karlkeefer's comments

Farm animals are also exempted from most animal cruelty laws via the magic words "standard agricultural practice".

It likely will be with language models becoming ubiquitous.

I can't speak to the actual problems from chicken bones, but scale may be part of the explanation.

We are producing something like 50 billion chickens for slaughter every year. I don't think that estimate includes laying hens or culled males, either. The scale of chicken production is bonkers relative to natural bird populations.

The most abundant wild bird species is on the order of 1.5 billion. They are sparrow-sized and that's not their annual number.

Framed animals dwarf wild mammals and wild birds by mass:

https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2021/08/total-biomass-weight-...

It seems like suggesting there is _no such threshold_ is even more in need of citation.

Boundlessness means that X could be all domesticated animals, and Y=1 human. Surely that seems like not the right call, given that it would ultimately kill even more humans.

Yeah.. the hype I think makes it harder to appreciate the main use case, which essentially was already covered by the first cryptocoin, and is still where it sees the most real-world use: resistance to state control. Folks use it to evade capital controls, use darkweb markets, launder money, find radical activism, etc.

That's still a big deal, but it's far short of the impact-for-everyone promised by some folks in the industry.

Videos are short, can be watched many times by 1 viewer, and may be viewed by all the folks that don't speak English as a first language, but speak it a second or third language, or have subtitles available (which are now automated).

165mil isn't as big as it sounds with those factors in mind.

Prediction markets have a built-in incentive for accuracy that's absent from broadcast news. It's useful to have an aggregate answer to things like "how likely is Russia to invade Ukraine" that is to some degree shielded from the normal filters of partisanship.

Or from another angle:

Changing your individual vote in an attempt to shift the outcome of an election is extraordinarily unlikely to actually make the difference, so prediction markets most likely punish people (with losses) who try to game it with their own votes. If you and a large group of people plan to do this, that will be priced into the market, preventing you from profiting very much.

That's a pretty high bar

Benz made the first car in 1886, which in your analogy means today is 1900.

I will be curious to see how crypto holds up in recession or under monetary crisis.

One of the reasons it was created hasn't really been tested, since the economy in the west hasn't faced a major crisis since its invention.

It seems plausible (if unlikely) that external events could push crypto adoption into more "normal" use cases. E.g. Israel's recent ban on cash transactions points to one way more things may become untenable in traditional finance.

I don't actually have strong opinions on what will happen - I do find your analogy fun to think about though!

Glad it suits you! Let me know if you run into issues :)

Thanks :)

I built a free service that sends you email prompts to think about gratitude. If you reply to the emails, it collects your responses into a gratitude journal.

https://emailnotebook.com

Its primary purpose is to get me to build the habit, and so far it's working for that :)

Area-wise, most US cities are much bigger than European ones, but that's actually part of the problem. Huge amounts of our housing stock is kind of far from everything else, making biking much less appealing.

I think you might be creating the value judgement on middle-class? I don't read the label as condescending.

> The current system is far from perfect, but it does favor upstarts and entrepreneurs' ability to build business rather than incumbents.

I think exactly the opposite is true. Patents are one of the primary ways that incumbents are able to rent seek on their inventions for decades. These large companies hoard patents, and are legally granted monopoly on a given technology, making direct competition on their invention illegal.

A world without patents would be more enabling to small entrepreneurs, because the amount of things they are allowed to attempt is so much higher than in our current world.

Calling dibs is still problematic, even with proper documentation... independent inventors often come up with same thing at a later date, because it's obvious, but they are still prevented from using their own invention because someone else had the same idea.

Those contracts are sometimes negotiated in private mediated sessions. It's not all open air by default.

https://tvtropes.org/ has a ton of this kind of thing - not sure if that scratches your itch!

I think they mean American Indians aka native Americans.

You can be satisfied or disappointed with a result in the supreme court without making the court your moral authority.

It can be both legal and wrong. No need for a "double standard".

Agile Learning Centers and Liberated Learners are inspiring networks of small schools in this vein (and both less dogmatic than Sudbury - in a good way, IMO).