The interstate system shouldn't have been built by any government, especially by the federal government, which destroyed a working railway system to do this, while using the stolen money to subsidise well connected road construction companies, while subsidising pollution, subsidising the spread of suburbs that could never be effectively served by any form of public transit. Of-course the worst crime beside the theft of money here was the destruction of individual freedom, which followed by giving the federal government the excuse to steal all other forms of freedoms by using the money for the interstate highway as blackmail against individual States.
There is a reason for H1 'interstate' highway existence on the island of Hawaii, and it has nothing to do with interstate travel but it has everything to do with control and oppression and theft perpetrated against the people that used to be free by the government that used to be tiny and insignificant.
Government shouldn't have been allowed any of this power grab but it was and here we are.
Pure, unadulterated nonsense and blindness. My ability to do anything beyond farming comes from individuals being less oppressed than previously by escaping from their original governments of Europe hundreds of years ago to the new continent and forming a system that oppressed individuals to a much lesser degree. This allowed capital formation in a free market setting that led to industrialization, which is what freed subsistence farmers to do other things.
Eventually that system became a perverted version of what it ran away from, so that is no longer possible in America.
Personally I hate spaces. I just hate them and that's that. I hate everything about them. The way they get the largest key on the keyboard, what are they compensating for?
Of-course I do like money, I like money quite a bit and I would like to get more money so here is what I am going to do. I am going to use spaces for a while and see if I start making more money.
I will start using spaces and then I will demand a raise and see how that goes. Of-course I know how that goes because I know who will be handling the demand. I will demand more money and I will have to approve that demand so... but who knows, maybe I will look at all those spaces and will appreciate them so much that I will give me a raise!
Here is my argument: any company that does not avoid taxes is idiotic. I believe that all income and wealth taxes are oppression, theft, collectivist robbery and basically crime.
I believe that taking any part of anybody's income by any form of collective government is a crime and needs to be punished, I believe that all systems that are doing this are criminal systems and need to be fought against.
Show me where do you see any stability and I will show you lack of value. Dogecoin is not valuable but it is stable. Bitcoin is valuable but it is not stable. This is inherent in the virtual currency not backed by anything and it has nothing to do with any form of hatred, where did you read hatred?
If a virtual currency becomes stable people leave it to move to another currency, thus the stable currency loses value because everybody wants to sell and buy something else that is more valuable and in the world of virtual currencies not backed by anything if something is more valuable people move in and out quite a bit and that currency cannot be stable.
Bitcoin is not stable at all, how is it stable with wild swings of 20% or so in intraday trading? Maybe your definition of stability is something that moves by 20% a day but that's not my definition of stability.
So I just wonder who stands to profit from restricting Chinese investments from coming to America? It makes no sense, if somebody wants to invest in you, you don't run away.
Americans are happily *consuming* everything that is produced in China and they are consuming on *credit* that is handed to them by the Chinese. So apparently it is good enough for Americans to *borrow for consumption* but borrowing savings for investment is not OK.
Who stands to benefit from this restriction financially? Well, government officials like to have their palms greased so maybe this is all about good old graft. I mean I really doubt that this is about somebody's ideology, when was the last time a politician in America was elected based on ideology rather than on fear and empty promises? That's what I thought.
So this has to be a demand for a handout, what else can this be beside that? Thoughts?
Nobody insures against petty crimes until there is a demand for that type of a product. There always will be a deductible, that is beside the point. Today with all of the might of the police state that you are running you still cannot get your bicycle back. Oh, sure, you can file a report.
A doctor visit may be 100USD per 15 minutes or maybe without government interference the prices actually come down. Maybe without government income and wealth taxes, business regulations, involvement in every nook and cranny the actual *free* market, free *from* government oppression and theft provides the health care system that people are able to afford *out of pocket* in the first place.
Insurance then would be used for what it is supposed to be used - high deductible, low monthly payment plan to cover actually expensive events.
Maybe without government creating inflation through the borrowing and the Federal reserve the prices would stop creeping up and instead would start coming down... prices on everything.
