AnthonyMouse

6 ms·

31.
by AnthonyMouse 25d ago
> But it's harmful for the average American because filling up the tank costs a lot more. The fun part about this is that it shows what people actually care about. What happens if petroleum prices go up? People use less. It's t
32.
by AnthonyMouse 25d ago
> Likely what will happen instead is that the person in the ID will become personally liable for accounts verified with that ID. Exactly. Which in turn requires you to have some way of tying those accounts to that ID, which was supposed
33.
by AnthonyMouse 25d ago
Under what scenario would they use it against New York or Washington?
34.
by AnthonyMouse 25d ago
They could verify your identity if you've given it to them. But it would also be completely reasonable to authenticate the customer exclusively using mechanisms other than government ID. You can already make a withdrawal using your ban
35.
by AnthonyMouse 25d ago
> Banks by law require substantial PII in order to even do business with you. And those laws are extremely invasive and should be repealed. It's offensive to have a law that de facto requires you to identify yourself in order to p
36.
by AnthonyMouse 25d ago
> You could also do this with ZKPs and device integrity protection. How has the anti-competitive lock-in scam of "device integrity protection" entered the discussion? Using ZK proofs without it has exactly the same effect. Ther
37.
by AnthonyMouse 25d ago
"The government already has our IDs" is missing the correlation between the ID and the service. They know your face and your name but not what you do on the internet. The website knows what you do on the internet but it isn't
38.
by AnthonyMouse 25d ago
> Extremely expensive. Battery storage has a levelized cost of ~$0.20/kWh. Solar is ~$0.04/kWh. If you're using the batteries for 50% of kWh you end up at an average of ~$0.14/kWh, which is in the same range as coal.
39.
by AnthonyMouse 25d ago
> BTW, it's about 7 units of wind energy to 1 unit of solar energy plus significant overcapacity plus increase of the grid transmission capacity plus additional measures for grid stabilization (like synchronous condensers) to get to
40.
by AnthonyMouse 25d ago
> Do those problems exist as much if the excess was forced into them investing into a certain type of power generation? The premise of "excess" already has the problem baked into it. Suppose an efficient company could provide
41.
by AnthonyMouse 25d ago
> I think a general principle of good governance is that the policy is agnostic to the industries which it affects and robust under any set of conditions The trouble with this is that people frequently don't like the consequences of
42.
by AnthonyMouse 25d ago
> When you write things like China is arguably the recipient of western emissions offshoring, despite western countries taking actions to decarbonize or add environmental efficiencies, you deprive China and Chinese people of agency and r
43.
by AnthonyMouse 25d ago
> Continuous manufacturing processes have big problems with intermittent energy sources. Intermittent energy sources are predictable in aggregate. A fairly modest amount of storage to smooth things out and you can pretty reasonably get a
44.
by AnthonyMouse 25d ago
Governments are extremely bad at calculating how much something "should" cost. Profits are revenue minus expenses. "Expenses" are revenue to someone else. Whenever you try to cap "profit" of some entity that is
45.
by AnthonyMouse 25d ago
It's the type of situation where that amount of water use isn't going to move the needle very much even in the desert, but building thermal power plants there there is still kind of silly because a) deserts are generally well-suit
46.
by AnthonyMouse 27d ago
> This requires a magically flexible definition of "market" at very best. The definition of a market is the set of goods or services which are fungible substitutes for one another. The only thing that's hard about this at
47.
by AnthonyMouse 28d ago
> So we're going to make government weaker, and by doing so, they will stand up to corporations that are now stronger than them? It's not about the amount of physical force they can assert. Suppose you have a constrained set of
48.
by AnthonyMouse 28d ago
How do you imagine that would work for something like this? Suppose you live in South America, register a domain from a registry in Canada and then have users accessing it from Ukraine. Are we going to give every local government a global r
49.
by AnthonyMouse 29d ago
> Maybe the matching-funds donor is all peachy and clean. Maybe they're the root of all evil. If they were the root of all evil then shouldn't you want to donate even more, to increase the amount of money they donate to the non
50.
by AnthonyMouse 1mo ago
They have the inherent incentive to inhibit you from doing layoffs, and the same incentive to stop you from replacing existing workers with different ones since the existing ones get a vote and the prospective replacements don't. >
51.
by AnthonyMouse 1mo ago
The infrastructure isn't that much is the problem , because labor costs are the largest single expense. When you take that off the table as something that can be cut, you're then stuck needing to make up the difference from the t
52.
by AnthonyMouse 1mo ago
> It makes sense for the employees to want to lock in their share of the bag. That's the problem, isn't it? Suppose that e.g. Wikipedia traffic is down year over year because of AI summaries and then they get fewer donations. N
53.
by AnthonyMouse 1mo ago
This is one of those problems where there are different ways to solve it but all of them require you to put in the work. We currently have an army defeatists who show up to tell you that if you think companies would get more customers by se
54.
by AnthonyMouse 1mo ago
> After all socialism also (indirectly) gave us weekends, paid holidays, sick leave, social security, state pensions, and decent healthcare. The history of these things is that something changes to allow them or everyone discovers that t
55.
by AnthonyMouse 1mo ago
> If you defer to a politician, you simply centralize more power into a body of government constrained by only cultural norms and donor interests. You're taking it as a premise that someone should have this power, i.e. that the cent
56.
by AnthonyMouse 1mo ago
> They could simply provide an API that allows websites to verify someone’s identity using a zero-trust approach without exposing the actual documents. Because then that website would get compromised and lose the data on 350 million pe
57.
by AnthonyMouse 1mo ago
The trouble with controlling the government is that nobody actually does. Nobody will ever get it to do everything they want, or everything it "should", or anything like that. It's a giant uncoordinated bureaucracy full of in
58.
by AnthonyMouse 1mo ago
> And they should still be banned from forcing apps to do it under their arbitrary judgements in order to participate on their platform. That isn't the same thing as preventing them from doing it. If they do it and it's enabl
59.
by AnthonyMouse 1mo ago
> It’s not considered a secret, it’s just something people don’t feel comfortable entering in forms online. If you have someone's US bank routing information then you can forge checks against their account. This is an unforced error
60.
by AnthonyMouse 1mo ago
Of the last 10 Presidential terms spanning 40 years, Republicans have held the office for 5 and Democrats for 5. Each party has likewise held around half the seats in the House and Senate. This has nothing to do with the voters, it's t

More ›