I’m just picturing a scenario where the fridge won’t open its door unless you finish watching an AI generated, very low quality, scammy ad. Looking at you, YouTube…
“The door refused to open. It said, “Five cents, please.”
He searched his pockets. No more coins; nothing. “I’ll pay you tomorrow,” he told the door. Again he tried the knob. Again it remained locked tight. “What I pay you,” he informed it, “is in the nature of a gratuity; I don’t have to pay you.”
“I think otherwise,” the door said. “Look in the purchase contract you signed when you bought this conapt.”
In his desk drawer he found the contract; since signing it he had found it necessary to refer to the document many times. Sure enough; payment to his door for opening and shutting constituted a mandatory fee. Not a tip.
“You discover I’m right,” the door said. It sounded smug.
From the drawer beside the sink Joe Chip got a stainless steel knife; with it he began systematically to unscrew the bolt assembly of his apt’s money-gulping door.
“I’ll sue you,” the door said as the first screw fell out.
Joe Chip said, “I’ve never been sued by a door. But I guess I can live through it.”
Dance along with the characters of the new Series, now streaming on $sponsor, and achieve a score of at least 6/10 to get another door unlock your door.
---
Your dance was not good enough, try again or buy a door unlock with the flash discount code "Distopia" for 99ct.
We need to create a type of business type for ad businesses. We have S-Corps, C-Corps, etc. We need an Ad-Corp. And the rule should be if your business sells any ads at all your business gets automatically converted to an ad-corp and you get taxed on revenue.
Location: Andorra
Remote: Yes (exclusively)
Willing to relocate: No
Technologies: Ruby, Rails, Ember.js, Svelte.js, SQL
Résumé/CV: https://www.linkedin.com/in/htatche
Email: herveonrails@gmail.com
Hi!
I'm a full stack software developer with 10+ years of hands-on experience with Ruby on Rails and Javascript. I’ve worked across the spectrum: early startups, high-growth scale ups, and most recently, a large corporate product with a huge Rails monolith and even bigger DB. On the FE side I've worked with a range of libs and frameworks, starting with raw JS a long time ago all the way to Svelte.js more recently.
Have a look at my LI and if you think you're building something where I could help, let me know!
Location: Andorra
Remote: Yes (exclusively)
Willing to relocate: No
Technologies: Ruby, Rails, Ember.js, Svelte.js, SQL
Résumé/CV: https://www.linkedin.com/in/htatche
Email: herveonrails@gmail.com
Hi!
I'm a full stack software developer with 10+ years of hands-on experience with Ruby on Rails and Javascript. I’ve worked across the spectrum: early startups, high-growth scale ups, and most recently, a large corporate product with a huge Rails monolith and even bigger DB. On the FE side I've worked with a range of libs and frameworks, starting with raw JS a long time ago all the way to Svelte.js more recently.
Have a look at my LI and if you think you're building something where I could help, let me know!
PS: I’d be also very interested in exploring the Go ecosystem, ideally finding a company that uses both Ruby&Go or that'd be willing to bring a pragmatic Rubyist into a Go environment. I’ve always picked up tech quickly and I’m excited to expand my skills.
> The results showed hints that spending by giant data center operators “could tighten at the margins if near-term returns from AI applications remain difficult to quantify,” Emarketer analyst Jacob Bourne said in a note.
> According to the president, Indonesia's central and regional governments together operate a fleet of 27,000 apps, many of which overlap or aren't integrated.
As an Indonesian working as a software developer, I can say that integration is more akin to a jargon than something actually planned and properly implemented here in Indonesia. The apps number continue to grow because almost every time the head of an institution changes (on whatever level it is), the new one would be more likely to create a new app from scratch as a form of achievement.
That's a big assumption. Alyssa may very well not spend all her walking time writing code (setting aside the implication that writing code is not "enjoyable" for now).
Feynman was a very successful physicist. A nobel price medalist, among other things. He very famously was also someone who enjoyed a life outside of physics a great deal.
Paul Erdős, on the other hand, did at least outwardly seem to have spent most of his life focused on doing mathematics. And nobody can convince me that he did not enjoy his life as well...
I love this argument. "Can you define EXACTLY what you want to ban"? I'd say a significant part of all criminalized activities can't be EXACTLY defined. Somehow we still manage.
It is such a tired argument now. Firs of all, the magical internet gambling tokens are not an alternative to "fiat" or world financial system. The global financial system consumes far less energy per transaction considering that billions of transactions take place around the world per second.
I really fail to understand the fetish of the crypto crowd with the word fiat and whatever they think it means. I get it, people just want to gamble and want to be ultra rich without doing anything, I am sure there are ways of doing that (gambling) without wasting a ton of energy.
Fiat as opposed to crypto currency? Crypto is the most fiat currency imaginable. I know crypto bros tries to redefine reality to trick people into thinking crypto is somehow tied to real tangible value, but it’s just not.