In that case insurances would simply declare everything 'not a crime'
- then insurance wouldn't be in business of insurance, would it? Why would I buy an insurance product that didn't insure me against something I want insurance against? You can declare whatever you like, but you cannot have my business if you are unable to provide me with a product I need.
USA has too many prisoners in the first place. Everything is a crime and if something is not a crime that's temporary. Shutting down the DEA would get rid of what, over half of the prison population at least?
Of-course this goes against the profit motive of the well politically connected prison industrial complex, so that's another problem in itself - the government passing the laws that put people to prisons and then handing out contracts to private corporations to keep those people there. There is a profit motive here and it starts with the politicians. Of-course the opposite of prisons would be freedom and liberty and we can't have that in the United States of America.
Freedom and liberty to do with your body as you wish, freedom and liberty to sell any product that people desire to purchase. Freedom and liberty not to be locked up for either using or selling any substances.
How about only locking people up for violence against other people? How about private prisons *NOT* getting government contracts?
AFAIC there shouldn't be any public police or public roads or public education or public health care or public courts, everything should be private. Everything should be paid with use fees and insurance payouts, not with any taxes. There shouldn't be income and wealth taxes, there shouldn't be anything that can allow the public to place people into prisons. All matters are private, event the most violent once.
At that point the question of the phone call pricing is no longer in the hands of any public authority / government, it is a private question. The size of the prisoner population is no longer in the hands of any public authority / government, it's private. You get robbed, beaten up, murdered, your insurance has to pay out, it can use the money to investigate and to place the offender behind bars of a private prison after going through a private court room.
Why would insurance do that? Because it needs to reduce the number of robberies, beatings, murders so that the number of payouts goes down.
Many people miss many things, however BTC is not based on anything even closely reminding of the Austrian model. Austrian model requires actual work to be done for money to be created, BTC is basically printed. BTC may have a hard limit on the total number of coins, however it can be further divided and each division can increase the total number of available coins (naming doesn't matter in this case, there is no physical difference between 1BTC and 0.00001BTC.
Beside that many other crypto-currencies have been started since then and many more will be started, BTC does not exist in vacuum, BTC itself is just a subset of the infinite space of crypto-coins not backed by any physical manifestation, they are limitless.
If you are after stability crypto-currencies that are not backed by anything are the exact opposite of what you would hold. If you want to hold a stable crypto-currency you would have to find one that is backed by something tangible. If you want to gamble and/or you want to go around government you use crypto-currencies. Go around governments too much and the governments will interfere with the crypto-currency, they can declare Bitcoins the money of terrorists and money launderers, it wouldn't be difficult at all.
The purpose of non-backed crypto-currencies is to create wild swings in relative value to allow gambling, incidentally they can be used to move money around certain government regulations. Will they be stable? If they are stable, their only purpose then is to get around government regulations and the governments don't tolerate competition in money (USA defaulted on the gold dollar but not before it declared possessing gold and signing gold contracts illegal).
So if you compete with a government controlled fiat you are going to have governments after you, what's stable about that? Governments will of-course release their own crypto-currencies, maybe the type they can issue the currency but nobody else can.
The fact that there are dozens (if not hundreds) crypto-currencies in the world already shows that the overall crypto-currency market is inflation prone, the fact that only a few of those currencies represent the vast majority of the total market valuation shows that the use is limited, the fact that the prices are swinging up and down dramatically shows that stability is in fact not valued.
Bitcoins today, dogecoins tomorrow, catcoins the day after, etc. The bandwagon will jump ship and move to another coin that promises *more* instability, not less. What is the use of bitcoins that are 'stable' in dollar value? There isn't any, people will dump those and will move to another crypto-currency not backed by anything else if that crypto-currency promises huge swings in prices that is basically gambling.
Whenever you are born you will observe yet another (many) crypto-currency being used for the exact purpose that they are intended for, trying to make money on speculation. There is nothing wrong with any of that, however there won't be a crypto-currency that is not backed by anything else that will be both valuable and stable.
