It's good at organizing massive rescue efforts. Since the US Armed Forces are expected to go anywhere and kill people, there's a large logistical tail that can go anywhere, and that can be used for other purposes.
The government also has different requirements than most people. For example, a $600 coffee maker in an aircraft was designed to not be a hazard under enemy attack. Since this is a very small market niche, the coffee makers cost more than they would have in a larger market. Military tools may be designed to work in environments where other tools would break or be unusable.
Tracing has been done, but, really, the authorities aren't really interested in the movement of Bitcoin. They're interested in the value when you buy something with it or cash it in.
You are assuming that regulation violates your property rights. In fact, you can't use your properly freely, since you're not allowed to kill someone with it directly. At that point, it's a question of how much regulation. Property rights mean that stuff can't be taken away from you without consent or due process, not that you have the right to do everything.
If people buy cryptocurrency in the hope that it will be worth more in the future, that's investment. It may not be successful, and it may not be wise, but lots of intangibles are investments.
"Supported" might be a better word than "backed" here. The US Dollar is vital to one of the largest economies on the planet, and the most powerful government on the planet deals in it. It isn't going away.
The welfare of the community as a whole is the sum of the welfare of its members. It's typically best served by allowing people to make their own choices, maximizing their own welfare, as long as the total costs to other people can be assessed and charged (within the limits of the law, of course).. The problem is when the individual's effect on any other individual is small, but it affects a lot of individuals. In this case, a individual might choose to use an Uber car because it's a little more convenient, and that produces a tiny increase in congestion that by itself doesn't significantly harm anyone, but if too many people do that the harm becomes apparent.
It's a form of the Tragedy of the Commons that isn't solvable by splitting up the commons. Each individual person is better off taking a Uber, but if enough do, everybody's worse off.
This is one reason why we limit the number of taxis on the roads.
Did you ever see "Demolition Man", starring Sylvester Stallone? It's got a chase scene with autonomous cars (Stallone, being a police officer, has override capability and can control the car himself). It's still exciting, but there are no crashes going on because the cars adapt to the situation themselves very nicely.
Here in the Twin Cities, Minnesota, I've worked for two highly innovative small companies that pretty much were (or are) the best in the world at what they did (or do).
The "flyover" states include some pretty large cities, where you will find culture, diversity, and frequently liberalism. The rural vs. city divide is one of the most fundamental in the US, more important than coast vs. inland.
Who said that? [Apple can't improve the world by making their stuff easier to use.]
Well,
it's about their general philosophy of not working well with others. You don't make a better world this way.
upthread.
Apple makes their stuff much harder to use, unless you have only Apple devices and Apple friends.
Really? I have no problems with using an iPhone, and Android tablet, a Windows laptop, and a Linux desktop I need to fix (it lost track of a hard drive). I haven't seen any of my friends or family have problems with having iPhones and nothing else Apple.
Yeah, back when the crime rate was higher? There are rare situations that come up in which a specially trained police unit is extremely useful. I'm not claimed that they're necessarily trained or equipped properly, or used appropriately, but a SWAT team is useful.
Given equivalent situations, are a SWAT team more likely to kill an innocent than a regular police officer? In the Wichita shooting, someone here claimed (I didn't follow it up and check it myself) that the officer who shot the fatal bullet was not, in fact, SWAT. It's possible that, if it had just been the SWAT guys, nobody would have died.
Suit yourself. My wife and friends already know I'm a history buff with my own opinions on things. I don't think my employer cares, as long as I don't identify myself with them.
Investigations that produce ongoing indictments and guilty pleas are evidence that something's going on. The Trump campaign was clearly corrupt. We're looking into Russian interference with the election, and Trump is trying to be buddy-buddy with the Russians. Obviously, this isn't enough to convict, and likely isn't probable cause by itself, but I find it suggestive.
As far as Trump himself being corrupt, we know that already. He bought off a state attorney general who was investigating Trump U. He's paid hush money to keep affairs quiet. His self-admitted sexual morals are deplorable. One of his standard business practices has been stiffing subcontractors and telling them they can sue.
Read "A Fire Upon the Deep" by Vernor Vinge. A colony world stumbles on what they think is instructions for Transcendence, and find out too late that it's something else entirely, which preys on a large chunk of the galaxy.
Slashdot Mirror
It's good at organizing massive rescue efforts. Since the US Armed Forces are expected to go anywhere and kill people, there's a large logistical tail that can go anywhere, and that can be used for other purposes.
