Highly recommend anyone to look into Oceanography! The ocean floors reveal a lot of ancient geological history and the Earth is much more dynamic than what meets the eye. Sea floor spreading, plate tectonics, and much more can be studied simply by observing the ocean floor!
Woah, philosophy and art are two massive subjects. Historically, both have been treated as separate subjects for good reasons.
However there is some overlap, such as something which is beautiful to the senses.
But the distinction between the two is that philosophy is usually a set of distinct thought-experiment(s) and art is an observer's perspective into the mind of an artist(s).
Largely, scientists scoff at philosophy due to the intrinsic nature that most of it relies in the realm of "thought experiments." Which may be hard for some people, but I've never had an issue with wild imaginations.
Yet, I would argue the Philosopher's Stone is one of the most mythological thing known to human history. And I'm sure 99.999% of people couldn't distinguish the Philosopher's Stone from a generic looking lake rock. Right?
I find it extremely alarming that law enforcement almost everywhere around the world is attempting to undermine almost a century-fold of legitimate mathematics and science with regards to encryption and cryptography.
It's a tad embarrassing that lawmakers (who aren't even computer scientists like c'mon are we for real here?) somehow forgot how and who broke the Enigma Machine. Alan Turing did that.
Same thing with the Tor browser developed by the US Navy. Either everyone has access to a tool which can guarantee that you can blend in with the rest of the crowd, or every civilian has a special color and we all pop out while the lawmakers and police are somehow wearing grey.
How did cypherpunks and computer scientists get blasted from the government like this? Shouldn't there be some laws regarding digital privacy for US citizens?
Somehow AD revenue is caked everywhere but I can't use a computer without the FBI wanting my social security card? What the duck. Shucks I thought this was America.
"Early-access" release of my paper I've been ruminating on for almost two months now. Potentially a solution for the age-old problem of baryon asymmetry. Any feedback from academics and or physicists is highly ideal. Thank you.
Symmetric and asymmetric behavior baffles me. Any progressive papers on the independent relationships between infinite limits, finite quantities, and asymmetric phenomenon would be much appreciated from the homestead.
Also, what is the dependent relationship between stable states and non-stable state systems? Is it more simple than thought before?
People ban programming functions? That is against the law for anyone respected and honest in the open source and scientific communities!
THAT IS AGAINST THE 1ST AMENDMENT RIGHTS for any American citizen. Any human citizen within the sovereignty of this mighty country only for for Legendary souls is bought bought - but earned. With the hands of both Life and Death. And programming is the most divine magic of them all - which only holy warriors should be able to touch. Programming is a lost art and forgotten by anyone who is respected in the eyes of the Heavenly Courts. Learn something new tomorrow.
Happy New Year Joe Biden, greatest president of the upcoming 21st century. Long live VALHALLA, and the mighty deliverer's of justice themselves. For the holy water which makes up Lake Tahoe, can only be touched by those granted access from a source of the Heavenly Courts. I believe and trust in my faith and my personal opinions.
Lucas Bernard Black is actually really known by very few, but admired by many. Stay humble, stay rooted and shoot for the stars
Failures shouldn't necessarily need a quote "mandatory positive spin". But they don't necessarily need a quote "mandatory negative spin". Meeting somewhere in the middle for a team is how generally speaking, consensus is met.
I think one of the most important things for a person in a leadership role to understand, is how to understand other people by confidently understanding yourself.
If you can't offer me encouraging advice and honest critique - without being afraid of hurting my personal feelings, I'd be left without a clear direction. Otherwise, you'd be easily able to recreate a positive growth cycle in your team (e.g. significant boosts in morale, productivity, communication, etc.)
False positive emotions are usually the result of someone denying the acceptance of truth. What ever that truth may be.
This is probably going to sound super corny but YMMV. The psychological impacts of denial are devastating. The psychological impacts of love, acceptance and forgiveness are limitlessly fruitful.
I see a lot of HN posts recently on the existence of these superhuman developers with god-like abilities or productivity. Everybody on this planet is human, yet we interact with others intellect or knowledge as if it were a static state. It's not. Every human mind is quite literally, a quantum computer. Anyone can grow their intellect or wisdom or maturity, it just takes the proper push in the right direction and some guts.
