It won't. But it will simply starve to death when their food source gets removed from the ecosystem. If all the big herbivores die off, then sometime later the carnivores too will have a mass extinction. Or so the idea goes.
Just for the sake of the argument: There is a difference between registration and licensing. We can argue that licensing (i.e. needing to obtain permission for ownership) is against the constitution, but registration (i.e. notification of ownership) is not. I don't disagree with your assessment of the purpose of 2A btw. Not necessarily agree with 2A itself, but it is what it is.
It's not about the UK giving anything on the way out. You completely misunderstand what these negotiations are about. They are about what the UK wants from the EU when they are finally outside the door.
I agree. It no longer matter why or how it happened. It did. That means the UK has to deal with the reality of the situation, not the dream they were sold to by the brexit campaign.
You should get some more diverse news then. I will give you 2 facts. 1) many of the remainers didn't vote because they never thought that the leave camp had a chance in hell of succeeding. the entire nation didn't move. Only a small percentage did, and they won by a hair. Since you live in the US: think of it as a constitutional amendment that got only a 51% vote in congress, and was ratified by 30% of the states. Is that an amendment you would be happy with? 2) the EU tld denotes representation in the EU and compliance with EU regulations etc. You cannot have a tld if you declare yourself exempt from those regulations.
Believe it or not, many of us are sorry to see you go but still understand that the EU has to make the UK face the consequences, even though it inconveniences the many friends I have in the UK.
It's not about being petty. What you wanted before the vote doesn't play into it anymore. Because those people are leaving together with the rest of their country, whether they want to or not. If an EU TLD is for legal residents etc, and is an indication that the websites comply with EU regulations etc, then letting UK residents keep EU domains is not an option.
The UK wants only the benefits, and none of the responsibilities or downsides. But that's not how the overall system works. The system as a whole cannot work if everyone only wants the perks but none of the burden.
Actually, an EU tld should indicate that the domain complies with EU laws. The UK chose a brexit because they explicitly didn't want that. It's about more than a name.
Your country voted to leave. Granted, it only happened because many of the remainers thought their vote wouldn't matter because there would not be too many brexiteers. But regardless, your country is leaving, as a complete unit. All of you are leaving., regardless of whether the vote was 51% or 99%. The EU cannot grant special rules that apply to the remainers. As far as the legalities are concerned: you are all brexisteers.
In the current proceedings, the EU's primary objective is to look after itself, not make things as cushy as possible for the remainers who got shafted. I know the berxit camp liked to pretend, but the EU is not going to give you any membership benefits. You're no longer going to be a member. You're going to be a foreign country and will be treated as such. THAT is what brexit means.
Actually, there is 1 simple reason why I get paid more compared to colleagues with similar jobs. I happen to be responsible for infrastructure that is absolutely critical to the plant. And if the plant were to shut down, we're talking hundreds of thousands of dollars per hour in damages. It's not that I am crucially important on a daily basis, but when they need me, they NEED me because there is noone else who can do the required troubleshooting. Or more correctly: there is not enough work for multiple people with my profile.
He doesn't say it has to be exactly the same. Most people don't care if someone makes more or less than them, as long as everyone falls within the gauss curve for the job they do. Because most people have an importance to the organization that falls within a gauss curve as well, and as long as the overall system is perceived as fair, everyone is happy.
Not necessarily. Very rarely are people so special that they really warrant wages that are way outside the norm. Having wages for a given job fall within a gauss curve makes perfect sense. Everybody likes to think they are the far end of the gauss curve, but they're not. And the person you are responding to doesn't really care who earns more or less than him, as long he knows that all wages fall within the gauss curve and is 'fair'.
You sound like you have never worked in the space industry. You cannot make a 50K payload that does anything useful. Active payload is designed and tested like you wouldn't believe and this alone costs oodles of money. And it's not exactly simple to make something cheap and still have it work in space.
The fact that you say it shouldn't be a hard problem to come up with a sub 50K payload for any scientist proves to pretty much anyone who has worked in the space industry that you are clueless when it comes to payload development.
Without wanting to go into a discussion on technical merits, I see that many exchanges have started trading against Ethereum as well as bitcoin. Bitcoin transfers are also faster than bitcoin transfers, and MUCH cheaper. That alone will have a big influence because in the crypto community many people have started using ETH for storing value, making transfers and trading.
One day, people will wake up and figure out that there is nothing that bitcoin does that another coin does better, and that its only advantage has simply been that it was the first mover. When that happens, bitcoin will go down and another currency will be king.
