xalava

This article seems to miss the point and practical use of Smart contracts. Smart contracts offer revolutionary new to transact gloablly. There are flaws, but the ones presented here are mostly tradeoffs. For each section:

- Reliance on external data is the same problem for any program.

- Smart contracts can be upgraded

- confidentiality is being adressed with ZKP

- to discuss about the legal status is to miss the main point of Smart Contracts.

- Any code has bugs and security flaws. The mitigation must combine traditional security and financial backstops. This is the consequence of relying on code

- Smart contracts execution is one of the most secure you can achieve. It comes with tradeoffs.

TLDR: Learn some basic coding while developing related skills

Most editors have a plugin that does that:

- https://github.com/OliverBalfour/obsidian-pandoc

- https://packagecontrol.io/packages/Pandoc

- https://marketplace.visualstudio.com/items?itemName=DougFink...

This method relies on the idea of a cost, most likely monetary, proportional to the choice. This is obviously incompatible with core principles of modern democracies.

This article reasoning compares the Brexit and Trump votes, and speculates that they might have had a different result by changing their voting mechanism, almost exchanging them. Rather than a good argument, this is exactly the reason why voting mechanisms should be dealt with carefully.

More generally, the idea of voting mechanisms using preferences is a few centuries old. There is an abondant literature analyzing its potential merits but also failures.

"Give me six lines written by the hand of the most honest man, I will find enough there to hang him" Richelieu, French PM, 17th century

I've been using this expression for years, but I use it when a company purposely does not applies your explicit decision. In this case, you are the one trying to circumvent their policy.

https://mobile.twitter.com/XavierLava/status/108590014312636...

- Why 10% margins on average? What is exactly the risk profile?

- Why consider that a group of diverse group of developers is a governance danger while a group of users would be fine?

- What are the incentives to run a full node for an average user?

Interesting debate. However:

- I doubt that the EU meant to directly investigate the pentagon, the opposite might have some history.

- The argument that there is redundancy and therefore it is safe is incomplete to say the least. For instance, how heterogeneous are operations, software, potential failures...?

Intellectuals don't debate wether it is ok to kill innocent people because the answer is pretty obvious.

To read more interesting thoughts on the matter : https://speakola.com/ideas/robert-badinter-death-penalty-abo...

The US is pretty exceptional in its lack of rails. There is also a Seattle-San Diego. Enjoyable as a tourist, but probably not suited for business purposes except in the last portions.

In France some high speed trains go now directly to airports (CDG,LYO). So it is becoming possible to chain a plane and a train in a few scenarios.

Theoretically, that might exist.

I recommend that you open each platform mentioned in the article and apply your definition.

"Prediction markets" is a fancy word for gambling. It is a highly regulated activity almost everywhere, mainly has it can have terrible consequences at the individual levels and major side-effects such as corrupt games in sports. Let's not even talk about politics where it is generally forbidden for obvious reasons.

The conclusion is disheartening "It shows a lot about how market efficiency actually works in practice, what are the limits of it and what could be done to improve it." Yes at a small scale, but at the current rate of adoption of crypto it will not go well if it is still treated as a playground.

Yes there is a lot of money riding on that, but that is the cost of doing business.

Why banks have heavy compliance costs? Doing proper AML and KYC costs money and society decided that it was critical enough to bear that cost even in light regulation countries.

A lot of the financial success of those companies is in part the result of not fully taking responsibility for the consequences of their business activity. Eventually they will, under social pressure that this post success represent, or by laws.

There are many confusions mixed with stereotypical startup culture in the first video. A global stable currency is not :

- Dollarization, that is an already relatively common phenomenon (Zimbabwe, Argentina...) with controversial effects. Definitely not a silver bullet for hyperinflation.

- A payment system, that requires to work tightly on UI/UX, on cultural preferences, to adapt to local infrastructure... Exactly the reason M-pesa succeeded where many silicon valley startup failed.

And then, there are the technology choices, the stability mechanism, the regulatory aspects ...

I've just realized that nano was initially released in 1999! Apparently, they just copied pico key bindings, that was used as an extremely light editor.

For the rest, there is to me a cultural divide between a sysadmin/dev culture with abstract interfaces, specific key bindings and options, configuration files, ... and the thousands of people with various backgrounds that are learning tech today, including the console, just to do something using computers.

Micro is probably the best of both worlds. Try editing an admin file as a user and save.

I know that vim is particularly enjoyed. The site looks nice and I wish you the best luck with this.