It can be either valuable or stable but not both. If it is valuable, it will not be stable, if it is stable it will not be valuable. It is valuable as long as the instability allows for wild price swings.
yet for thousands of years gold has proven itself to be valuable to people enough that it was used as money without any government decree and at the same time it is a useful, rare enough material, pliable, divisible, easily measurable by weight and purity, not poisonous, stable, not reactive, etc.
Gold is the perfect money that people recognised and used as such. Bitcoins and other crypto-currencies may be used as money but again, should the demand for Bitcoin money disappear the value of Bitcoin is gone completely. You cannot use Bitcoin for anything at all except for being money, it has 0 intrinsic value (value outside of whatever value you assign to it as money).
Gold is a metal, metals on this planet were always more or less valuable, how valuable this particular metal is in relation to other items depends on the situation.
A file with some random numbers in it is only as valuable as the network that is willing to use it for its only purpose. Without the network in place, or with the network moving to a different crypto-currency standard Bitcoin in itself has 0 uses.
The compressor does not remove heat. In a fridge or an AC unit the job of removing heat is in the hands of heat sinks.
Compressor compresses (obviously) and the compressed substance becomes much hotter before it was compressed, but at this point the compressed substance needs to be cooled to something close to the ambient temperature and for this large heat sinks (and possibly fans) are used. Once the compressed substance is cooled down, at this point if the substance is let out of the compression chamber it will cool down. If the substance was not cooled down before being let out, the system could not be used to cool down anything below the ambient temperature, but because the substance is compressed and then cooled by the heat dissipating sinks, at this point the decompression will cause the substance to become cooler than what its temperature was before compression.
Compressor doesn't have a large problem compressing continuously (unless it itself overheats maybe) but there is a limited space in the tank to hold the compressed substance and it takes time to dissipate the heat from the compressed substance.
In order to create continuous cooling with something like that there would have to be multiple tanks and the heat sinks would have to be much larger and probably fans would have to be used or even water cooling.
I think maybe adding water cooling to the compressor tank heat sink would actually provide a more efficient refrigeration unit.
Heh, so can gold, or any other commodity. Place yer bets...
- gold never moves by 20% in a day, you cannot find a chart with those types of moves. The difference of-course is gold is valuable in itself, crypto-currencies are not. They are valuable as long as they are used for their only single property: being coins. Gold doesn't need to be a coin or even money to be valuable, it serves as a useful monetary tool of the people (gold is people's money, it is the opposite of fiat) but it doesn't have to be money and it is still useful as not money.
Bitcoins and other forms of crypto-currencies only have one purpose and without that one purpose they are not valuable at all. That purpose is to be money.
Despite its recent appreciation in value, as a technology,
Bitcoin has stagnated over the last three years.
- 3 years ago I think the price was about 640USD or so, today it's about 2640USD.
Bitcoin is really only useful as a store of value.
- value of what? Bitcoin cannot keep value, it can move by 20% up or down in a single day.
Even then, its usefulness for actually transacting value is limited.
- all speculative crypto-currencies are of limited value of transacting, as they appreciate they become more expensive to deal with and nobody actually wants them, people want to get some money that is more stable (even though AFAIC USD is inherently flawed and failing as money, it is still more stable in intraday trading so far, it doesn't jump up and down by 20% in a day)
Ethereum, on the other hand, was never intended as a Bitcoin competitor.
- of-course not. All crypto-currencies that are not backed by anything exist for the reason of creating inflation in the crypto-currency world (expansion of the money supply), the only real difference is who gets their hands on the newly created coins first. So people who are interested in mining Bitcoins but are too late in that game come up with a different currency of their own, then this repeats. Bitcoin itself may be limited in total number of coins that can be created but the supply of crypto-currencies in general is absolutely limitless. A new one can be started every day (or more often than that).
Hundreds of projects, startups, and companies at every scale -- including the likes of Intel, Microsoft, and Samsung -- are building software using Ethereum.
