Nothing creepy about that hug…these old fucks can’t help themselves can they.

Ha…guess I’m the asshole. But I still hate teams alright!

I’ve had to repeatedly switcho “new teams”. The selection isn’t sticky for some reason. It seems like it shouldn’t be that hard to develope a messaging app that does file transfers and meetings but apparently this bloated pile of horseshit proves reason wrong. A second long delay when changing threads? “You’ll use it because corporate says you will…and you’ll LOVE IT”.

And now you know something about me😋

Added, sorry for the delay.

Added. Sorry for the delay.

Is linked to excess deaths? Technically it could be saving lives at a population scale. I doubt that’s the case, but it could be. I’ll read the article now and find out.

Edit: it doesn’t seem to say anything regarding “normal” auto related deaths. They’re focusing on the bullshit designation of an unfinished product as “autopilot”,and a (small) subset of specific cases that are particularly aggregious, where there were 5-10 seconds of lead time into an incident. In these cases a person who was paying attention wouldn’t have been in the accident.

Also some clarity edits.

🤯

I get this sentiment, but it’d go a long way for people who have the dreaded “range anxiety”. If they want the expense of both systems, then go for it. I have a used Chevy Volt which is a PHEV, we got it a few years ago and didn’t want to commit to full electric yet. It’s my families only car and in our case it’s been bullet proof. 95% of our driving is on electric with only family visits requiring gas. It’s not a bad system for people who aren’t convinced. Different now that it’s becomming a culture war issue though.

Just want to say that I appreciate how you two ended up haha. It was a wide eyed “Woah” from me at the beginning there (both), but I do love that you guys talked it out and ended up all civil and complimentary. There’s hope for us all to understand each other is my takeaway. Thanks to both of you for showing us the way.

Yeah, a couple of decades ago China was a miracle as western institutions repeatedly redefined the poverty threshold to make global poverty look like it was improving. Back then it was touting the power of the free market, with most of the gains being in China. Now that they want conflict with China, those numbers are no longer good enough. I’m not saying China doesn’t have a poverty problem, I’m just saying this is illustrative of propaganda changing the narrative.

Also, if its in human poo it’s already in the carbon cycle and so really less of an issue. The problem is bringing up carbon that’s been removed from the cycle (subterranean oil or gas pockets) and putting that back into circulation. Granted it would be better to pull carbon out of the atmosphere (somehow), but at least using poo wouldn’t be adding NEW carbon. That’s my understanding anyway.

As a non programmer, isn’t visual basic for Excell scripts?

Upvotes for Tali!

I genuinely don’t understand why so many people go with the network brand. AFAIK all of the US networks have MVNO’s that operate on their networks at much lower cost. Some of those virtual operators are even owned by the big guys, e.g. Cricket on ATT. My coworkers pay literally hundreds of dollars more per month than is necessary, and what, they get a few Mbps faster data rates? Is that really worth it?

Edit: TIL a lot of people have had a hard time with MVNO’s. My experience has been excellent and consistent, but that apparently doesn’t generalize.

Guess you won. I’ll just pack up and head out with all my wrongness. 🖖

Yeah that’s true about losing access to your shit for sure. There are options like multisignature accounts that could reduce the possibility of theft, but really the danger in crypto is shooting yourself in the face and losing your keys. Theft comes from bad software around the crypto like browser extensions and shit like that, the blockchain itself though makes theft numerically impossible on timescales like the existance of the universe. But your point stands that it isn’t user friendly, which isn’t new to emerging technology.

On a personal note, I very much like the model of self custody of assets, and this is coming from someone who almost fucked up and lost their keys. Loss of assets is a possibility and should be in the mind of users, but the tradeoff here is that you always have access to your funds and control over them.

Another commenter stated that crypto is solution in search of a problem, and I don’t think that’s not necessarily wrong. I see that as optimistic because it’s still a solution. It potentially broadens the space of possibilities from our sole option of centralized control by existing wealth/power structures.

Your second paragraph is where I think the win is. When you have self custody of things, you have more ineroperability and stuff like that. Largely I buy the statement that all this is a solution in search of a problem. I don’t think that’s necessarily a bad thing though. It broadens the possible space of options in the future, which I find to be exciting.

Edit…added the following.shit

There is at least one airline using this NFT model currently, in Argentina I think. It could be that the CEO is using the service because he’s just a crypto maximalist but I believe the win from their point of view is that they get a cut of subsequent secondary sales. They’ve sold the ticket once, maybe you can get a bit more for it.

As far as the card game goes, what your saying, that the game could be shuttered is not different than what we currently have. It’s only different in that you’re able to own the cards while it’s running. Maybe you want to gift your child a good card that you have, you can just send it to them. Impossible currently because you don’t control anything in hearthstone except how much money to spend on packs.

I don’t think that I’ll be able to change your mind. I get the bad blood with crypto, really, but I guess I just don’t share the absolute conviction that the whole thing is a scam.

The way you’re breaking down ownership is true, but it’s true about every form or ownership. The deed to your house? You don’t own anything, that’s just a piece of paper that someone says prooves that you have a right to live there. Whether that’s saved in a county records department or a blockchain that doesn’t really change. Point taken, but I think it’s a broader point than how you were using it.

I’m not really sure what makes saving your deed information on a blockchain less valid than in a county records department though. I mean breaking it down, a blockchain is really just a ledger that keeps track of information in a cryptographically secure way. I think that this has gotten out of hand because of all of the get rich quick schemes, and that’s fair. It’s happened…a lot. But does that invalidate the whole endeavor?

The current exchange system has rent seeking vultures sitting on top. Visa, MasterCard, these fuckers sit there and take a percentage of every transaction that theY fascilitate. What are they doing? Keeping a ledger. We trust them to do it accurately and pay them steeply to do it. Now we have a self managing ledger that requires no trust from anyone. Can you really tell me there is ZERO use case potential here?

NFT’s are a form of ownership (I know, I know, of a JPEG). If we leave out the scammy bullshit that NFT’s have been in the past, then there are interesting things you can do with them. One company now is minting NFT plane tickets. The advantage is that if plans change or something you OWN that plane ticket, and could directly sell it on a seconary market or somthing. Another case would be for games. I personally like collector card games, like hearthstone and things like that. However when you play digital card games you never own shit. They could just close ownership down at any point…technically. with a set of NFT cards you 100% own it.

Beyond that, the ownership model in crypto can be empowering to users as well. One insurance company popped up that let you combine your funds with others directly in the form of their risk pools to provide the necessay function that insurance companies currently do and decreasing the amount of liquidity they have to maintain which can lower prices for consumers and provide for growth on your resources.

Not all of these things have succeeded. The main thing is a different take on ownership. Previously it has been that you give money to institutions and it’s yours because you trust them. In crypto it’s yours because that’s how it’s coded in the smart contract. I’m not a maximalist, but I think if that change can be capitalized on in certain cases it could work well.