C is a fairly easy language to learn and understand. I basically had only 2 'special' skills that were very much appreciated by the senior engineers in the companies where I worked. the first one was that I have a masters degree in electronics and had theoretical physics as a hobby when I was in college. So aside from being a good programmer, I had the knowledge to understand the physics and instruments I was dealing with, which was a real benefit.
And my second 'special' skill was the fact that I wanted all my code to be bullet proof, and deal with every type of malformed data packet, data mismatches, incorrect use cases, etc. And I applied that same constraint not only to my code, but also to the logic it implemented. I knew how the instruments worked and what they were made to do. So my logic also set boundaries to the things that were allowed.
I hear you thinking 'that is not all that special' and I agree. But you'd be amazed how many programmers, even in those sectors, are satisfied with code that works. I always take it as a given that code should work. You should try to make it fail, once it is implemented. Ever night, every weekend, I ran more and more unit tests non stop, and injected bad commands and bad data at random intervals in order to see if I missed something.
Again, in itself not special, but the majority of C programmers in the companies I worked at did not have that mentality.
Actually there are plenty of highly interesting and good paying projects for which C is the only real option. A decade ago I was a C and C++ programmer, and pretty good if I say so myself. I cared to write bullet proof and well documented C code, and companies paid me a lot of money to do just that. I wrote firmware for the 2000 series Texas Instruments DSP to control the semiconductor for a telecom laser. That was all C without even standard libraries because the DSP only had a couple K of RAM and ROM.
I wrote software for a set of kernel level linux deamons that did IO via optical interfaces with GPS sattelites or a spy camera that was going inn space. My inter process communication was basically all 'C with classes' and the communication with the interface was all straight C because when delaing with PCI boards and ISA interfaces, you're dealing with mapped memory that you have to write to at specific addresses following certain protocols
All those projects were in C, and among the most interesting and rewarding projects I've done.
Currently, the predominant feature of bitcoin is not the tech as such, but the fact that it is the 1 coin you can trade against any other crypto asset on every exchange. In many cases, if you want to buy coin xyz, you have to buy bitcoin first. Likewise, if you sell coin xyz, you have to cash out to bitcoin and then convert to fiat.
As long as that remains the case, bitcoin is more or less guaranteed to have 'a' significant value. But if more and more people start to trade against Ethereum for example, then eventually Ethereum will take over from bitcoin, and bitcoin will wither.
That is, as long as the crypto space grows, there will be dominant assets with a high value, simply because there are exchanges that ONLY have crypto trading pairs and not fiat trading pairs.
It's only cheap if you stay within boundaries. Sending money from Europe to the US is ridiculously expensive. Even sending money from the EU to the UK is stupid expensive because the currency conversion costs a ridiculous amount of money. With most crypto, the fees are much, much smaller. Granted, BTC fees are getting silly. But I can buy litecoin or ethereum with euros, send it to the US for a very small fee, and the receiving party can convert it to USD for a very small fee.
I guess it depends on how much longer it will take. There are technically better alternatives to bitcoin. Ethereum is one such, though it needs to figure out a way to increase transaction speeds. Many coins already trade against bitcoin AND ethereum. If one keeps gradually increasing while there is still money going in, eventually bitcoin may be supplanted by something different.
As soon as bitcoin is no longer the de-facto currency against which all other coins are traded, the effect of a bitcoin crash may be less severe.
Coinbase is not an exchange where people buy and sell from each other. Instead coinbase buys and sells at just above, and just under market value, to and from their customers.
It's not coincidental that they don't allow access at times when the market value dips very hard. They'd be shooting themselves in the foot by selling their own btc at low values. If the volatility is too high, their margins are not big enough to cover their losses.
If people transfer BTC to coinbase and then sell them all at once, they have to buy them from funds they may not have available, and they'll be unable to sell the coin they just bought from you because volatility might just have tanked the price. BTC is so valuable at the moment that they just don't have the funds to buffer and ride the wave.
You can quite easily daytrade because transactions on the exchanges are not part of the block chain. As long as you buy and sell on the exchange, it's like buying and selling IOUs. Orders and transactions are near instantaneous. Only when the load is very high do you get smallish delays.
Slashdot Mirror
It won't. But it will simply starve to death when their food source gets removed from the ecosystem. If all the big herbivores die off, then sometime later the carnivores too will have a mass extinction. Or so the idea goes.
