doublejay1999's comments

It’s brilliant that someone would do this.

There is no problem statement, a series of bad design decision and component choices, and a rather silly price.

It reminds me a bit of the British tradition of shed engineering and it’s great to see people still doing things for the dream

i dont mean to be glib, just concise :

capital writes policy, and exceptions are hard fought and rare.

1200 down to 30 even if that rises to 50, or 60, means the link is materially broken.

there will always be a death a rate. im not sure what you were expecting ?

> The craziest thing is we keep seeing the phrase "the link between infections and deaths has been broken".

Death rates have fallen from a peak of around 1000 deaths per day in feb - with comparable infection rates, to 6 deaths per day. https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/

i think most people would consider that to be having broken the link, between infection and death.

Apple are a patent troll company, often using their size and weight to beat down competition. They have stolen functionality at will to make the product they want, and then fought it out in court.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Inc._litigation#Trademar...

> How it works is that users need to control themselves under provocation.

then do so, my friend. then do so.

The nature of the article is hardly in question. It is the headline, and purpose of the piece.

My best advice would be to apply your vigilance to submissions as diligently as you do to the comments, nipping it in the bud, as it were. That's what I'd do, if I was interested in maintaining standards as your profess to be.

The submitted article is a flame war against non-developers and promotes the same attitude in the workplace. Other people have jobs too.

It's condescends :

   "Your non-techie peers just don’t get it, no matter how many times you try to make them understand."

Demeans :

   "Tell him that you bet him lunch he can’t get it done in five minutes, only getting one shot at getting the answer right. Maybe he’ll stop laughing and get to work."

..and insults :

    "complete with ridiculous buzzword BS bingo and sports metaphors about “closing out the game in the endzone” or something. By the time the dust settles and you’ve been Six-Sigma-ed into submission by 3rd degree black belts",

As long as HN keep accepting such submissions, I'll keep giving them the treatment they deserve, which I think is fair.

TSLA has far more speculators in the stock than users of the product - which was the criticism levelled at bitcoin by OP

You mentioned TSLA has future earnings, which is true, but it has 12bil of debt of the balance sheet too. Bitcoin has no debt on the balance sheet..

More significantly, TSLA is trading at a normalised P/E ratio of >700. For comparison, FORD is about 14. This says that unequivocally people believe TSLA is far, far, far more valuable that the sum of it's parts. Just like bitcoin.

it obviously costs more to produce content than it does to host and stream it.

That's why you watch a show costing 10 millions dollars per episode, for 10 bucks a month.

Seems like the real pressure, rather than perceived pressures, is your Visa dependency.

I'm speculating a bit - but the fact that you perceive this job as a pressured environment, suggests that it's not right for you.

Very simply, brace your self for 6 months and then find a environment that suits you better.

I don't know if you think its clever somehow, to wilfully avoid the point & attempt a low brow straw man, but I can tell you that it isn't.

so what bitcoin (and of course other crypto) is, is complex and ultimately subjective : it's different things to different people, just like money.

It does some things money can do & does some things that money cannot. FIAT money is the same, It does some s bitcoin can't but cannot do some things bitcoin can.

instead of advancing a concrete definition of crypto - which as i said is a subjective argument - i'd encourage you to look at what money, monetarism & fiat really are.

It's equally subjective, and arguably a more difficult concept that crypto.

At the moment, traditional cash can be spent much more freely than crypto, which is one of things limiting it's utility as a currency. But similarly, the lack of an immutable ledger, a practically infinite(or a least unknown) supply, and risk of physical counterfeits limits Cash as store of value.

....right now...crypto is something. Even if it's yet to be fully realised. It's mainstream, at least as an investible asset and It has some utility as currency, albeit limited.

For people in developed countries, with established currencies backed by a military force, either directly of indirectly, it will seem quite absurd that crypto could/should replace cash.

For people in unstable regimes, countries who've experienced hyperinflation, it's a massively attractive proposition.

like tesla

i'm so tempted.

It's amazing! Hundreds of SciFi writers predicted such surveillance, I dont think many predicted it arrive by invitation - i expect many parents will support this.

Same for smart speakers. It's a hairs breadth away from complete audio & video surveillance.

its not naive to think there are plenty of talented 120k devs sitting in faangs waiting to catch a break.

> It is clear, at least to me, that emitting large quantities of CO2 into the air, and heated waste water into a lake, for the sole purpose of enriching oneself

i agree, but that would make bitcoin mining merely the most recent addition to a very, very long list of immoral endeavours undertaken for the sole purpose of enriching oneself.

It would interesting to surrender the whole process to AI.

Let's have AI decide what the productivity requirement should be, given biological constraints of us meat sacks. Feed it all the data - churn, sick days, the Geneva convention, employment law, recruit & training costs, development goals....the whole fucking shebang.

I'll have a sportsman's bet with any of you, that the targets for performance set by AI, would be easier to meet than those devised by mere human cruelty.

a lightbulb moment for the author, in which he happens upon the idea that films made for mass appeal are somehow limited in artistic scope & ambition.