SilasX

45 ms·

481.
by SilasX 3y ago
I’m still scratching my head at that attribution of motive though. “No, rich guys, what He meant to say is that it’s at least as hard as threading a rope through the eye of a needle. So rich guys like you just have to do that simple thing
482.
by SilasX 3y ago
>So at what point does anyone get to keep the money?! If the rental prices are really low relative to buying the units outright, then you put the proceeds in an investment account, and pay a portion of the returns to rent.
483.
by SilasX 3y ago
Agreed. It's naive to think that an decision this unpopular somehow wouldn't have resulted in dissent and fracturing if only they had given it a better explanation and dotted more i's. Imagine arguing this in another cont
484.
by SilasX 3y ago
Actually ... since the trial ended, FTT went from ~$1.2 to ~$3.5 and has stayed up. I have no idea how these people expect it to pay out. Even if FTX restarts, they will almost certainly cast off such liabilities with the approval of the ba
485.
by SilasX 3y ago
Tether absolutely had the chance to become solvent in the weekend of the SVB collapse. In that time, everyone was rushing out of USDC and DAI into Tether (USDT). Liquidity pools were drained of all their USDT and smartcontracts showed all
486.
by SilasX 3y ago
JFC it’s like a full time job to keep up with this story. Now we have to distinguish this reopening of negotiations to bring back Altman from the one that happened Saturday. What’s the endgame here?
487.
by SilasX 3y ago
Yep. Or, if you're running an immense, well-funded organization that is gauging the consequences of a plan that involves being kicked in the balls, you take a tiny sliver of those funds and get some advisors to appraise you of what to
488.
by SilasX 3y ago
It lets you have someone add up your numbers, and give you the sum, without knowing the input numbers or their sum. Basically, any time you want someone else to host the data, while you can also do queries/computations on it. That now
489.
by SilasX 3y ago
You still can't justify a claim that nobody panic-sold, given what you know. Let's try to stick to claims we have a basis to believe, instead of fighting noise with noise. A more reasonable claim from your epistemic state could be
490.
by SilasX 3y ago
Nobody panicked? I suspect that's beyond what your current evidence, plus general knowledge of market behavior, can justify.
491.
by SilasX 3y ago
Just for once I’d like to see such a statement look like, “You sheep probably want a comment on today’s news. We’re not doing that. We’re just content to buy up all the shares you’re panic-dumping. Looking forward to flipping them back to y
492.
by SilasX 3y ago
I first heard about it from United Airlines ads that feature Oscar the Grouch (yes, of Sesame Street): https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=akOq47EZZpU Interestingly, that ad takes care to mention what can’t be turned into SAF (
493.
by SilasX 3y ago
Great episode, but no, not completely accurate, unless a) every exit you take leads to another sales pitch, b) they illegally detain you, and c) local police refuse to do anything about that because they work for the timeshare people. Btw f
494.
by SilasX 3y ago
Okay but the problem to be solved here isn’t analogous. In the case you described, they’re uninsurable be used they’re legitimately high risk, and the government forces their insurance as a favor/pity/charity. In the case of adult
495.
by SilasX 3y ago
But don’t worry, they still nag users for unnecessary donations!
496.
by SilasX 3y ago
Oh wow. Norway and Sweden sound like heaven for apartment living. (Or Valhalla, as the case may be.)
497.
by SilasX 3y ago
Sufficiently advanced “inability to implement it right” is indistinguishable from bad design.
498.
by SilasX 3y ago
On my latest re-reading of it in your comment, it sounds more like it's saying, "shut up, you lost, the measures taken to suppress your rebellion are valid, move the frak on".
499.
by SilasX 3y ago
There’s a related joke about whether the capital of Kentucky is pronounced loo-EE-ville or loo-ISS-ville. Actual: Frankfort. (Actual for the other city: something more like loo-uh-ville.)
500.
by SilasX 3y ago
Wouldn’t a better analogy be a Mexican cult, to better approximate a country with the same relationship as China to Japan?
501.
by SilasX 3y ago
We did! He was doing exactly what he did to everyone else whose questions he tried to evade, it's just that this time people called him on it (and had legal power to compel non-evasive answers).
502.
by SilasX 3y ago
Right, and assumes he didn't abandon the Kelly Criterion for the mentality of "keep playing double-or-nothing even when you win": >>Bankman-Fried’s error was an extreme hubris that led him to bite bullets he never sho
503.
by SilasX 3y ago
My comment was replying to the question of whether they’d get it (and similar materials) directly from the prosecution, not whether they’d get it some other way.
504.
by SilasX 3y ago
Yes, they’re obligated to turn over everything they’ll use in their case. They’re also obligated to turn over everything that could help the defendant (exculpatory evidence). But my understanding is, they’re not obligated to turn over evi
505.
by SilasX 3y ago
Still a different argument than one that offhand dismissed the very idea of global restriction at any level. Nothing you’re saying is found anywhere in the original comment. You have better uses of your time than retroactively rewriting ot
506.
by SilasX 3y ago
“So, contrary to popular belief, the internet is not some big truck that you can just dump something on a la Ted Stevens; it’s more of a … series of tubes?” ‘That is correct.’
507.
by SilasX 3y ago
That's a different argument than the parent, who claimed that global restriction isn't even possible.
508.
by SilasX 3y ago
But it will work fine for limiting GHG or CFC emissions?
509.
by SilasX 3y ago
So don’t change it around. Just reject the metaphor usage entirely. “If you don’t understand metaphors, please, just don’t use them.”
510.
by SilasX 3y ago
I remember an answer from Quora about how lawyers handle such a witness on cross-examination: They say, “well, we have this evidence from the time saying you did/said XYZ. So you’re saying you can’t think of anything that would contrad

More ›