Just for the sake of the argument: There is a difference between registration and licensing. We can argue that licensing (i.e. needing to obtain permission for ownership) is against the constitution, but registration (i.e. notification of ownership) is not. I don't disagree with your assessment of the purpose of 2A btw. Not necessarily agree with 2A itself, but it is what it is.
It's not about the UK giving anything on the way out. You completely misunderstand what these negotiations are about. They are about what the UK wants from the EU when they are finally outside the door.
I agree. It no longer matter why or how it happened. It did. That means the UK has to deal with the reality of the situation, not the dream they were sold to by the brexit campaign.
I wish I still had mod points (I posted) because you hit the nail on the head, 100%.
You should get some more diverse news then. I will give you 2 facts.
1) many of the remainers didn't vote because they never thought that the leave camp had a chance in hell of succeeding. the entire nation didn't move. Only a small percentage did, and they won by a hair. Since you live in the US: think of it as a constitutional amendment that got only a 51% vote in congress, and was ratified by 30% of the states. Is that an amendment you would be happy with?
2) the EU tld denotes representation in the EU and compliance with EU regulations etc. You cannot have a tld if you declare yourself exempt from those regulations.
Believe it or not, many of us are sorry to see you go but still understand that the EU has to make the UK face the consequences, even though it inconveniences the many friends I have in the UK.
Nope. You own the content. You don't own the domain name. You lease it, which is why you also lose it when you stop paying the yearly fee.
It's not about being petty. What you wanted before the vote doesn't play into it anymore. Because those people are leaving together with the rest of their country, whether they want to or not. If an EU TLD is for legal residents etc, and is an indication that the websites comply with EU regulations etc, then letting UK residents keep EU domains is not an option.
The UK wants only the benefits, and none of the responsibilities or downsides. But that's not how the overall system works. The system as a whole cannot work if everyone only wants the perks but none of the burden.
Actually, an EU tld should indicate that the domain complies with EU laws. The UK chose a brexit because they explicitly didn't want that. It's about more than a name.
Your country voted to leave. Granted, it only happened because many of the remainers thought their vote wouldn't matter because there would not be too many brexiteers. But regardless, your country is leaving, as a complete unit. All of you are leaving., regardless of whether the vote was 51% or 99%. The EU cannot grant special rules that apply to the remainers. As far as the legalities are concerned: you are all brexisteers.
In the current proceedings, the EU's primary objective is to look after itself, not make things as cushy as possible for the remainers who got shafted. I know the berxit camp liked to pretend, but the EU is not going to give you any membership benefits. You're no longer going to be a member. You're going to be a foreign country and will be treated as such. THAT is what brexit means.
Actually, there is 1 simple reason why I get paid more compared to colleagues with similar jobs. I happen to be responsible for infrastructure that is absolutely critical to the plant. And if the plant were to shut down, we're talking hundreds of thousands of dollars per hour in damages. It's not that I am crucially important on a daily basis, but when they need me, they NEED me because there is noone else who can do the required troubleshooting. Or more correctly: there is not enough work for multiple people with my profile.
He doesn't say it has to be exactly the same. Most people don't care if someone makes more or less than them, as long as everyone falls within the gauss curve for the job they do. Because most people have an importance to the organization that falls within a gauss curve as well, and as long as the overall system is perceived as fair, everyone is happy.
Not necessarily. Very rarely are people so special that they really warrant wages that are way outside the norm. Having wages for a given job fall within a gauss curve makes perfect sense. Everybody likes to think they are the far end of the gauss curve, but they're not. And the person you are responding to doesn't really care who earns more or less than him, as long he knows that all wages fall within the gauss curve and is 'fair'.
You sound like you have never worked in the space industry. You cannot make a 50K payload that does anything useful. Active payload is designed and tested like you wouldn't believe and this alone costs oodles of money. And it's not exactly simple to make something cheap and still have it work in space.
The fact that you say it shouldn't be a hard problem to come up with a sub 50K payload for any scientist proves to pretty much anyone who has worked in the space industry that you are clueless when it comes to payload development.
It has already started, in my opinion.
Without wanting to go into a discussion on technical merits, I see that many exchanges have started trading against Ethereum as well as bitcoin. Bitcoin transfers are also faster than bitcoin transfers, and MUCH cheaper. That alone will have a big influence because in the crypto community many people have started using ETH for storing value, making transfers and trading.