But for beginners, I now recommend micro as a console text editor (https://github.com/zyedidia/micro). It's a one line install with all the shortcuts and display that have become a standard across editors.

I don't use any of this on an iPad and I miss every day some functionalities : a convenient terminal, a fully fledged text editor, a complete and free photo editor ...

I actually wonder if that will help people to move to alternatives before what is perceived as a "privacy wall".

This has been clarified in prior statements:

The SEC does not considers Bitcoin a security, as it's "decentralised enough". Nobody is running Bitcoin alone, selling them alone...

The Ethereum sale was probably a security offering, but it is now "decentralised enough" too for the same reasons.

Similarly, and multiplatforms, I recommend DroidCam (https://www.dev47apps.com/). The interface could use some polish but it works well on android/ios phones to Mac/Windows and Linux.

Interesting, but reading the conclusion I'm fascinated in this affaire how technically knowledgeable people loose common sense to defend their favorite brand: - Per launch verification is terrible for privacy, vis-a-vis Apple and the whole network when it happens in plain text - "They should also explain how, having enjoyed their benefits for a couple of years, they’ve suddenly decided they were such a bad idea after all", another key issue: user information, consent and control. - Additionally, the public was made aware because it malfunctioned, which is also a security issue. - Considering the current corporate culture, there are legitimate concerns of what those choices might lead towards

This article seems to confuse various forms of knowledge and discourse.

To follow up on the doctor analogy: First, I expect the doctor to tell me what he finds. For instance, I can't blame him for not finding pathologies for which I don't have a symptom yet.

Secondly, the state of any scientific knowledge is limited. Especially in economy, to explain ongoing new phenomenons is already a prowess, to accurately and convincingly anticipate them is sorcery. I expect economists to have heated debates among themselves, and the state of established knowledge to be lagging behind.

Thirdly, I don't expect my doctor to tell to Congress what he finds. There is a distinction between applying professionally an expertise and political statements. The Chair of the Fed has to do both both, having to analyse the situation accurately and to measure public statements. That goes to the question of how decisions are taken in a democracy.

Finally, as for op-ed, even written by Nobel prized economists, they are labelled as opinions. I appreciate Paul Krugman column, but one feature of weekly opinions is that they inevitably contain contradictions.

I'm not sure how buying a device connected to the internet, fully controlled by the company, that also collects data and sell ads is an improvement.

It is a valid point that there has always been cultural codes and that I'm probably more sensitive to changes that I've seen in my lifetime. And thanks for pointing Hays code. I've dug into some history of censorship and morality in US cinema.

However, by cultural sensitivity I refer to something beyond codes. Nothing that this article points out is particularly illegal, immoral or even shocking. Yet, probably due to cultural globalisation, social media, and the polarisation of the debate in the US on certain social issue, I am under the impression that this kind of clumsiness is more likely to be noticed.

The most relevant point of this article is not about historical accuracy, but on the contradiction of claiming cultural sensitivity by including gender and origin diversity while totally missing the point on deeper issues.

I've grown up in a period when pop culture didn't care much about cultural sensitivity. With proper education anyone can compensate and treat them as pure simplistic fiction, but I do think that those new debates, if nuanced and not reduced to representation, could bring quality to pop culture items.

Particularly in the video game industry, and this company, that have proven to have flawed IRL corporate cultures.

Having followed hearings related to Libra, sure there is a lot of posturing. However, first, some MP asks precise critical questions. Secondly, it seems that even for trained CEOs one hour of intense questioning takes a toll. I've rarely heard something new, but you can detect some of their personality, their contradictions, the important points for MP ...

The title is at best misleading. They do not attack M. Schrems in Justice or even morally. They are the object of two complaints and they defend themselves invoking that privacy laws are not applicable as they are not directly processing data. This seems a perfectly valid argument. I'd be curious to understand in details their role in the process and see how courts will treat it.

Beyond privacy laws, there might be also allegation of fraud as their marketing campaigns seem to relies heavily on privacy and they seem to have a curious conception of it.

The fact that this was included in the OS without raising alarms is quite revealing in terms of privacy concerns.

Question, is there a good justification to use not use hierachical certificates like web browsers or other OSes ?

Just on time for GTK 4. Pretty ironic considering that GTK stands for Gimp ToolKit.

It doesn't work well through competition as it is a feature that is not relevant at the time of purchase. We have seen this already in other markets, from ink cartridge to planned obsolescence.