Personally, having a good attitude will be better over the long run than a bad attitude for mental health but lying to people won't solve anything. An over-excited spirit can be just as weakening as an under-excitied spirit.
To each their own, but I find be joyful or humourous during hard times is much better for people to be around than to be someone denying someone else's individual right to be happy.
I think what most software developers will come to find out with Cloud outages, it isn't necessarily that the tech is working incorrectly - it's most likely that it was not configured in the way it was intended...
I think too many HNers here have an incomplete picture of what makes something complex. There is genius in simplicity. Complexity can be best understood (for me) as simultaneous interactions of many simple things under the same roof, which we then consider to be in totality an object of reality.
Those simple things can be different in an infinite variety of ways, in which complexity can be derived. Personally, if I've jumped into a codebase that is messy and cluttered - unorganized... It's immediately noticable that the original project developers had a shallow and or narrow strategy for how they wanted to design their system.
Start with simple and useful mechanisms, which are the building blocks for whatever problem you are trying to solve. Complexity and abstraction can then be extrapolated from a simple yet brilliant foundation. I don't know how that isn't common sense.
A lot of people can believe in themselves. Fewer people can believe in the "right" things about themselves. And even fewer can execute well with those justified beliefs.
Ponzi schemes are different than Bitcoin, which is a cryptocurrency by very definition. From Wikipedia,
"A Ponzi scheme can maintain the illusion of a sustainable business as long as new investors contribute new funds, and as long as most of the investors do not demand full repayment and still believe in the non-existent assets they are purported to own."
Bitcoin isn't a business, it's an asset with decentralized production and a distributed ledger. Also, assuming the network isn't down (which it never has been to date) you can liquidate in full immediately. The asset exists and maintains ownership on an individual basis, therefore in direct contradiction to a Ponzi scheme.
I think you could possibly argue that stocks are Ponzi schemes too by your description. Correct me if I'm wrong, it was developed around the 2008 era financial crisis to act as an alternative to US Dollars, in the event that pulling out cash from a bank is no longer a valid option. Public exchanges offer a variety of options to trade BTC to USD, but there wasn't really any of that about a decade ago. It seems more like some of tech has absorbed crypto and incorporated, or designed, their products around it. And personally it doesn't seem likely that cypherpunks have the highest regard for corporate America.
Hard work is the essence of what produces so-called talent. It seems to my understanding that talent is more so the culmination of a chain of clever thinking which ultimately derives more understanding and natural association with XYZ, than a deterministic natural born trait. Albeit, there are most definitely physical strengths tied to DNA, it wouldn't be entirely far-fetched to claim that different people have different mental strengths.
However, hard work doesn't always produce greatness. It would be misleading to say that hard work is equivalent to all other hard work. It's not. It's synonymous with the phrase, "practice makes perfect." Yet the phrase should really be amended to "perfect practice makes perfect." Aimless, bad practice will led to aimless, bad results.
Mental focus and barricades are huge components as well. The greats are just as human as the rest of us. Comparison is mentally debilitating for everyone, especially if "talented" individuals have a higher rate of growth than the average. Yet I have to wonder, does the individual who "desires greatness" aspire to achieve validation for ego-boosting fictional accomplishments or truly wish to push the edge of their capabilities to their respective human limits? The former have no chance at putting their energy into prospective efforts. The latter may continue to develop and create something the world hasn't seen before, and or realize that they can do things they had believed they couldn't before.
I'm not a professional physicist but it would seem unlikely that one discovery would permanently wipe generations of fruitful knowledge and imagination which has passed the eyes of some of the most brilliant minds that ever walked the planet. Not to say that it can't happen, but it would be more likely that we are missing a component/relationship that we don't understand about our reality either because we don't have to the physical senses to detect it or the technology to measure it. I'd highly consider studying some physics even if you view yourself as a layman, it can geniunely be immense fun!
The marriage tax seems like a way for the government to get it's cut of joint filings if couples are maximizing their income relative to their inherently lower tax bracket. I'm just a kid so don't quote me but I'd be willing to wager that the IRS has figured out all sorts of ways to prevent couples from abusing their tax leverage versus when they were single. Why people get married is very different than
> Why does my relationship need to be officially registered
There could be many reasons why couples get married, and many reasons why couples get divorced.