I wonder what Musk would say about the idea of limiting Tweets instead of banning them.
Oh, wait!
New Twitter policy is freedom of speech, but not freedom of reach.
Negative/hate tweets will be max deboosted & demonetized, so no ads or other revenue to Twitter.
You won’t find the tweet unless you specifically seek it out, which is no different from rest of Internet.
> has this happened with blockchain yet? I'm not seeing it.
It's a unique situation in that hype is easily and definitely measurable: market cap. You would arguably need to subtract any use for real-world applications, i. e. the drug business using it, which can easily be approximated (to the closest full percentage point of market cap) by the formula x = 0.
That was always stupid and there were always demonstrations of said stupidity. It’s one of those snarky contrarian takes people repeat ad nauseam. See also: correlation and causation.
This excellent comeback currently being downvoted is quite a testament to this weird turn against California in the tech community. It seems too sudden and drastic to be just the result of the general ascend of the alt-right in the sector so I am wondering if there any other reasons? Elon Musk? (No it’s not the weird crime fantasies. Also, by the way, Sweden still has excellent quality of life and phrenology is probably wrong and definitely useless)
Maybe housing? But that’s almost literally the Woody Allen joke, “nobody goes there anymore, it’s too crowded”.
So… A recession may turn out to be bad for an economy? I know economics is called the “dismal science” but this seems to undercut even low standards.
More specifically on the article’s thesis: yes, California’s tax revenue may be more sensitive to an economic downturn. But that’s due to extremely high income from startups that just doesn’t exist in other states. It’s running a budget surplus that’s something like half of all other states’ total revenue IIRC.
If that extra income disappears, people will still work, earn income, and go shopping. The state’s revenue will just revert to normal-state levels.
Hacker News has taken this weird turn to hate California to a degree usually reserved for, say, female CEOs or renewable power. This story may seem to satisfy this urge, predicting as it does a hard crash for the state. But it’s really just reporting on the altitude record the state is currently setting.
Edit, in response to the answer below: TIL, thanks! I’ll have to switch to making jokes about their Nobel being second-rate and their models being thinner and on more crack than those of the fashion world.
For Saudi Arabia, it seems they didn’t nationalize anything but demanded 50 % of profits, which is not too far off from being considered a tax. They then bought the other 50 % decades later.
For Sri Lanka, it seems it wasn’t oil production but merely the domestic petrol distribution? Also unclear how much of it was British and not American.
For Turkey I can’t find the company at issue, but it apparently happened before the Second World War and I’d guess American interests just weren’t very substantial at the time? The article suggests the US was supporting Turkey in getting out from under existing relationships with the old powers of Europe.
You could try adding an elaborate backstory and run it as a cult.
Traditionally, violence was also useful to get people to work for free. If you’re really good, the first round of violence makes the mere threat of it effective for subsequent rounds / business projects.
Maybe say you’re hiring and make the work an “example project”. If it’s too much for a single applicant (more than a week), have a “operations management” applicant divide it into suitable sub-packages.
Child labor is illegal almost everywhere, so the only way they can be made to work is without pay.
Being triggered by the use of the word "dirty" for fission reactors, in comparison with fusion reactors no less, is far more telling than the use of the word. It creates radioactive waste. Creating waste is dirty. The promise of fusion is not to do this. Requiring the former for the latter is a strange proposition when viewed threw the only lense that makes sense for fusion power: cleanliness, the absence of dirtiness.
The love for nuclear power some internet communities exhibit has far left the realm of the science people often invoke as their reason and gone into full-on scientism. Nuclear scientists have respect for radiation. They wouldn't take offense with the mere mention that it has unwanted byproducts. They built and ran a couple hundred reactors for a few decades, and only two of them managed to render large swaths of the landscape into uninhabitable wastelands, which is quite a feat. But it was only possible because they didn't minimize the danger with the sort of I-would-love-a-reactor-in-my-backyard attitude that seems to be prevalent now. Which is, by the way, not only getting the science wrong, but also the politics: nuclear power is out not because it is dangerous, but because it is too expensive and, at this point, too slow to build.
While science bros have been huffing isotopes, actual scientists, with the help of some eerily effective subsidies, have improved solar and wind power and battery technology to the point where it is competitive and scalable not just to replace nuclear power, but even coal. Why people keep making the same arguments as they did a decade ago, a time span in which those technologies became 80-90% cheaper and more efficient, cannot be explained by the natural sciences.
It doesn't require anal sex, it requires prolonged skin-on-skin contact. The factor that makes gay men overrepresented among the current cases is likely to be the number of different sex partners, plus possibly a higher rate of detection because that community has been on high alert for a few days now.
I say this is the most deranged take on this possible, but then again, humanity tends to surprise me.
Who is "the government" in this case? What power do they have over this person? The power to stop them from saving money? How is that power useful or desirable to anybody?
Survivorship bias is less of a factor than commonly assumed. If you check, for example, this map showing the age of buildings in Berlin (https://interaktiv.morgenpost.de/so-alt-wohnt-berlin/), you will note that it is neighborhoods rather than individual buildings that survived (or didn't). Large parts of Berlin were built in the early 1900s, and the differences between individual buildings is rather small. Survival depended on the war and, to a lesser degree, the east/west split, with policy in the east being more inclined to tear down intact city blocks and replace them with architecture better representing the ideology of the times.
Great recommendation, indeed. There are quite a few misspellings, but more often than not, it feels like a running record of humanity. „petrosexual“ is certainly a Word I didn’t know I needed to know.
The difference is marginal at best. Most of the requirements are obvious and never/rarely change, like your address or the date. And adding a an incrementing number to a set of documents isn't exactly rocket science, either.
I was in student accommodation recently and noticed that it didn't have any reading lights at either desks or beds, neither as part of the standard finishing nor added by the students, at least in for the two or three rooms I saw.
A common definition, which happens to better capture my idea of what tether is doing (wrong), is that a bank transforms short-term deposits into long(er)-term loans.
Oh, wait!
Elon Musk, Nov 18th, 2022: https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1593673339826212864