trevelyan

13 ms·

31.
by trevelyan 5y ago
You might enjoy this analysis of Skyfall, which talks a bit about the choice of the poem: http://filmreadings.com/2015/12/23/skyfall/ "The authoritarian tendencies of the agency are also underlined
32.
A Response to Paul Krugman from a Keynesian Bitcoiner(org.saito.tech)
5 points by trevelyan 5y ago|0 comments
33.
by trevelyan 5y ago
Interesting angle -- but it's really not a defense of POW so much an argument for networks like Saito ( https://saito.io ) that replace mining with routing work and get cost-of-attack from the electricity spent running the se
34.
The Scalability Trilemma is either Irrelevant or Wrong: here's why(org.saito.tech)
2 points by trevelyan 5y ago|0 comments
35.
by trevelyan 5y ago
> generally it’s beyond current science to independently create mutations for a specific purpose. No it isn't. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4810786/
36.
by trevelyan 6y ago
I don't see the point. We know that zoonotic transmission and natural origin is possible. The question is about how likely it is to be the origin of COV. No-one who has been to Wuhan would expect zoonotic transfer. And certainly not of
37.
by trevelyan 6y ago
> I personally have no idea if it was shut down for a week in September, that's a very specific thing. Do you know exactly when a company in your line of work started doing work from home? I'm quite familiar with my own industr
38.
by trevelyan 6y ago
> Why would this support either hypothesis? So why did you bring it up? The observation doesn't support zoonotic hypothesis at all, although it could support lab leak if we assume GOF was done on a natural or modified virus with a h
39.
by trevelyan 6y ago
Everyone knows that mutations that increase transmissability generally hurt morbidity. Is there some reason you think this supports zoonotic hypothesis? It is public knowledge RaTG13 was collected from a mine shaft where a similar virus kil
40.
by trevelyan 6y ago
James, I read your post on Reddit back in the day. It was evasive and frankly condescending because you basically argue against something no-one familiar with the science is claiming: that COV is a chimeric virus that is the product of copy
41.
by trevelyan 6y ago
> There is circumstantial evidence the virus was introduced by an animal/person who traveled to the wet market. Not for this one. There were several cases we know preceded the wet market cluster. This was known in January 2020.
42.
by trevelyan 6y ago
Saito ( https://saito.io ) is a leading third-generation blockchain. If you're in the blockchain space and have yet to hear of Saito, that will change this year. Saito is unique in not being built atop POW or POS. Instead, it
43.
by trevelyan 6y ago
Thank you for the reference. [1] particularly interesting.
44.
by trevelyan 6y ago
RaTG13 geonome was published January 23, 2020 by Wuhan Institute of Virology. https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.01.22.914952v1.... https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/nuccore/MN996532
45.
by trevelyan 6y ago
The NIH has also addressed this topic as well. "We speculated that in COVID-19, beyond the classical pulmonary immune-inflammation view, the occurrence of an oxygen-deprived blood disease, with iron metabolism dysregulation, should be
46.
by trevelyan 6y ago
Thanks for sharing your off-topic criticism. Here is NIH on the same topic: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7267810/#:~:tex... . Next time, if you're going to try gatekeeping, be sure you hav
47.
by trevelyan 6y ago
> As far as I know we simply do not have evidence if or if not gain of function research played a role. You can examine phylogenetic distance -- the degree of evolutionary drift that the initial virus had from others which are subject to
48.
by trevelyan 6y ago
Parent is correct about COVID attacking the ability of red blood cells to carry oxygen. This has been known for a while. Many sources if you search. Here is one: https://chemrxiv.org/articles/preprint/COVID-19_Dise
49.
by trevelyan 6y ago
Look into Saito Consensus: https://saito.io/saito-whitepaper.pdf The network pays the nodes that run infrastructure rather than miners or stakers. Cost-of-attack is generated by the same nodes, so paying for infrastructure
50.
by trevelyan 6y ago
Yeah. They don't know that Marian has it.
51.
by trevelyan 6y ago
You don't need a transaction to be routed by many nodes: how quickly it propagates (and thus how quickly it gets included/confirmed) just depends on how much hashing you do before sending it. The halving penalty on work just for
52.
by trevelyan 6y ago
Distributed Proof-of-Work is not vulnerable to this: https://org.saito.tech/eliminating-51-attacks-in-proof-of-wo... The community of users simply attaches harder cryptographic proofs to their transactions, forcing up the c
53.
by trevelyan 6y ago
> the technology is broken beyond fixability. Saito fixes it ( https://saito.io/arcade ). There is no 51% attack and no scalability trilemma. So you have a network that pays for itself and generates a quantifiable cost-of
54.
by trevelyan 6y ago
US government documents are public. You can legally publish and discuss them. No-one has a legal obligation to secrecy unless they sign it away as part of an employment contract with the government. Thus the attempts to nail Assange for con
55.
by trevelyan 6y ago
Ruffled feathers
56.
by trevelyan 6y ago
Blockchains does not require append-only. There are pruning techniques like Automatic Transaction Rebroadcasting coming out on high-throughput blockchains like Saito: https://youtu.be/agppUdX9YvI?t=65 These techniques will
57.
Team Red, Team Blue: Faith and Despair in Tenet(saito.io)
1 points by trevelyan 6y ago|0 comments
58.
by trevelyan 6y ago
The Adrian Lamo chat logs (published by Wired) show Assange was contacted by Manning with express intent to leak. So there was no conspiracy. Not disagreeing with the rest of your post, just pointing this out because there is no reason to r
59.
by trevelyan 6y ago
There has been no evidence he hacked anything. Prosecutor cites him saying, "no luck with that" as evidence he did try instead of evidence he didn't. The conspiracy stuff is also nonsense. Adrian Lamo logs show Manning contac
60.
by trevelyan 6y ago
It's self-evident bullcrap. The Adrian Lamo logs (published by Wired and available online) show very clearly that Manning contacted Assange with intent to leak.

More ›