visitor counter be compliant? It's tracking something in order to provide that number.

How can a small website cope with GDPR compliance though? The rules that sprang up to constrain the social-media behemoths seem onerous for anyone but them to comply with.

I guess the takeaway here is that it might be better to de-google-ize yourself on your own initiative than to deal with having it done to you unexpectedly.

How much of the money is going to artists though, and how much to opportunistic NFT "drops" of random junk that are borrowing legitimacy from actual artists?

It did somehow manage to have a lot of good content, but it made it too difficult to access. I haven't looked at any Medium stuff in a long time, but if I recall correctly highlighting text wouldn't allow you to copy it, but would allow you to tweet it. Infuriating if you want to save a link to it and a snippet someplace for your own use.

There should be an option to use the "numbers" that are prime in a different universe.

With the potential for a 10 million euro fine, I don't think "basically certain" is sufficient.

It is that hard. The level of certainty you need when "less serious" fines have 8 digits is hard even if you're just running HTTP "Hello World" on port 80 on the internet. The risk of a mistake in your configuration logging PII that you misplace and forget about is too high.

Presumably because the fines for getting GDPR wrong are potentially very high, where "less severe infringements could result in a fine of up to €10 million" and more serious infringements "could result in a fine of up to €20 million,". [0]

Personally I'm afraid to make anything I'm working on publicly available, in case the server logging at some level isn't compliant. It's hard to be sure something hasn't been overlooked, and the monetary risk is very high.

[0] https://gdpr.eu/fines/

It's disconcerting that id.me seems to be managing access to government services and some kind of online shopping mall at the same time:

https://shop.id.me/

If it pushes all companies to be clear about their potential GDPR issues, I'm all for it. Let them compete on ease of compliance.

As it is, it's very difficult to tell if something you're using is gathering data that you don't intend to gather (e.g. your hosting provider logging IP addresses for your hand-coded blogging software). I don't want to have even the tiniest possibility of being on the receiving end of one of those theoretically huge GDPR fines just by self-publishing some code and putting it on the internet.

> ipad on a music stand

Thanks for the idea. I might get some kind of tablet so I can watch things without moving my (cheap) stationary bike in front of the living room TV.