ummwhat · HackerTrans

I took the California Zephyr all the way to Chicago and then continued my rail trip on to New York. While the dining experience differs depending on the route, I can tell you first hand that on my way to Chicago I was slamming back steak and clams. Couldn't believe it was included in the ticket. And also complimentary coffee. They don't tell you this, but the sleeper ticket is actually first class. I initially thought I was being gouged for the privilege of not trying to sleep in a chair.

ummwhat

7 年前議論

The thing that kills this niche is booking a sleeper car ticket on the capitol corridor. Amtrak does all this but better. Train is quieter, there's a full dining car with meals cooked in a legit kitchen, more space to walk around, fantastic view in the observation car. Only thing they don't do right is advertising. Did you know the sleeper car comes with 3 meals a day? I didn't.

On reflection the other issue is that it doesn't go direct into downtown. But you can transfer to BART at Richmond so same same.

ummwhat

7 年前議論

Read the indictment for yourself. Namely page 16 and 17 which account for charges 3-21 of the indictment (the vast majority of it).

The only company within US jurisdiction that BTC-E did business with is a company called "tradehill". The amounts of money moved were small, ranging between $12.60 and $17,000. Less than $100,000 was moved overall and all of it was moved in early 2012.

The US doesn't care about tracking down the $12.60 that you laundered on 24 January 2012 like it says in the indictment. The US is just using that as an excuse to impose it's money laundering laws outside of it's jurisdiction. The indictment is a pretext for extraterritoriality. Extraterritoriality is a thing you get to do when you're an empire.

ummwhat

7 年前議論

Ostensible justification: some trivial amount of money laundering could be traced to the US (iirc a few thousand dollars worth).

Real justification: Extraterritoriality is a thing you get to do when you're an empire.

ummwhat

7 年前議論

>Most people on any platform are consumers,

Yes but one post can eat many user-hours. A minority of people can be making content and you would still have a supply glut.

ummwhat

7 年前議論

>TikTok lets whoever's talented become at least relatively popular

Enjoy it while it lasts.

No user generated content meritocracy ever lasts. Not steam greenlight, not the app store, not new grounds, not YouTube etc.

The problem with your "transparent algorithm" is when the supply of content starts to outpace the supply of 50 users to test it on. Then content will inevitably get unfairly unviewed and the only thing left to do is implement some dodgy [redacted] process.

Don't believe me? Consider this. Your one clip takes 30*50=1500 seconds of user time to categorize (according to your algorithm). If a user spends 1 hr on tiktok per day, they effectively volunteered 3600 seconds of work towards categorizing clips as good or not. Meaning if you post a moderate amount (2, sometimes 3 times per day), you've just cancelled out that entire user and you only spent 90 seconds of your own time to do it. If more than half the people on the platform are moderate posters and 1 hr a day consumers, the system breaks.

コメント