Rury

39 ms·

451.
by Rury 6y ago
>Without the right blacksmith, there can be no magic. Magicians will be magicians, always hustling (bullshitting) >management may consult the blacksmith in the selection of magicians I mean when you put it like that, why hire a magici
452.
by Rury 6y ago
I like Orwell, his fears are well justified, but it's statements like these which make me think he stopped short in his realizations (along with most people). I think Plato's arguments presented in his Allegory of the Cave, paint
453.
by Rury 6y ago
>USDT market cap is lower than that of GBTC. So it's not possible that USDT is inflating 90% of the price of Bitcoin. Technically it is possible. You don't need an equal or larger market cap to inflate something else 90%. You j
454.
by Rury 6y ago
>You end up needing a mix of both If you study political philosophy (e.g. Plato, Hobbes, Locke etc..) and read stuff like Orwell's Animal Farm, I think it becomes pretty evident that it ultimately won't matter how you structure
455.
by Rury 6y ago
Caffeine is a drug where you must consume it habitually, or never at all, or else face regular headaches. Like others mention here, I had aura migraines nearly each week, which bad enough to cause vomiting which were seem to be getting wors
456.
by Rury 6y ago
Imagine this hypothetic scenario just to demonstrate the point: Bitcoin becomes mass adopted, but not after 30 institutions end up hoarding ~60% of bitcoin in existence by some time in the next decade or two. Then by the year 2147, bitcoin
457.
by Rury 6y ago
> the ability to independently verify the money supply and being able to transfer money across political boundaries without censorship is probably the most important intrinsic value one could hope for in a MoE/SoV. This is opinion,
458.
by Rury 6y ago
>2) Cars are just one thing in Tesla's portfolio. This is also true of other companies. Honda also makes jets, watercraft, ATVs, aircraft, mountain bikes, lawn equipment, and solar cells. Toyota also makes homes.
459.
by Rury 6y ago
Yes, you can make different arguments. The point I'm making is that it's ultimately upon them to decide what to believe in. They may or may not accept your alternative argument as convincing. Everyone ultimately chooses what they
460.
by Rury 6y ago
The thing is though... there is no way around the "trust" problem, whether it comes to science or anything else. Plato's allegory of the cave makes this quite evident IMO. In the end, we're all ignorant, all have our set
461.
by Rury 6y ago
When did it call the liger a "lion" when it acts like a tiger? In my mind it's acting like a liger, but the lion bits are fundamental to the problem, and hence why the tiger is showing.
462.
by Rury 6y ago
You can't have a liger without a lion.
463.
by Rury 6y ago
It's the standard outcome of capitalism...
464.
by Rury 6y ago
Your comment here seems familiar to me. I was raised Catholic, turned atheist in my teens, and then slowly fell into agnosticism in young adulthood. Now I don't consider any of those labels accurate of my beliefs. Have you considered &
465.
by Rury 6y ago
>what are possible trade-offs when there is substantial constrains on monopolies, platforms, and aggregators ? The benefits to centralization/aggregation is that things can be made uniform everywhere, which can make things convenien
466.
by Rury 6y ago
>I used to buy Apple computers precisely because I did understand computers Maybe because computers were always complicated and messy to use - so someone who understands computers would appreciate a 'friendly to use' computer?
467.
by Rury 6y ago
>Funny how they keep sending me marketing emails though. >This is kind of a weird notion, that Apple doesn't want me as a customer, as I've spent more $ on Apple products in my life than the majority of people. Maybe that&#x
468.
by Rury 6y ago
>As a businessperson, I have the legal right to be a complete jerk to my customers You're still not getting the point - which is you're not the customer Apple is trying to sell to - just as Mercedes isn't trying to cater t
469.
by Rury 6y ago
If you don't like their terms or products - then don't agree to their terms and don't buy their products. If you want things your way - don't outsource - make it yourself. Apple made their product. As so, why shouldn&#x2
470.
by Rury 6y ago
>No, my problem is that Apple keeps changing the terms. The Mac that I purchased is no longer the Mac that I have. Uh, did you read their terms and conditions? They held that right when you bought it...
471.
by Rury 6y ago
>I expect to be able to use it as I please. This is your problem. Apple doesn't sell the product: "computer devices at which you can do whatever you want with". They sell "computer device which does lots of things eas
472.
by Rury 6y ago
Sometimes they withhold agency for good purpose though. Actually, a good anecdote from today. We have an internal app within our company that a user had gone in and messed with a file it relies on. Consequently, the app stopped working corr
473.
by Rury 6y ago
>Is there any proprietary OS that is NOT pulling these shenanigans in the lastest versions? >Is there any OS that won't attempt to screw me Technically, all products are made to work a certain way. Take a car engine for example.
474.
by Rury 6y ago
>does this mean this user is now a "software developer"? Sure. He developed software - who cares what tools he used to do it? Is a farmer who farms via tractor not a farmer? The OP gave an apt example in FORTRAN - as FORTRAN is
475.
by Rury 6y ago
The fact that it didn't make software developers obsolete. Instead it created a whole new breed of 'specialized' software developers - ones that knew Fortran. This is the fundamental problem with "they are going to autom
476.
by Rury 6y ago
>So the net effect is that the device in the lab gets cooler and the object far away get hotter. So you have a flux of heat. But if the other object is hotter, you have a lux of heat from in the wrong direction, that is impossible accord
477.
by Rury 6y ago
Of course. Operating a foot-treadle floor loom doesn't pollute. Stirling engines don't necessarily pollute (unless you consider kinetic energy to be pollution). Actually machines don't inherently pollute. Ones which do, only
478.
by Rury 6y ago
I don't think either are particularly caused by the other. I'd argue both are naturally and ultimately caused by inherent subjectivity and bias in the populace. "What's house X worth?" - Some people might be more wi
479.
by Rury 6y ago
Yeah, but those times might just be exceptions to the natural order of things. Naturally, it's always easier to get others to understand problems and viewpoints when matters are simple. When things are more complex, it's more diff
480.
by Rury 6y ago
These theories aren't necessarily at odds with one another. Could very well be a combination of both MACHOs & WIMPs among other things...

More ›