The government also has different requirements than most people. For example, a $600 coffee maker in an aircraft was designed to not be a hazard under enemy attack. Since this is a very small market niche, the coffee makers cost more than they would have in a larger market. Military tools may be designed to work in environments where other tools would break or be unusable.
Tracing has been done, but, really, the authorities aren't really interested in the movement of Bitcoin. They're interested in the value when you buy something with it or cash it in.
You are assuming that regulation violates your property rights. In fact, you can't use your properly freely, since you're not allowed to kill someone with it directly. At that point, it's a question of how much regulation. Property rights mean that stuff can't be taken away from you without consent or due process, not that you have the right to do everything.
If people buy cryptocurrency in the hope that it will be worth more in the future, that's investment. It may not be successful, and it may not be wise, but lots of intangibles are investments.
"Supported" might be a better word than "backed" here. The US Dollar is vital to one of the largest economies on the planet, and the most powerful government on the planet deals in it. It isn't going away.
The welfare of the community as a whole is the sum of the welfare of its members. It's typically best served by allowing people to make their own choices, maximizing their own welfare, as long as the total costs to other people can be assessed and charged (within the limits of the law, of course).. The problem is when the individual's effect on any other individual is small, but it affects a lot of individuals. In this case, a individual might choose to use an Uber car because it's a little more convenient, and that produces a tiny increase in congestion that by itself doesn't significantly harm anyone, but if too many people do that the harm becomes apparent.
It's a form of the Tragedy of the Commons that isn't solvable by splitting up the commons. Each individual person is better off taking a Uber, but if enough do, everybody's worse off.
This is one reason why we limit the number of taxis on the roads.
Did you ever see "Demolition Man", starring Sylvester Stallone? It's got a chase scene with autonomous cars (Stallone, being a police officer, has override capability and can control the car himself). It's still exciting, but there are no crashes going on because the cars adapt to the situation themselves very nicely.
Here in the Twin Cities, Minnesota, I've worked for two highly innovative small companies that pretty much were (or are) the best in the world at what they did (or do).
The "flyover" states include some pretty large cities, where you will find culture, diversity, and frequently liberalism. The rural vs. city divide is one of the most fundamental in the US, more important than coast vs. inland.
Well,
upthread.
Really? I have no problems with using an iPhone, and Android tablet, a Windows laptop, and a Linux desktop I need to fix (it lost track of a hard drive). I haven't seen any of my friends or family have problems with having iPhones and nothing else Apple.
The car has something like a roof rack installed. It came that way from the dealer. I don't have a good way to clean off the top.
Yeah, back when the crime rate was higher? There are rare situations that come up in which a specially trained police unit is extremely useful. I'm not claimed that they're necessarily trained or equipped properly, or used appropriately, but a SWAT team is useful.
Given equivalent situations, are a SWAT team more likely to kill an innocent than a regular police officer? In the Wichita shooting, someone here claimed (I didn't follow it up and check it myself) that the officer who shot the fatal bullet was not, in fact, SWAT. It's possible that, if it had just been the SWAT guys, nobody would have died.
Suit yourself. My wife and friends already know I'm a history buff with my own opinions on things. I don't think my employer cares, as long as I don't identify myself with them.
I'm not arguing with that.
Investigations that produce ongoing indictments and guilty pleas are evidence that something's going on. The Trump campaign was clearly corrupt. We're looking into Russian interference with the election, and Trump is trying to be buddy-buddy with the Russians. Obviously, this isn't enough to convict, and likely isn't probable cause by itself, but I find it suggestive.
As far as Trump himself being corrupt, we know that already. He bought off a state attorney general who was investigating Trump U. He's paid hush money to keep affairs quiet. His self-admitted sexual morals are deplorable. One of his standard business practices has been stiffing subcontractors and telling them they can sue.
Any society that can manage interstellar travel will certainly be able to hit Earth with a large planetoid and effectively destroy the planet.
Read "A Fire Upon the Deep" by Vernor Vinge. A colony world stumbles on what they think is instructions for Transcendence, and find out too late that it's something else entirely, which preys on a large chunk of the galaxy.
Do we leftists hate Musk? I must have missed the last Masters of Socialism meeting.
How much natural gas and hydro power does Oahu have? We're talking about a special case here, not like anything on the mainland.
As Mueller digs deeper into Trump's campaign staff, you're trying to pretend he isn't corrupt?
Infosys is staffing their new Indianapolis center with US citizens making decent money.
I'm going to say he lived on Earth before 1980, which is when the Republicans became the borrow-and-spend party.
I can say some nice things about Hitler, too. He was good to his dog, and his WWI service was quite creditable.
H-1B reform is about the only thing Trump has done or is doing that I really like.