That's fine, inhale whatever you want, whatever floats your... vapor fog. I know this much: everybody who smokes or uses any form of air-polluting devices around other people is a dick, other than that I don't care how you get your high.
I run a company where I am the CEO, CTO, CFO, chief architect, it is small enough for that yet it is large enough for more than one group of people to work for me. Nobody has the access to production except for me and if in my company something similar happened I would only have myself to blame. This is not about size, this is about at least some common sense. Where is this common sense? It is not so common after all.
To protect you... by destroying you so that it is much easier to 'protect' you.
To save you from hunger... by destroying individual choices and freedoms so that it is much easier to take from some to give to many thus supposedly 'protecting' you, which in reality leads to destroying the economy in the long run and may seriously harm you.
This is what government is all about, why are so many people assuming that this is not exactly what governments are about?
That's not different from any government ever. That's not different from what the USA presidents did, tore up the freedoms one by one for the purposes just as ephemeral and unachievable through the force and oppression as 'fighting terrorism'.
Human rights were violated by governments around the world for the purpose of things like 'fighting wars on poverty', poverty wins of-course while individual rights get destroyed. The war on drugs creates stronger drugs and drug cartels that actually murder people. The war on homelessness by the government (everybody to own a house) leads to lowest home ownership by the population. If government decides it will fight so that 'no child is left behind' then all children will be left behind.
The war on anything by governments leads to those things winning, so of-course this war on terrorism is lost already and May is not any different in this than any other government.
Governments of the world are the major causes of terrorism, of poverty, of economic destruction and disparity (through destruction of value of money itself and endless borrowing to attempt to satisfy the endless desire for more power and more government and more government handouts)..
Governments of the world are the causes of murder, economic catastrophes, drug abuse on a mass scale, poverty, lack of education and lack of common sense, etc.
Slashdot Mirror
The interstate system shouldn't have been built by any government, especially by the federal government, which destroyed a working railway system to do this, while using the stolen money to subsidise well connected road construction companies, while subsidising pollution, subsidising the spread of suburbs that could never be effectively served by any form of public transit. Of-course the worst crime beside the theft of money here was the destruction of individual freedom, which followed by giving the federal government the excuse to steal all other forms of freedoms by using the money for the interstate highway as blackmail against individual States.
There is a reason for H1 'interstate' highway existence on the island of Hawaii, and it has nothing to do with interstate travel but it has everything to do with control and oppression and theft perpetrated against the people that used to be free by the government that used to be tiny and insignificant.
Government shouldn't have been allowed any of this power grab but it was and here we are.
Pure, unadulterated nonsense and blindness. My ability to do anything beyond farming comes from individuals being less oppressed than previously by escaping from their original governments of Europe hundreds of years ago to the new continent and forming a system that oppressed individuals to a much lesser degree. This allowed capital formation in a free market setting that led to industrialization, which is what freed subsistence farmers to do other things.
Eventually that system became a perverted version of what it ran away from, so that is no longer possible in America.
Personally I hate spaces. I just hate them and that's that. I hate everything about them. The way they get the largest key on the keyboard, what are they compensating for?
Of-course I do like money, I like money quite a bit and I would like to get more money so here is what I am going to do. I am going to use spaces for a while and see if I start making more money.
I will start using spaces and then I will demand a raise and see how that goes. Of-course I know how that goes because I know who will be handling the demand. I will demand more money and I will have to approve that demand so... but who knows, maybe I will look at all those spaces and will appreciate them so much that I will give me a raise!
Here is my argument: any company that does not avoid taxes is idiotic. I believe that all income and wealth taxes are oppression, theft, collectivist robbery and basically crime.
I believe that taking any part of anybody's income by any form of collective government is a crime and needs to be punished, I believe that all systems that are doing this are criminal systems and need to be fought against.
Show me where do you see any stability and I will show you lack of value. Dogecoin is not valuable but it is stable. Bitcoin is valuable but it is not stable. This is inherent in the virtual currency not backed by anything and it has nothing to do with any form of hatred, where did you read hatred?
