liaukovv

And how would seller pay taxes? They didnt get any fiat, they can't off-ramp it presumably(otherwise buyer would have done it), and now guy with a gun comes and demands his share, what happens?

Next thing you know they'll be cursing at you using speakers

>contact us to get the details

Meh Also 10 mb of ram are hard to come by on mcus

By regulate they mean bail out

They could offer something you can't get anywhere else that would force consumers to come. I mean game exclusives, not technology. In the end it's all about games

Those are not even in the same league

Freedom is important

I personally consider conservatorship immoral. "We know better so you are better off being my slave"

Why do you consider yourself or the cashier to be in position to deny the man his lawful right to be stupid?

If i had any tether I would sell it all right now, on the off chance that tether is in fact not fully backed. In the end there is no upside to holding it, so even small risk is unnecessary

If they did that they would get sued by their own investors.

If you can use hash to identify someone then its pii by definition

Emergency is the favourite tool of tyrants

Purpose of life is reproduction Reproduction is easier in engineered environment

Something like 4chan in the past

I don't think the hobbit abomination is forgivable.

My mom isnt on twatter

Second part of your nickname is certainly true

My understanding is that verilog is more popular in us while vhdl is common in europe/germany

Is it an alternative to modelsim?

Or something different?

Unsafe in rust means "you have to enforce the use contract manually as opposed to compiler doing it for you" So yes, if contract is violated there the entire program is contaminated

In capitalist system owner can enforce cooperation so the pot itself grows. The proportion that workers capture here is of course dependant on external factors, like labour market and laws.

In the communal system it is in the best interest of each agent to work against other agents.

Tragedy of the commons and all that.

This creates inverted incentives: to take as much from the pot as possible while putting in as little as possible. Same reason as why such communal systems never work if they get much larger than one family.

The company doesn't exist to make money for it's employees.

That would make hardware a commodity and there is not enough margin in commodoties.

Modern journalism as a whole forfeited it's good faith credit quite some time ago, kinda like crypto scammers.

I'm pretty sure they are doing it for a house near central park with a roof deck.

Maybe less represented gender likes this terminology less because they understand it less(because they are less represented)

I'm just saying waving away the need for proving points before taking acion is doing more harm than good

Such proposals usually start with "self-evident" assertion of harm incorrect terminology causes, but is it actually measurable? Did anyone make research while isolating influence of such things? Sociology is such a shitshow