beaned

12 ms·

61.
by beaned 3y ago
This is part of the draw for me (in addition to the prose). It is at least partially influenced by history [0], including the character of the Judge. Sometimes if it's easier to understand a certain place and time when it's wrappe
62.
by beaned 3y ago
I don't think it's apologetic, it's two different approaches. MS has chosen to try to kill 2 birds with one stone, and Apple has allowed their devices to become more focused. As someone with an iPad, I appreciate Apple not tr
63.
by beaned 3y ago
How was this achieved? It seemed like battery energy density improvements were very marginal. I'd expect that this type of jump could only be achieved with a new significant insight, but the article seems to say it's just traditio
64.
by beaned 3y ago
I said nothing of the sort. I said that the difference exists and asked if we should be able to talk about it.
65.
by beaned 3y ago
I haven't read the comments there but IQ differences among genetic groups is real and deeply studied, it is one of the least refutable things about homo sapiens that we know. Should we be able to talk about it?
66.
by beaned 4y ago
I dunno, have you been to any of the major western European cities in the last 15 years? They're pretty brown now. At least these cities seem to greatly favor immigration.
67.
by beaned 4y ago
I would think that limiting immigration rather than the use of English would have a far greater impact on what they're trying to achieve. Not making a qualitative statement about whether that's a morally or economically right or w
68.
by beaned 4y ago
Is there a specific capacity in regards to labeling that is enabled by more money? I can see it for like.. heart surgery. But don't most of us know what things are to be called when we see them? ChatGPT seems to be pretty good at knowi
69.
by beaned 4y ago
How can you possibly be a fair "enforcer" of a law that you refuse to specify?
70.
by beaned 4y ago
*in the past
71.
by beaned 4y ago
I don't have any evidence for this but I feel like things used to work more this way in the future. Now we send everything to experts, people with licenses and degrees and years of experience. And I mean it works, but we pay in terms o
72.
by beaned 4y ago
Considering everything in the current US regime would be pushing against this to be the conclusion and it is still the finding, I suspect the "low confidence" is a managerial stamp based on high level skepticism of likely inscruta
73.
by beaned 4y ago
Fix it with Kintsugi [0] and sell it as a 1 of 1 for a higher price. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kintsugi
74.
by beaned 4y ago
I can't read the article because it's paywalled but I've lived in NYC and SF for several years each, and have now been in Austin for 2. I'll just say one thing which I like about it a lot. Being a blue city in a red stat
75.
by beaned 4y ago
Actually it does just arise from owning the token, if you stake the token.
76.
by beaned 4y ago
It might be possible that you have a point but you have to expound on it for it to be clear. When you jump to "in other words..," I don't know what you're talking about.
77.
by beaned 4y ago
Yeah that makes sense but that's not what I was meaning to point out. You said this: > You can issue stock that pays dividends in piñatas. If it's sold to Americans, the SEC has jurisdiction. So whether or not the stock issues
78.
by beaned 4y ago
> The SEC isn't going that far. It's just saying if you want to take peoples' money and pay a return on it, you need to do the things others who do the same must. Like what? I'm not sure I understand. They're bot
79.
by beaned 4y ago
Thanks, this phrasing makes more sense to me than the other explanations I've read. But if kraken already is approved to hold crypto for users, what makes staking it different? Aren't they already promising just to hold it and ret
80.
by beaned 4y ago
All good to know. > Not relevant. You can issue stock that pays dividends in piñatas. If it's sold to Americans, the SEC has jurisdiction. Isn't this because the stock itself is already a security, not because of whether or how
81.
by beaned 4y ago
I don't understand how they're different. Charles Schwab is a middleman to the company (say Exxon). Kraken is a middleman to the Blockchain. That seems like a clear analog, and not only that, but the code, the law of the Blockchai
82.
by beaned 4y ago
Bonds are a "promise" because they can fail - the issuer can fail and the bonds can become worthless. So there may be a reasonable expectation of return, but still risk. Staking is not the same, because it is the algorithmic infla
83.
by beaned 4y ago
It seems to me that by this description, whether or not it's a security is basically how it's marketed? You could also explain such a product as simply a custodianship that is able to hold your eth in a staked state for you, with
84.
by beaned 4y ago
That still doesn't make it a security.
85.
by beaned 4y ago
That seems like a traditional contract between provider and consumer more than a security. If I own a dividend-bearing stock on Charles Schwab and they don't pay me the dividend, it's not because Charles Schwab offered a security,
86.
by beaned 4y ago
Will be interesting to see what impact this has on validators adhering to ofac rules. It's much easier to control blocks when they're processed centrally. https://www.mevwatch.info/
87.
by beaned 4y ago
Is it a "promise" if it's a guaranteed algorithmic result?
88.
by beaned 4y ago
How can you call his sources crank without knowing who they are yourself?
89.
by beaned 4y ago
> Also there were many incidents of the mainstream media cutting of talks or turning away the camera when people said or did anything discrediting the official narrative. Twitter itself pioneered this during covid. It's no surprise
90.
by beaned 4y ago
I don't understand your comment. First you said that cutting carbs to get shredded is bollocks, but then in your very next sentence you said you reduce carb intake during a cut.

More ›