Non-fiat currency is physically tied to the creation of real-world value, like say mining gold which has thousands of real-world applications. Traditional fiat currencies are fundamentally designed to be a proxy for real world value. In a well designed system it’s most of its creation is tied to debt issues to, say a gold mine or an oil well or solar farm. Cryptocurrency is - in its utter insanity - fundamentally tied to the destruction of physical value. That is, burning electricity while creating nothing useful. So: more fiat than fiat. Another huge step removed from the creation of real physical valuables.
Traditional currencies are far more efficient and a basic necessity for the economy to function at all.
Cryptocurrency is fundamentally unsuited to become a real currency by its very design. Every one I’ve seen so far has been made by people who seem to lack even the most basic understanding of what the main origin of currency is. (Hint: it’s not metal coins..)
> Traditional fiat currencies are fundamentally designed to be a proxy for real world value.
The US went off the gold standard in 1971. It's all just bullshit paper now. I'm not sure why you're talking about something that doesn't even exist today.
I'd love it if "traditional fiat" currencies existed as you describe, but they don't.
crypto in and of itself is a really cool and valuable tool. the hype bubble around it and subsequent power/environmental consequences are not good - but the tech is cool and should be appreciated. blockchain is also a great tool for the right usecases (distributed ledger)
the hype bubble around it and subsequent power/environmental consequences [...]
The energy consumption is not the result of anything, it is a fundamental design element. [1] To reach a meaningful consensus, you have to give all participating users equal or at least similar voting power. But Bitcoin does not want a central database of users which opens the door for Sybil attacks - you can just invent an essentially unlimited number of users out of thin air and have them vote the way you want. The solution to this problem in case of Bitcoin is to tie votes to computing resources for calculating hashes. While you can invent users out of thin, you can not invent computing power out of thin air. This gives each user voting power in proportion to the amount of money they are willing to invest in computing resources. Not really equal voting power for all users but close enough in practice. If miners would not burn enormous amounts of energy, anyone could come along and influence or alter the transaction history or just mine empty blocks and with that block all transactions.
[1] For Bitcoin and similar proof of work systems, there are alternatives.
You can't understand why people want to be free from the shackles of government issued money? Arguments can reasonably be made about the viability of crypto, the stability and how useful it actually is, but it should be crystal clear why many people are desperate for mediums of exchange and stores of value outside of the government-controlled medium (crypto, gold or otherwise).
That governments can't control access to cryptocurrencies and gold is the biggest fantasy that crypto rubes believe. That people in developed countries don't want governments to control money to claw it back from fraudsters is the second biggest fantasy.
>That governments can't control access to cryptocurrencies and gold is the biggest fantasy that crypto rubes believe.
Cryptocurrencies are math. Governments cannot control math, as much as authoritarians wish they could.
>That people in developed countries don't want governments to control money to claw it back from fraudsters is the second biggest fantasy.
The assumption that most people in developed countries want government to "control money" is delusional at best. There are certainly many people in developed countries who want the government to control money, control speech, control political discourse and control everything else - but there are just as many who oppose all of that.
Governments can't stop you doing maths, but they can make it very difficult to either do it at scale, or convert your maths back into government issued currency.
> Cryptocurrencies are math. Governments cannot control math, as much as authoritarians wish they could.
And there's the misconception. Trading government money for cryptocurrency is subject to regulation. Do you think you can hack the President's communication and send it to Putin because it's math? Do you think you can set the interest rate on a loan to 500% because it's math?
> The assumption that most people in developed countries want government to "control money" is delusional at best.
How strange then that every single developed democracy has implemented it. I must have just imagined the entire field of tort law and people clamoring for relief from the courts.
You are trying to retcon the reason why (e.g.) Bitcoin was created in the first place:
> Commerce on the Internet has come to rely almost exclusively on financial institutions serving as trusted third parties to process electronic payments. While the system works well enough for most transactions, it still suffers from the inherent weaknesses of the trust based model. Completely non-reversible transactions are not really possible, since financial institutions cannot avoid mediating disputes. The cost of mediation increases transaction costs, limiting the minimum practical transaction size and cutting off the possibility for small casual transactions, and there is a broader cost in the loss of ability to make non-reversible payments for non- reversible services. With the possibility of reversal, the need for trust spreads. Merchants must be wary of their customers, hassling them for more information than they would otherwise need. A certain percentage of fraud is accepted as unavoidable. These costs and payment uncertainties can be avoided in person by using physical currency, but no mechanism exists to make payments over a communications channel without a trusted party.
What's strange about it? The creator of Bitcoin could not predict that volatility. The inflation of fiat currency is one major reason why crypto exists. Bitcoin has a 21 million BTC supply limit. That's the point.
However even with the volatility, it's way more stable than the Venezuelan currency. Crypto is widely used in Venezuela.
As a +10years Ruby dev, I don't see anything looking "pretty nice" about this, just yet another a new confusing way of achieving the same result, but differently.
I've been doing Ruby for some 15 years now and the major thing that puts me off is the community's love for implicitness.
This is another case: we had a way that requires a programmer to explicitly define what she is forwarding and where she is forwarding it to.
And now we have a way that requires the reader of software to know the intricacies of the language in order to understand how the "magic" works.
I truly fail to see how this makes a language better.
reply