I will, once again, bring your attention to hashql, which is so pleasant to use. It's so minimal that it is almost more a pattern than a library. Try it out as an alternative to graphql if you are mainly querying a SQL database anyhow (although it can be easily configured to request data from other types of sources.) I don't think it can currently combine results from multiple data sources, but I think it should be within the realm of possible things
I think it comes down to, if you read the history of the American Medical Association, that some doctors simply didn’t like a free market pushing down prices for their services.
No, not something better designed. Something augmenting Bitcoin to make it cheaper to transact while maintaining a base layer for final settlement that is secure and decentralized.
You leave out other characteristics that make Bitcoin an attractive economic good, when you think that matching or exceeding the security at a lower cost is a valid argument against Bitcoin. If it was all about power consumption, Bitcoin wouldn’t keep increasing in demand and price.
Look, you can theorize all you want about the inefficency of Bitcoin, but the market has spoken and continues to speak.
What you call inefficiency (I guess in terms of power consumption) is a misuse of the term in a world where value is subjective. It is efficient and necessary for the use case and value it provides. You can argue it is ineffecient compared to Proof of Stake for example, but Proof of Stake is a completely different system and has a completely different incentive structure.
I’m saying also that L2 (and L3, … Ln) is a way to scale the number of users without increasing power consumption. Every time you add a layer, there are other trade-offs for the benefits gained. But at the base layer you still have the benefits of not having a central authority censoring and controlling exchange of an economic good.
Maybe Lightning Network will scale, maybe not. But VISA or Mastercard could build on top of Bitcoin and allow many more transactions than the base layer does. You would use the base layer for final settlements.
Already now you can get a VISA/Mastercard and use that to spend Bitcoin. But of course, every layer on top of Bitcoin presents its own set of trade-offs in terms of trust and security.
Your first mistake is assuming that the power used to secure the Bitcoin network is a waste. It is clearly not, since thousands of people believe it is worth paying for.
The second error is implicitly assuming that the number of people Bitcoin serves is correlated with it’s power usage. You could serve the same number of people as the banking sector does now without increased power consumption when you bring layer 2 or 3 solutions into the picture.
If all those things were true, an HR department might not be able to help you in any case. An HR department doesn't make you physically stronger. They do not have control over the culture in general, and do not prosecute rape cases. They do not control the minds of people that may think you were asking for it.
> but your response to workplace harrassment would be to harrass their spouse instead?
Not as a first resort of course. But if you involve HR, you might get the 'harassing' person fired and take away his/her livelihood, even though that person might be very productive and an important asset to the company. Just because a number of people were offended. It wasn't like he was violent towards them or anything according to the story.
> Please bear in mind, being female in US and British culture can be pretty unpleasant at times, with a continued attitude held by a lot of men that it's perfectly okay to proposition strangers in the street in loud voices, or shout suggestive comments at them, or demand "just a smile, love" or a conversation like it's their right to have a conversation with you, or that you _owe_ them a conversation. Imagine you're a woman in the tech industry, where women are chronically under-represented.
Yeah, but what are you going to do about that? Some women and men will be flattered by such remarks by strangers, some won't. We have very different sensibilities.
How will you solve the underrepresentation of women in tech? By forcing more women to take jobs they may not be interested in? By forcing companies to hire more women because 'gender diversity'?
> For you or me, as men, we might find such an incident as this slightly novel and interesting. If we've spent our _entire lives_ dealing with unwanted and unsolicited sexual advances and comments and innuendo, with media representations of our gender as little more than objects of male desire, and then we get such comments, can't you imagine that we might just feel a _little bit fed up_?
But is that really the case? Do media generally portrait women the way you describe? Not in my experience. Do women go through life fighting every day dealing with these advances and comments? Not that I've heard from my female friends.
Whenever I hear about a case of a woman being harassed at work, I can't help but wonder how I would react in a similar situation. I am male and I have never experienced workplace harrassment, but if a female co-worker started writing things like those in the story I can't imagine that it would annoy me the slightest. If she was attractive, I would probably be flattered. If it _did_ annoy me, I would ask the person to stop and if that didn't help, I might contact her husband as retaliation.
Is it a female-thing to take these sort of situations so seriously, or maybe a personality trait?