gonehome

53 ms·

631.
by gonehome 5y ago
I locked in 2.49% rate on a 30yr fixed two months ago in the US basically betting that rates were about to skyrocket and I wouldn’t be able to buy again for a long time at a rate this good. To get a rate that low you have to pay it down in
632.
by gonehome 5y ago
There’s nothing that makes it physically impossible so it’s likely inevitable - just hard to know when. The risk of poorly aligned AGI as described is real, makes sense to try to work on the problem before we need it (when it’ll be too late
633.
by gonehome 5y ago
I love Ted Chiang’s scifi but he’s just not well informed on the AGI stuff. I think if he ramped up on it his writing about it would better.
634.
by gonehome 5y ago
The more likely AGI risk is indifference in pursuit of optimizing a reward function with values not aligned with us. Like the anthill destroyed by the construction of a dam. The humans don’t hate the ants, aren’t putting them in zoos, they
635.
by gonehome 5y ago
The monkey playing the computer game was the more interesting one imo - but it’s outside of my field of expertise.
636.
by gonehome 5y ago
Thanks - this is probably the exact story I was remembering.
637.
by gonehome 5y ago
There’s another interesting spleen fact that I remember reading: people who survive flight ejections and hitting water at high speed tend to have had their spleens removed. Probably because otherwise the impact causes a rupture and you blee
638.
by gonehome 5y ago
Any thoughts on Neuralink's work/approach?
639.
by gonehome 5y ago
> "They are not incentive aligned for students who make between 0-50k. Lambda gets no money." The are aligned because <50k is a failure for lambda. They're aligned because they need students to make >50k. > "
640.
by gonehome 5y ago
There's nothing to follow - most of the comments here are wrong. ISAs align incentives between teaching institutions and students, they're strictly better than the tuition model. They don't fix all issues because they still r
641.
by gonehome 5y ago
I'm biased because I now work on it, but I think Urbit is the only way something like this will work for most people and at scale. "Only" is probably too strongly worded, but it's the one attempt I've seen where I t
642.
by gonehome 5y ago
When I've asked this question to engineers that work at famous companies they're usually happy to explain what the tradeoffs are and why some decision was made if they know the reason (often there might even be a blog post). Usual
643.
by gonehome 5y ago
It's in quotes because you often can't liquidate the exercised shares of a private company. So acting as if the spread is income prior to an actual sale for tax reasons is wrong (imo) and bad policy. You're still assuming ris
644.
by gonehome 5y ago
Took me a bit to realize you are the same account from the last thread ( https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30630271 ) You have a clear motivated reasoning bias (crypto = bad and useless) paired without understanding the ba
645.
by gonehome 5y ago
I use Magnet and I've found it works well, maybe you are pickier than I am (but I'm pretty picky).
646.
by gonehome 5y ago
200yrs is nothing (and fiat was backed by gold as recently as 50yrs ago). Focusing on this despite the rest of what I wrote is still kind of missing my point. There’s not really much point in further discussion, there’s not much more to say
647.
by gonehome 5y ago
I’m assuming good faith, but I feel like you’re intentionally ignoring and redirecting away to prove some existing conclusion. We’re talking about advantages and capabilities - specifically granted by crypto of which self-custody is a prere
648.
by gonehome 5y ago
It’s harder to enforce regulations for self-custody crypto than it is to enforce regulations on centralized banks that hold wealth for you. Mostly because it’s harder to confiscate (more akin to a physical item in your possession)
649.
by gonehome 5y ago
It’s harder to regulate and easier to buy than assets outside of Russia. This is probably why Chinese wealth leverages it to get around attempted controls by the ccp despite regulation.
650.
by gonehome 5y ago
I didn’t call it the future of money. Limited supply is not irrelevant or “factually wrong” for a long term store of value (like gold) which is more the role BTC plays specifically.
651.
by gonehome 5y ago
You're right that sanctions and restrictions could impact the price. What I'm arguing is that this impact doesn't cause the price to be zero, requires global coordination to have a big impact, and that even in this case, the
652.
by gonehome 5y ago
It’s more likely someone will accept them and that some exchanges will still accept them. What you’re suggesting requires perfect and total global coordination. With fiat in a bank, you don’t have a chance since it just gets frozen and you
653.
by gonehome 5y ago
It’s not as easy to move money to an overseas account as it is to buy Bitcoin. Your money on that account is still being trusted to some authority and your guarantees on it are limited. The real fiat equivalent would be moving all your weal
654.
by gonehome 5y ago
Retaining more individual capability does allow people to commit crimes (though in the public ledger case this is often a stupid idea if you stay in the jurisdiction where what you’re doing is a crime). Not all governments are good, not all
655.
by gonehome 5y ago
This largely matches my experience fwiw - I was in college in 2010 and didn’t have much money (and coins were harder to buy back then too, mining was still not super easy without a gpu rig). I thought the tech was cool, but never owned any
656.
by gonehome 5y ago
FDIC insurance is capped at 250k. The recovery there is also limited and it’s a bad idea to keep large amounts of money in a bank account. > “Comparing the risk profile of Coinbase to a bank is no different than blindly trusting a big ba
657.
by gonehome 5y ago
I think these are all good questions and where the conversation gets interesting imo. Also the answers are largely unknown and unproven. Gold has held up as a value store and is the closest analog I think, but it’s not a perfect comparison
658.
by gonehome 5y ago
You’re right about FDIC protection. The wire fraud example is really the least important part of my comment (it was just showing risk exists with some traditional financial transactions too). Exchange risk is tempered somewhat by Coinbase w
659.
by gonehome 5y ago
> “ Why wouldn't they just use the stablecoin?” This is a good question and I think there’s a two part answer. Part one is stable coins still have smart contract risk in the arbitrage style version, and fraud/authority risk in
660.
by gonehome 5y ago
That’s not that big of a deal, just move BTC into a stable coin first and then use that for the transaction. Bitcoin is more akin to a gold like store of value than a currency.

More ›