If a virtual currency becomes stable people leave it to move to another currency, thus the stable currency loses value because everybody wants to sell and buy something else that is more valuable and in the world of virtual currencies not backed by anything if something is more valuable people move in and out quite a bit and that currency cannot be stable.
Bitcoin is not stable at all, how is it stable with wild swings of 20% or so in intraday trading? Maybe your definition of stability is something that moves by 20% a day but that's not my definition of stability.
So I just wonder who stands to profit from restricting Chinese investments from coming to America? It makes no sense, if somebody wants to invest in you, you don't run away.
Americans are happily *consuming* everything that is produced in China and they are consuming on *credit* that is handed to them by the Chinese. So apparently it is good enough for Americans to *borrow for consumption* but borrowing savings for investment is not OK.
Who stands to benefit from this restriction financially? Well, government officials like to have their palms greased so maybe this is all about good old graft. I mean I really doubt that this is about somebody's ideology, when was the last time a politician in America was elected based on ideology rather than on fear and empty promises? That's what I thought.
So this has to be a demand for a handout, what else can this be beside that? Thoughts?
Oracle, SAP, IBM and other expensive licensing deals.
Nobody insures against petty crimes until there is a demand for that type of a product. There always will be a deductible, that is beside the point. Today with all of the might of the police state that you are running you still cannot get your bicycle back. Oh, sure, you can file a report.
A doctor visit may be 100USD per 15 minutes or maybe without government interference the prices actually come down. Maybe without government income and wealth taxes, business regulations, involvement in every nook and cranny the actual *free* market, free *from* government oppression and theft provides the health care system that people are able to afford *out of pocket* in the first place.
Insurance then would be used for what it is supposed to be used - high deductible, low monthly payment plan to cover actually expensive events.
Maybe without government creating inflation through the borrowing and the Federal reserve the prices would stop creeping up and instead would start coming down... prices on everything.
I should have qualified it with Federal prisoners.
Table 10 of that PDF shows that drug prisoners are 49.5% of the total federal prison population. Not over half though, just under half.
In that case insurances would simply declare everything 'not a crime'
- then insurance wouldn't be in business of insurance, would it? Why would I buy an insurance product that didn't insure me against something I want insurance against? You can declare whatever you like, but you cannot have my business if you are unable to provide me with a product I need.
USA has too many prisoners in the first place. Everything is a crime and if something is not a crime that's temporary. Shutting down the DEA would get rid of what, over half of the prison population at least?
Of-course this goes against the profit motive of the well politically connected prison industrial complex, so that's another problem in itself - the government passing the laws that put people to prisons and then handing out contracts to private corporations to keep those people there. There is a profit motive here and it starts with the politicians. Of-course the opposite of prisons would be freedom and liberty and we can't have that in the United States of America.
Freedom and liberty to do with your body as you wish, freedom and liberty to sell any product that people desire to purchase. Freedom and liberty not to be locked up for either using or selling any substances.
How about only locking people up for violence against other people? How about private prisons *NOT* getting government contracts?
AFAIC there shouldn't be any public police or public roads or public education or public health care or public courts, everything should be private. Everything should be paid with use fees and insurance payouts, not with any taxes. There shouldn't be income and wealth taxes, there shouldn't be anything that can allow the public to place people into prisons. All matters are private, event the most violent once.
At that point the question of the phone call pricing is no longer in the hands of any public authority / government, it is a private question. The size of the prisoner population is no longer in the hands of any public authority / government, it's private. You get robbed, beaten up, murdered, your insurance has to pay out, it can use the money to investigate and to place the offender behind bars of a private prison after going through a private court room.
Why would insurance do that? Because it needs to reduce the number of robberies, beatings, murders so that the number of payouts goes down.
You had me at pneumatic, where is the signup button?
Many people miss many things, however BTC is not based on anything even closely reminding of the Austrian model. Austrian model requires actual work to be done for money to be created, BTC is basically printed. BTC may have a hard limit on the total number of coins, however it can be further divided and each division can increase the total number of available coins (naming doesn't matter in this case, there is no physical difference between 1BTC and 0.00001BTC.
