Oh, but it so is. Trump has made a point, over and over again, of announcing policy over his personal Twitter account; he himself reminds us regularly that Twitter is the main way to "get his message out" (sic). The POTUS is effectively using social media as his main communication channel, which is absolutely insane.
Now ponder this: do you imagine this uproar over @POTUS being offline for 11 minutes? And what would've happened if instead of disabling @realDonaldTrump someone over Twitter wrote "I've instructed USPACOM to launch a preemptive strike on North Korea"?
If this happened to a regular user instead of the President of the United States, what would be the recourse?
No. This wouldn't even be a story.
It is quite amazing that the POTUS Twitter account being out for 11 minutes is almost a state issue. Speaks more about Trump's use and abuse of social media than anything else.
By the way, "top of the line" fighters would be the F-22, which is way more expensive than the F-35.
Um, no. The F-35 program cost is estimated to be at least 7x the F-22, and it has already blown way over its initial budget. Per shipped aircraft the F-22 is cheaper.
Now, the F-22 is quite expensive to fly (about 2x the hourly cost of a F-35) but that mean very little if the alternative cannot take off or does it in a crippled capacity.
That's a shame. I figure the F-22 was scrapped as being too expensive, but it is still very likely the most technologically advanced fighter out there and, in retrospective, it would've probably been cheaper for the US to keep it around.
What happens when the cost of the computing resources required to generate more falls below the marginal selling price of a bitcoin?
Nothing more than someone gaining money easily, but we'll likely never hit that point. The amount of BTC available for mining is fixed; by next year over 80% of it will already be mined. A conservative estimate is that the last block will be mined in 2140 (by virtue of the block reward halving frequency every four years), but it is posed to happen way before. Right now a new block is mined every 9% in average, which is already 10% faster than the estimate.
Then there are other systemic issues due to the origin of its value in illegal activities making it target for not just every imaginable regulation but making the holding itself illegal and subject to sentencing and fine/prison. This does happen and is targeted at stopping those illegal activities. For instance, try crossing an international border with a million in undeclared USD and see what happens.
You can cross an international border with a million USD in undeclared bank assets and no one will ever know. BTC is the exact same in that regard.
Now, i agree that the legality of cryptocurrencies is a big question mark and i have no idea how this will evolve in the future. In general governments don't like what they can't control nor tax.
Well, no, not really. Disclaimer: i'm not yet quite sold on the concept of crytpocurrencies, but i've been studying them for a while.
Bitcoin and other digital currencies do have utility and their value (specially in the case of Bitcoin) is derived from scarcity and the effort required to "mine" new currency. The main problem with BTC is that right now its market is minuscule and limited almost exclusively, as you explain, to value exchange. Relatively small operations can make its USD value change dramatically overnight; BTC is volatile because it is not widely used, and it is not widely used because of its volatility. I don't know if it will ever overcome this issue.
Other than that, the design behind Bitcoin is technically very sound - not only in terms of crypto but also economics. Whoever came up with it did its homework.
Gold is not valuable because it is tangible; it is valuable because it is scarce. So is Bitcoin, BTW. Much like gold, as a currency it is inherently deflationary.
There is no good reason to believe that the value will continue to increase or hold steady over time.
There actually is: Bitcoin is a fixed amount currency, with only about 21 million BTC available. If it popularity increases prices will go nowhere but up.
OnePlus manufacture some dam nice phones, and OxygenOS was stock android with just the right amount of custom tweaks. I'm now happy i didn't pick up a OP5.
All of the targets MUST be measurable, per the accord letter. GHG can be either measured by production or consumption, with a calculable error; your concern seems to be that these measurements are mostly indirect. I fail to see how that make them invalid.
Slashdot Mirror
Oh, but it so is. Trump has made a point, over and over again, of announcing policy over his personal Twitter account; he himself reminds us regularly that Twitter is the main way to "get his message out" (sic). The POTUS is effectively using social media as his main communication channel, which is absolutely insane.
Now ponder this: do you imagine this uproar over @POTUS being offline for 11 minutes? And what would've happened if instead of disabling @realDonaldTrump someone over Twitter wrote "I've instructed USPACOM to launch a preemptive strike on North Korea"?
If this happened to a regular user instead of the President of the United States, what would be the recourse?
No. This wouldn't even be a story.
