gnaritas

28 ms·

211.
by gnaritas 9y ago
Not the least bit surprised.
212.
by gnaritas 9y ago
No, the OP said it correctly, it's a momentum strategy, you presume the market will keep going in the direction it's already going. This is a simple trend trading strategy. It doesn't actually work anymore, but anything tha
213.
by gnaritas 9y ago
That guy will be dead soon, it's only luck that he isn't yet.
214.
by gnaritas 9y ago
Trading != investing, dollar cost average is an investing strategy, not a trading strategy; you have an investing bot, not a trading bot.
215.
by gnaritas 9y ago
> What's popular isn't always correct and dictionaries by definition reflect usage. What's popular is correct by definition, that's why dictionaries reflect usage, they don't prescribe it. Language is about commu
216.
by gnaritas 9y ago
You can't patent math.
217.
by gnaritas 9y ago
> This is the first time I've been sitting on an algo that I genuinely believe to be novel. The odds are extremely high that you're simply mistaken. While it might be novel to programmers, it's very unlikely to be novel to
218.
by gnaritas 9y ago
Fine, I think it was simply blunt, not uncivil, but whatever.
219.
by gnaritas 9y ago
> and putting one particular model above all others as the 'correct' is actually discouraging the reader from getting towards the deeper truth. No one is putting a particular model above all others, one model is simply being us
220.
by gnaritas 9y ago
If he understood how to communicate with people at all, he'd have simply said what you just did. He's also mistaken, it is an extremely useful one because it makes a complex topic clear in a way that explains why C can't be
221.
by gnaritas 9y ago
There are no good aspects here, this pardon is dispicable and undermines the rule of law and is directly an expression of racism from the POTUS. Arpaio was an awful sheriff, a bigot who abused his power and put innocent people on chain gan
222.
by gnaritas 9y ago
You are terrible at explaining things and are correcting someone who actually explained it much better than you, even if he is technically incorrect. Your jargon laden overly verbose response is wildly out of place in correcting a simple la
223.
by gnaritas 9y ago
I agree usage is growing, but that is not the topic. Most coins are moving not because of usage but because of speculation, people are buying largely because of speculation, trading because of speculation, and selling because of speculatio
224.
by gnaritas 9y ago
> getting the money to and from the exchange would be a gigantic hassle No, it's a simple bank transfer. It doesn't matter if that's reported to anyone, transfer to an exchange in your own country and you're not doin
225.
by gnaritas 9y ago
Well hey, I'm annoyed by people who think their delusions of what something could be is the same thing as reality. I'm a huge fan of crypto, but the OP is correct about what it currently is and who's mostly using it. Demand
226.
by gnaritas 9y ago
I'm a big fan of crypto, I'm just saying don't count your chickens before they hatch; it isn't world changing yet, might be or might not be eventually but no need to exaggerate.
227.
by gnaritas 9y ago
No, it's a factual statement of where the tech currently stands. You're confusing your hope of what it might become with what it currently is.
228.
by gnaritas 9y ago
Uh, bitcoin is the size of a single company, that's a pretty good example of how small it is. It's 1/6th the size of Google, that's not a world changing amount of capital.
229.
by gnaritas 9y ago
It's tiny, no more than the size of a single company in the real market. Crypto is cool, no need to exaggerate its size as more relevant than it really is, right it it's a tiny drop in a huge ocean of capital, it is not significa
230.
by gnaritas 9y ago
This is a disingenuous comment, all of those other things are primarily used for something else; so you either miss the point he's making or you're being unnecessarily pedantic.
231.
by gnaritas 9y ago
It should have been, but people get irrational when they're afraid.
232.
by gnaritas 9y ago
It's an abuse of language to call either of them free, neither are free, one is simply less authoritarian than the other. Yes, authoritarianism is not binary, there are many levels, but freedom of speech is binary, if you can be jaile
233.
by gnaritas 9y ago
Not a paper, but one of my favorite talks https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ahvzDzKdB0&t=642s Growing a Language by Guy Steele (co-inventory of Scheme). Brilliant speech about how to grow languages and why it's nec
234.
by gnaritas 9y ago
That's an absolutely awful idea. It's great if you want to live in a totalitarian regime, otherwise awful.
235.
by gnaritas 9y ago
Then it's not free speech. If you're not free to speak about certain things, you do not have freedom of speech, it is very much all or nothing. Freedom is a binary condition, you either have it, or you don't.
236.
by gnaritas 9y ago
I don't see why any of those are problematic, all should be protected as free speech. Speech is not violence, it does not have victims and thus should not be in any way a crime no matter how repugnant. No speech should ever be banned.
237.
by gnaritas 9y ago
I know what you meant, I don't agree. Scour any large codebase, x++ is far more idiomatic than ++x.
238.
by gnaritas 9y ago
The topic is moving capital across borders, that presumes you already have said capital and naturally yes that would be in a bank. Buying millions in bitcoin is not illegal, it will not be difficult, it doesn't matter if your bank repo
239.
by gnaritas 9y ago
No one who understands what bitcoin is thought it was anonymous.
240.
by gnaritas 9y ago
Technically, those embassies are still in U.S. jurisdiction, however, I grant you your point as I was unaware they did this.

More ›