Beside that many other crypto-currencies have been started since then and many more will be started, BTC does not exist in vacuum, BTC itself is just a subset of the infinite space of crypto-coins not backed by any physical manifestation, they are limitless.
If you are after stability crypto-currencies that are not backed by anything are the exact opposite of what you would hold. If you want to hold a stable crypto-currency you would have to find one that is backed by something tangible. If you want to gamble and/or you want to go around government you use crypto-currencies. Go around governments too much and the governments will interfere with the crypto-currency, they can declare Bitcoins the money of terrorists and money launderers, it wouldn't be difficult at all.
The purpose of non-backed crypto-currencies is to create wild swings in relative value to allow gambling, incidentally they can be used to move money around certain government regulations. Will they be stable? If they are stable, their only purpose then is to get around government regulations and the governments don't tolerate competition in money (USA defaulted on the gold dollar but not before it declared possessing gold and signing gold contracts illegal).
So if you compete with a government controlled fiat you are going to have governments after you, what's stable about that? Governments will of-course release their own crypto-currencies, maybe the type they can issue the currency but nobody else can.
The fact that there are dozens (if not hundreds) crypto-currencies in the world already shows that the overall crypto-currency market is inflation prone, the fact that only a few of those currencies represent the vast majority of the total market valuation shows that the use is limited, the fact that the prices are swinging up and down dramatically shows that stability is in fact not valued.
Bitcoins today, dogecoins tomorrow, catcoins the day after, etc. The bandwagon will jump ship and move to another coin that promises *more* instability, not less. What is the use of bitcoins that are 'stable' in dollar value? There isn't any, people will dump those and will move to another crypto-currency not backed by anything else if that crypto-currency promises huge swings in prices that is basically gambling.
Whenever you are born you will observe yet another (many) crypto-currency being used for the exact purpose that they are intended for, trying to make money on speculation. There is nothing wrong with any of that, however there won't be a crypto-currency that is not backed by anything else that will be both valuable and stable.
It can be either valuable or stable but not both. If it is valuable, it will not be stable, if it is stable it will not be valuable. It is valuable as long as the instability allows for wild price swings.
yet for thousands of years gold has proven itself to be valuable to people enough that it was used as money without any government decree and at the same time it is a useful, rare enough material, pliable, divisible, easily measurable by weight and purity, not poisonous, stable, not reactive, etc.
Gold is the perfect money that people recognised and used as such. Bitcoins and other crypto-currencies may be used as money but again, should the demand for Bitcoin money disappear the value of Bitcoin is gone completely. You cannot use Bitcoin for anything at all except for being money, it has 0 intrinsic value (value outside of whatever value you assign to it as money).
Gold is a metal, metals on this planet were always more or less valuable, how valuable this particular metal is in relation to other items depends on the situation.
A file with some random numbers in it is only as valuable as the network that is willing to use it for its only purpose. Without the network in place, or with the network moving to a different crypto-currency standard Bitcoin in itself has 0 uses.
The compressor does not remove heat. In a fridge or an AC unit the job of removing heat is in the hands of heat sinks.
Compressor compresses (obviously) and the compressed substance becomes much hotter before it was compressed, but at this point the compressed substance needs to be cooled to something close to the ambient temperature and for this large heat sinks (and possibly fans) are used. Once the compressed substance is cooled down, at this point if the substance is let out of the compression chamber it will cool down. If the substance was not cooled down before being let out, the system could not be used to cool down anything below the ambient temperature, but because the substance is compressed and then cooled by the heat dissipating sinks, at this point the decompression will cause the substance to become cooler than what its temperature was before compression.
Compressor doesn't have a large problem compressing continuously (unless it itself overheats maybe) but there is a limited space in the tank to hold the compressed substance and it takes time to dissipate the heat from the compressed substance.
In order to create continuous cooling with something like that there would have to be multiple tanks and the heat sinks would have to be much larger and probably fans would have to be used or even water cooling.