One day, people will wake up and figure out that there is nothing that bitcoin does that another coin does better, and that its only advantage has simply been that it was the first mover. When that happens, bitcoin will go down and another currency will be king.
C is a fairly easy language to learn and understand. I basically had only 2 'special' skills that were very much appreciated by the senior engineers in the companies where I worked. the first one was that I have a masters degree in electronics and had theoretical physics as a hobby when I was in college. So aside from being a good programmer, I had the knowledge to understand the physics and instruments I was dealing with, which was a real benefit.
And my second 'special' skill was the fact that I wanted all my code to be bullet proof, and deal with every type of malformed data packet, data mismatches, incorrect use cases, etc. And I applied that same constraint not only to my code, but also to the logic it implemented. I knew how the instruments worked and what they were made to do. So my logic also set boundaries to the things that were allowed.
I hear you thinking 'that is not all that special' and I agree. But you'd be amazed how many programmers, even in those sectors, are satisfied with code that works. I always take it as a given that code should work. You should try to make it fail, once it is implemented. Ever night, every weekend, I ran more and more unit tests non stop, and injected bad commands and bad data at random intervals in order to see if I missed something.
Again, in itself not special, but the majority of C programmers in the companies I worked at did not have that mentality.
Actually there are plenty of highly interesting and good paying projects for which C is the only real option. A decade ago I was a C and C++ programmer, and pretty good if I say so myself. I cared to write bullet proof and well documented C code, and companies paid me a lot of money to do just that. I wrote firmware for the 2000 series Texas Instruments DSP to control the semiconductor for a telecom laser. That was all C without even standard libraries because the DSP only had a couple K of RAM and ROM.
I wrote software for a set of kernel level linux deamons that did IO via optical interfaces with GPS sattelites or a spy camera that was going inn space. My inter process communication was basically all 'C with classes' and the communication with the interface was all straight C because when delaing with PCI boards and ISA interfaces, you're dealing with mapped memory that you have to write to at specific addresses following certain protocols
All those projects were in C, and among the most interesting and rewarding projects I've done.
Currently, the predominant feature of bitcoin is not the tech as such, but the fact that it is the 1 coin you can trade against any other crypto asset on every exchange. In many cases, if you want to buy coin xyz, you have to buy bitcoin first. Likewise, if you sell coin xyz, you have to cash out to bitcoin and then convert to fiat.
As long as that remains the case, bitcoin is more or less guaranteed to have 'a' significant value. But if more and more people start to trade against Ethereum for example, then eventually Ethereum will take over from bitcoin, and bitcoin will wither.
That is, as long as the crypto space grows, there will be dominant assets with a high value, simply because there are exchanges that ONLY have crypto trading pairs and not fiat trading pairs.
It's only cheap if you stay within boundaries. Sending money from Europe to the US is ridiculously expensive. Even sending money from the EU to the UK is stupid expensive because the currency conversion costs a ridiculous amount of money. With most crypto, the fees are much, much smaller. Granted, BTC fees are getting silly. But I can buy litecoin or ethereum with euros, send it to the US for a very small fee, and the receiving party can convert it to USD for a very small fee.
>>Charlottesville and what happened there looked nothing like that stuff.
So they were not representative of the good and responsible white supremacists, you mean?
I guess it depends on how much longer it will take.
There are technically better alternatives to bitcoin. Ethereum is one such, though it needs to figure out a way to increase transaction speeds. Many coins already trade against bitcoin AND ethereum. If one keeps gradually increasing while there is still money going in, eventually bitcoin may be supplanted by something different.
As soon as bitcoin is no longer the de-facto currency against which all other coins are traded, the effect of a bitcoin crash may be less severe.
Coinbase is not an exchange where people buy and sell from each other. Instead coinbase buys and sells at just above, and just under market value, to and from their customers.
It's not coincidental that they don't allow access at times when the market value dips very hard. They'd be shooting themselves in the foot by selling their own btc at low values. If the volatility is too high, their margins are not big enough to cover their losses.
If people transfer BTC to coinbase and then sell them all at once, they have to buy them from funds they may not have available, and they'll be unable to sell the coin they just bought from you because volatility might just have tanked the price. BTC is so valuable at the moment that they just don't have the funds to buffer and ride the wave.
You can quite easily daytrade because transactions on the exchanges are not part of the block chain. As long as you buy and sell on the exchange, it's like buying and selling IOUs. Orders and transactions are near instantaneous. Only when the load is very high do you get smallish delays.