StavrosK

78 ms·

811.
by StavrosK 6y ago
As far as I know, those work quite differently.
812.
by StavrosK 6y ago
Thank you!
813.
by StavrosK 6y ago
Yes, it is intentional. The functionality actually exists, it's just not mentioned: https://github.com/skorokithakis/expounder/blob/master/examp... It's because, once clicked, the new text shou
814.
by StavrosK 6y ago
Not at all, go for it!
815.
by StavrosK 6y ago
Same here, and I didn't like the tradeoff, so I figured I'd solve it with the power of T E C H N O L O G Y.
816.
by StavrosK 6y ago
The AZ vaccine is more effective than the BioNTech one? That's extremely interesting.
817.
by StavrosK 6y ago
And, more importantly, a blockchain provides a trustless data store. Why can't I just trust myself to keep the data?
818.
by StavrosK 6y ago
> the changes at the time were interpreted by many users to mean that the platform would share their messages with parent company Facebook. > The misperception caused a backlash amongst users of the Facebook-owned platform, causing an
819.
by StavrosK 6y ago
> Full PoS decentralization does not exist yet. How do you define "full PoS decentralization"? That sounds a bit no-true-Scotsmany. > Sadly, the complexity (rube goldberg) of PoS far outweighs the simplicity of PoW. Yes, and
820.
by StavrosK 6y ago
Ahh, that's interesting, thank you. It sounds like a low probability scenario, but not impossible.
821.
by StavrosK 6y ago
Hmm, does it guard against minority representatives being able to do damage? If you have thousands of representatives, capturing one won't do much, correct?
822.
by StavrosK 6y ago
Would you say that the existing PoS systems (like Ethereum 2) aren't as centralized as he mentions, then?
823.
by StavrosK 6y ago
The author says that PoS algorithms are centralized at heart, but does anyone know how this applies to Nano? I read the paper a few years ago and couldn't find any obvious disadvantages or centralization to it, and it has PoS, no fees,
824.
by StavrosK 6y ago
That's true, I live in a country where you can live luxuriously on $2k/mo.
825.
by StavrosK 6y ago
There's also https://ipfs.io/ipfs/Qmdpah7j4mLswRLsv55qX4R9RzK3RtCWKfYNt4A...
826.
by StavrosK 6y ago
> the idea that obviously we should fund them is ridiculous. Ridiculous like feeding people mold to see if they get sick less, or injecting people with the pus of other people to inoculate them? The discovery of antibiotics alone has pai
827.
by StavrosK 6y ago
> So do you pick the wildest conjecture to test, or one of the somewhat more plausible ones? 20% of the former, 80% of the latter. > And how much money should go into one before you move on? 3% of the available funds each year. Hope
828.
by StavrosK 6y ago
Eh, you can allocate a percentage of resources on wild conjectures, since many of our biggest discoveries have been made that way. No need to shut them down and ridicule them.
829.
by StavrosK 6y ago
Except the trust of the currency itself, as if you're attacking a currency you have a lot of stake in, you reduce the value of your stake because you attacked it.
830.
by StavrosK 6y ago
So PoS is vaporware because it hasn't solved a problem where the miners can act against their economic best interests and mine a fork? How does "there's a theoretical issue, and also it shares a problem with PoW" follow
831.
by StavrosK 6y ago
I know, but this sounds like a misunderstanding. The Handshake equivalent of domains in the traditional DNS is TLDs, and that's what you can own and control (for example, I have several TLDs like .stavros). I own the keys for those and
832.
by StavrosK 6y ago
I have too, but when I have an option between 1x the price and 1x the boards and 2x the price and 9x the boards, I usually pick the latter.
833.
by StavrosK 6y ago
Or a handshake domain :(
834.
by StavrosK 6y ago
Okay but so what? Why do I have to have an opinion of PJ Vogt? I can have an opinion about whether I like his podcast or not, but what he does in his workplace concerns his coworkers. Beyond a vague "we should condone X and condem Y be
835.
by StavrosK 6y ago
> If I met someone that was either of those things, I would lose some respect for that person. Apologies for the "cancellation". To me, this is the entire problem with the current discourse situation in the US. Everyone keeps f
836.
by StavrosK 6y ago
Doesn't this argument imply that anyone who is against "wokeness" supports abuse? I see lots of shutting down discourse from both sides here.
837.
by StavrosK 6y ago
Ethicists study ethics. Per your example, I would expect an ethicist to be able to study ethics very well. You don't expect a teacher to know everything, or a writer to always speak with perfect eloquence, or a photographer to always t
838.
by StavrosK 6y ago
Indeed, and apparently ethics boards find it preferable to wait for hundreds of thousands to die rather than kill one, but it's not entirely unreasonable. Also, I think the number of total deaths in both branches are about the same, as
839.
by StavrosK 6y ago
You're assuming that pulling or not pulling the lever is morally irrelevant, which may not be the case. To take it to the extreme, it's the difference between killing three people or waiting for three people to die so you can stud
840.
by StavrosK 6y ago
> Ethicists behave no more ethically than the average person[1], which strongly suggests that the entire field is worthless. I don't see how that follows. We don't expect our ethicists to behave more ethically any more than we

More ›