It is quite amazing that the POTUS Twitter account being out for 11 minutes is almost a state issue. Speaks more about Trump's use and abuse of social media than anything else.
Ok i laughed :)
Will it? The planned cost for the F-35 is bigger than the GDP of Australia... and it keeps going over budget.
The last batch of delivered F-22 were about $130 mil a pop, or roughly the same of what a F-35 costs today.
By the way, "top of the line" fighters would be the F-22, which is way more expensive than the F-35.
Um, no. The F-35 program cost is estimated to be at least 7x the F-22, and it has already blown way over its initial budget. Per shipped aircraft the F-22 is cheaper.
Now, the F-22 is quite expensive to fly (about 2x the hourly cost of a F-35) but that mean very little if the alternative cannot take off or does it in a crippled capacity.
Speaking of which, i always loved Kelly Johnson's 14 rules he enforced while running Skunk Works: https://www.lockheedmartin.com...
That's a shame. I figure the F-22 was scrapped as being too expensive, but it is still very likely the most technologically advanced fighter out there and, in retrospective, it would've probably been cheaper for the US to keep it around.
At this rate the US could just pour money into buying perfectly capable, top-of-the-line fighters and write them off as losses in the F-35 program.
Oh, i dunno: https://arstechnica.com/gadget...
The original Pixel sold very well and was deemed the best premium smartphone of 2016 by many.
Wow, that is pretty damning. Really doesn't bode well for Trump and the Russia collusion investigation.
We're all neural networks designing drugs and climate models.
Bitcoin is artificially scarce.
Yes, it is designed that way. Its artificial scarcity is intrinsic - you cannot just switch it off.
In all fairness, nothing has intrinsic value. Not even gold.
What happens when the cost of the computing resources required to generate more falls below the marginal selling price of a bitcoin?
Nothing more than someone gaining money easily, but we'll likely never hit that point. The amount of BTC available for mining is fixed; by next year over 80% of it will already be mined. A conservative estimate is that the last block will be mined in 2140 (by virtue of the block reward halving frequency every four years), but it is posed to happen way before. Right now a new block is mined every 9% in average, which is already 10% faster than the estimate.
Then there are other systemic issues due to the origin of its value in illegal activities making it target for not just every imaginable regulation but making the holding itself illegal and subject to sentencing and fine/prison. This does happen and is targeted at stopping those illegal activities. For instance, try crossing an international border with a million in undeclared USD and see what happens.
You can cross an international border with a million USD in undeclared bank assets and no one will ever know. BTC is the exact same in that regard.
Now, i agree that the legality of cryptocurrencies is a big question mark and i have no idea how this will evolve in the future. In general governments don't like what they can't control nor tax.
Well, no, not really. Disclaimer: i'm not yet quite sold on the concept of crytpocurrencies, but i've been studying them for a while.
Bitcoin and other digital currencies do have utility and their value (specially in the case of Bitcoin) is derived from scarcity and the effort required to "mine" new currency. The main problem with BTC is that right now its market is minuscule and limited almost exclusively, as you explain, to value exchange. Relatively small operations can make its USD value change dramatically overnight; BTC is volatile because it is not widely used, and it is not widely used because of its volatility. I don't know if it will ever overcome this issue.
Other than that, the design behind Bitcoin is technically very sound - not only in terms of crypto but also economics. Whoever came up with it did its homework.
"Controlled"? What the fuck are you talking about?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Gold is not valuable because it is tangible; it is valuable because it is scarce. So is Bitcoin, BTW. Much like gold, as a currency it is inherently deflationary.
And he's supposed to be a Wharton-educated businessman. Jesus effin Christ.
There is no good reason to believe that the value will continue to increase or hold steady over time.
There actually is: Bitcoin is a fixed amount currency, with only about 21 million BTC available. If it popularity increases prices will go nowhere but up.
OnePlus manufacture some dam nice phones, and OxygenOS was stock android with just the right amount of custom tweaks. I'm now happy i didn't pick up a OP5.
Trump is newsworthy every day, and not in the way that you think he is.
Well, evidence points to social media advertising being exceedingly effective this past election.
All of the targets MUST be measurable, per the accord letter. GHG can be either measured by production or consumption, with a calculable error; your concern seems to be that these measurements are mostly indirect. I fail to see how that make them invalid.
You should check again - every country pledges to a series of goals when they enter/ratify the accord: http://climateactiontracker.or...