You are not considering the value that very old individuals might contribute (and in fact do so) in many sophisticated societies with language: teaching of younger individuals and also acquiring deep complex knowledge about life, which can be simply impossible to do if they had short lives (they would just not have time to learn any of it).
In many times of our history the resources weren't that scarce to begin with. Primitive tribes don't need to dig for rare metals to make their Teslas, they could survive and thrive on very abundant resources.
This guy is truly a legend. A force of nature.
"Windows 2000 Demo
It is done in an unusual way: the browser runs a Javascript VM, which runs x86emu, which runs Linux, which runs QEMU, which runs Windows. "
If you knew the technical details of blockchains, you would not think that. And yes, the process IS much more than wasing massive amounts of energy.
> 1) Surely we can come up with a less wasteful solution to this
You are welcome to try. If you do come up with a less waisful solution you will be able to create your own altcoin and will make billions worth of dollars on it. Some very smart people have tried in the past and are still trying.
Fiat money doesn't serve the same purpose as Bitcoin and in some ways is the opposite. Why are there so many trite unthoughtful comments being made about cryotocurrencies? I'm guessing people are turned off by all the scam coins and are throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
I'm turned off by watching a bunch of people who haven't learned basic lessons about banking trying to reinvent it, badly. Anyone who spent a few days learning about how banks do security could have understood that what these exchanges like Mt. Gox were doing was frightfully vulnerable, and anyone unwilling to spend at least a few days learning about banking security has no business running a currency exchange. But it's all handwaved away because fiat money is evil and cryptocurrency makes you feel like the hero in a Neal Stephenson novel so screw the man. So now we have a bunch of programmers and enthusiasts learning how the financial system works from first principles and making boneheaded mistakes as a result. And they have enough money swirling around thanks to Chinese capital flight that they can screw with the pricing for an entire market like GPUs. And then when you point out how much electricity this whole scheme wastes they say "well banks use electricity" as if that's the same thing. It's heedless, irresponsible and discouraging.
Do you realize that exchanges and cryptocurrencies are not even close to the same thing? In fact most exchanges deal in fiat as well, so you should also be shitting on fiat at the same time based on your logic.
So what? Bank of America is a company that provides banking services as a business model, they are not a necessary aspect of fiat currency any more than coinbase is a necessity of bitcoin.
Right. People are still going to have mortgages in a world where cryptocurrency replaces fiat money, assuming that we don't have much bigger concerns than electricity use. People are still going to need banking services. It's not like you can replace the whole banking sector with Bitcoin.
Because banks aren't setting themselves up in places based on the electricty cost. And shoving rackmount servers in close proximity and underventilating them. Even huge fintech operations aren't chasing cheap power at the exclusion of other concerns. Banks do not use the kind of electricity that cryptocurrency uses, when you control for the volume of usage of each.
This is very cool. You can basically even call all Java classes (and the other way around) from that JavaScript! (And reliably limit the classes that can be used if you want to execute JS in a safe environment.) Why isn't this used more often? (Or is it used more often?)
I can't speak to whether it is used more often, but I would bet the java-based Nashorn vm is significantly slower than the c++-based nodejs. In fact, a cursory google search shows this is the case, and it's not even close.
While it is of course going to be slower, "it's not even close" is a judgement claim. The tests you have link talk about 1.6-2-3 times the difference. In a lot of applications the performance hit is going to be worth gaining access to the whole Java ecosystem of libraries.
Also the performance is very likely to increase with newer versions.
Nashorn isn't that slow, but there's another JS-on-the-JVM project called Graal.js which is about as fast as NodeJS/V8.
One reason Nashorn isn't used that much is that it doesn't expose a node.js compatible API. JS people often want Node specifically, not just the ability to run JS. It has some cool features though. The shell mode is neat.
Ok, allow me to me rephrase GP: will this make it possible (in the long run) to train tensor flow models on AMD acceleration cards in a supported, easy-to-use and performant way, comparable to what NVidia is offering?
While there is sure some enforceability, like he says, it has to be much harder to do because there is no way these ICOs actually have as much legal text written out and agreed upon by all participants. This has to mean that it will be much easier for dishonest actors to get their wishes with ICOs, as opposed to with regular LTDs and such.
More interestingly, there seems to be no real answer for the question you have asked. What is the real value, if the courts and legalities are what people need in this situations, and those things are already in place?
Sometimes it really seems like the enthusiasm of most honest people coming into ICOs is fueled by the fact that they don't understand this. They don't comprehend what stocks are really about: making sure that the state can aid in contract enforcing.
Think otherwise? Please prove me wrong. There just don't seem to be any real industrial value in ICOs, we already have stock technology.
If you can't learn how to use Swing, it means you are a bad programmer. It does not depend on your age. You might not be willing to learn, or have some other reasons, but claiming that Swing is somehow so old that young people are not able to learn it is just plain false and completely unsubstantiated.
I think your experience reflects that basic gist I've gotten from most professionals:
ORMs are complicated and convoluted because they provide a solution for a very complicated problem. If you are somewhat new and don't understand things, it's easy for you to see the few problems introduced by ORMs and think that it means that the whole concept is just unnecessary bloat. With more experience and wisdom, you understand that the few quirks of ORMs are a necessary evil for having a software that solves such a complex and flexible task.
That's a good analysis of things, and on top of that, when you're new you'll treat an ORM like a hammer in search of a nail. So someone who's less experienced and doesn't realize that you should supplement the ORM with raw SQL queries might try to evaluate complicated queries in the ORM, with the usual results. Some of that has changed with e.g. LINQ and IQueryable in .NET, but it's no panacea.
He seems to have tried to enter USA using ESTA. ESTA is not a visa, it's a visa-waiver program. It's specifically created as an easier method of entering a country, but as a trade-off, it says in the terms that they can deny it for any reason with no questions. This does not mean that the person cannot enter the country per se, it just means they need to apply for a real visa.
I believe the border control personnel act as if that vetting hasn't been done at all. All in all, I think this path is worse, since you get denied to entry after a long flight, and you have to flight back...
It's frustrating they couldn't warn him prior to the hour of travel? I find it difficult to believe they'll have rejected him for something they couldn't have contacted him about days or weeks ago. With ESTA they've got perfect contact details too?
I assume he's lost the price of the flight? Travel insurance wouldn't repay it?
At least they told him before he flew over. They could have done that when he actually landed, and he would have been denied entry there, then shuffled back onto a flight.
I do not get your point. The ESTA is the only way to get to the country if you're going to a conference or on holidays or to visit someone.
If you're looking for better, you need to find a job to sponsor you and you need to go through the lottery (H1B). Or you need to work for a US company abroad for more than a year (L1). Or you need to get married with an american person.
Where are you getting the information? There absolutely are other visas. The ESTA is just an easier way to do it, and as such, can sometimes be more limited. You can also get normal visa and get other vetting procedures and likely other outcomes.