I think maybe adding water cooling to the compressor tank heat sink would actually provide a more efficient refrigeration unit.
Heh, so can gold, or any other commodity. Place yer bets...
- gold never moves by 20% in a day, you cannot find a chart with those types of moves. The difference of-course is gold is valuable in itself, crypto-currencies are not. They are valuable as long as they are used for their only single property: being coins. Gold doesn't need to be a coin or even money to be valuable, it serves as a useful monetary tool of the people (gold is people's money, it is the opposite of fiat) but it doesn't have to be money and it is still useful as not money.
Bitcoins and other forms of crypto-currencies only have one purpose and without that one purpose they are not valuable at all. That purpose is to be money.
Despite its recent appreciation in value, as a technology,
Bitcoin has stagnated over the last three years.
- 3 years ago I think the price was about 640USD or so, today it's about 2640USD.
Bitcoin is really only useful as a store of value.
- value of what? Bitcoin cannot keep value, it can move by 20% up or down in a single day.
Even then, its usefulness for actually transacting value is limited.
- all speculative crypto-currencies are of limited value of transacting, as they appreciate they become more expensive to deal with and nobody actually wants them, people want to get some money that is more stable (even though AFAIC USD is inherently flawed and failing as money, it is still more stable in intraday trading so far, it doesn't jump up and down by 20% in a day)
Ethereum, on the other hand, was never intended as a Bitcoin competitor.
- of-course not. All crypto-currencies that are not backed by anything exist for the reason of creating inflation in the crypto-currency world (expansion of the money supply), the only real difference is who gets their hands on the newly created coins first. So people who are interested in mining Bitcoins but are too late in that game come up with a different currency of their own, then this repeats. Bitcoin itself may be limited in total number of coins that can be created but the supply of crypto-currencies in general is absolutely limitless. A new one can be started every day (or more often than that).
Hundreds of projects, startups, and companies at every scale -- including the likes of Intel, Microsoft, and Samsung -- are building software using Ethereum.
- until they all jump ship to another one.
That's fine, inhale whatever you want, whatever floats your ... vapor fog. I know this much: everybody who smokes or uses any form of air-polluting devices around other people is a dick, other than that I don't care how you get your high.
I run a company where I am the CEO, CTO, CFO, chief architect, it is small enough for that yet it is large enough for more than one group of people to work for me. Nobody has the access to production except for me and if in my company something similar happened I would only have myself to blame. This is not about size, this is about at least some common sense. Where is this common sense? It is not so common after all.
To protect you... by destroying you so that it is much easier to 'protect' you.
To save you from hunger... by destroying individual choices and freedoms so that it is much easier to take from some to give to many thus supposedly 'protecting' you, which in reality leads to destroying the economy in the long run and may seriously harm you.
This is what government is all about, why are so many people assuming that this is not exactly what governments are about?
If you are after a generic job in the field how about looking at training and testing of neural networks and bots. But you may end up surfing the Internet, looking for dickpics for a few months....
That's not different from any government ever. That's not different from what the USA presidents did, tore up the freedoms one by one for the purposes just as ephemeral and unachievable through the force and oppression as 'fighting terrorism'.
Human rights were violated by governments around the world for the purpose of things like 'fighting wars on poverty', poverty wins of-course while individual rights get destroyed. The war on drugs creates stronger drugs and drug cartels that actually murder people. The war on homelessness by the government (everybody to own a house) leads to lowest home ownership by the population. If government decides it will fight so that 'no child is left behind' then all children will be left behind.
The war on anything by governments leads to those things winning, so of-course this war on terrorism is lost already and May is not any different in this than any other government.
Governments of the world are the major causes of terrorism, of poverty, of economic destruction and disparity (through destruction of value of money itself and endless borrowing to attempt to satisfy the endless desire for more power and more government and more government handouts)..
Governments of the world are the causes of murder, economic catastrophes, drug abuse on a mass scale, poverty, lack of education and lack of common sense, etc.