CoryG89

34 ms·

301.
by CoryG89 10y ago
It most definitely does work this way in practice. If you go buy a sheet of acid from a random person, you can bet there is at least a 50% chance it contains no LSD at all. Why should I give you a sheet with LSD on it when I can give you a
302.
by CoryG89 10y ago
I agree with you there. Although, I don't really think LSD, cannabis, ketamine, or ecstasy are addictive at all, other than being potentially habit forming, which just about anything can be. I would just put alcohol more in the habit f
303.
by CoryG89 10y ago
Well, the other two (pot and LSD) are not physically addictive at all, so it would be impossible to be less addictive than that. Yes, alcohol can have physical withdrawal symptoms for people that stop after already having abused the drug fo
304.
by CoryG89 10y ago
There are plenty of drugs other than alcohol that can safely be taken regularly. Legality and safety aren't correlated at all, at least in the US. I've never seen anyone die from a joint per day. Plenty of other drugs are the same
305.
by CoryG89 10y ago
Alcohol is not physically addictive in the same way opiates or cocaine is addictive. It's silly to be scared of becoming "addicted" to alcohol. After many years of abuse, alcoholics can get to the point that their bodies dont
306.
by CoryG89 10y ago
I'm not sure where they are getting their 25% figure for heroin in your linked article. They link to yet another article as a source, but I see no mention of the 25% there. The claim seems to be that only 25% of people who try the drug
307.
by CoryG89 10y ago
For the most part I would agree with you, but historically this hasn't always been the case. Before modern times, the quality of water was terrible pretty much everywhere. Because of this, many regularly drank alcoholic drinks instead
308.
by CoryG89 10y ago
You can't assure rapists don't get 4 years (or less): > The convictions carried a potential sentence of 14 years in prison. Prosecutors recommended six years in prison while probation officials recommended a "moderate&quot
309.
by CoryG89 10y ago
> The carrier weight is significant because its proportional to the amount of substance This is not true. I can take a clean sheet of paper and dissolve as much LSD (or as little) on it as desired. 1g of near-pure crystal will definitely
310.
by CoryG89 10y ago
Here is the list: [ ] No really though, there are a lot of people researching it. I could find very little on the market actually using it. http://www.physics.manchester.ac.uk/our-research/research-im... Graphene looks
311.
by CoryG89 10y ago
I also suspect the author may have a possible or likely identification of some programmer(s) involved. While I am no fan of some of the things the US does, I don't bear these programmers the type of ill will that your encouragements of
312.
by CoryG89 10y ago
Perhaps it's possible to limit the search space by also looking only at experts likely (or possibly) have worked with the US government or NSA in the past or present. Then maybe you could get the list down to a reasonable number? For e
313.
by CoryG89 10y ago
Looks to me like the author is posting initial findings (and if I am reading this right, withholding some). It doesn't look like a crazy amount of time/resources have gone in, but it looks like a basic proof of concept to me. Perh
314.
by CoryG89 10y ago
The heritability of IQ is often estimated at 0.4 according to Wikipedia. Not very high, but not insignificant. Height has 0.8 heritability. Even if you're a genius, it doesn't mean your child will be. I think 0.4 suggests environm
315.
by CoryG89 10y ago
I don't think "smart children" is the same as "successful and well educated children". While your statement is indeed backed my most research, the article seems to suggest that because your smart, your children will
316.
by CoryG89 10y ago
I don't think it's much of a slippery slope. I think most of us would (or at least should) agree, up front, that intuition isn't worth much. Even when investigating topics that are considered obvious. "As for me, all I k
317.
by CoryG89 10y ago
> and delaying entry for individuals coming from areas where terrorism is endemic, until a vetting process is established. I hate to even further the discussion on this off-topic subject, but the above is simply not true. Here is the off
318.
by CoryG89 10y ago
Yeah, I think they messed this up. In my view they could have charged him with money laundering if they could have proven that the bitcoins he was using were purchased with illicitly obtained funds. The laundering would have taken place whe
319.
by CoryG89 10y ago
My point was not that mining pools completely do away with decentralization, just that contrary to your comment, additional network computing power does not necessarily contribute to that decentralization. It can in fact push it in the oppo
320.
by CoryG89 10y ago
Honest centralization is still centralization. You may be assuming that everyone participating in a mining pool will get an independent vote. From my understanding, this is usually not the case. If a small number of mining pools control mor
321.
by CoryG89 10y ago
Actually $150M worth of ether was invested in just the DAO, just a single contract running on the protocol. Probably more than that has been invested in the protocol at this point. One thing to keep in mind is that much of this was not inve
322.
by CoryG89 10y ago
This. To me (1) are (3) are amazingly, agonizingly ironic given the context of the situation, even if the outcome is not entirely surprising knowing how the voting is done and how centralized mining pools make things (as well as point (2)).
323.
by CoryG89 10y ago
They just view the transactions in question as side effects from a bug. <sarcasm> Ethical dilemma eliminated.</sarcasm>
324.
by CoryG89 10y ago
> The assumption gets stronger as total computation power increases. This assumes that the increases in computing power were not added via a mining pool, in which case the additional computing power is making things worse. This is one re
325.
by CoryG89 10y ago
I have read somewhere previously that someone claiming to be the hacker came forward anonymously and said they would indeed take it to court if they lost the funds due to intervention via a fork[1]. Who knows if this was really the hacker,
326.
by CoryG89 10y ago
Right? I could see being sued for claiming you painted something that you didn't. I think that is pretty standard faire. But the reverse? That sounds crazy to me. At any rate, my freedom of speech definitely covers both cases.
327.
by CoryG89 10y ago
Can a court really forbid you from doing such a thing? What if someone wants to create art but not be forced to put their name on it afterwards. This is just impossible?
328.
by CoryG89 10y ago
I agree with this, but can someone really be held liable for something like this? I assume the painting did not come with a contract that states the artist/seller must always claim the work, from now to forever?
329.
by CoryG89 10y ago
This is a good point. If you are trying to design a system that "tells police officers where to go" then you shouldn't be using data to predict arrests, you should be predicting crime, which we don't have unbiased data f
330.
by CoryG89 10y ago
OP never claimed it wasn't easy to turn them off.

More ›