739 karma · joined December 25, 2009
I didn't read the paper fully but grepped for "gender" and "sex" and couldn't find anything.
But regulations didn't come before the credit card did right? Only after they were invented were regulations built. Let builders build.
> Only some fraction of the data is open.
We're talking past each other here. I'm talking about a subset of algorithmic stablecoins
> They're not good investments because they're overpriced, but they're not zero-sum. They have customers and the intrinsic value of the shares increases (ideally) through dividends, buybacks and capital reinvestment over time.
They're not zero sum. AMC, GME do not make money, so profits don't cover corporate expenses. They are quickly bleeding money.
This is availability heuristic. Many financial innovations work out well and power everything we do today without a second thought. Credit cards, internet banking, mobile banking, etc etc etc. Should we ban all financial innovations because a subset can cause collapse?
For stablecoins, the difference here is that all data is open. So for example with the latest news with MIM/abracadabra, all the loans/treasuries and collateralization ratios are viewable by everyone [1] and on chain as well. For Dai/frax/etc as well.
[1] https://dashboard.abracadabra.money/
For ICOs, this exists today as well in our regular regulated markets as well. Don't tell me you think AMC or GME is worth what they are worth.
> Crypto hasn't created anything new fundamentally, it's just re-hashing all the stuff we outlawed before because it was an objective breeding ground of fraud and crime and grift. The only thing new about the crypto economy is that the pitches are structured as "${previously_failed_idea} except on the Internet."
I'm not sure this is true.
Web3 is less centralized in that the user data is exposed and freely available to be composed upon. For example, when someone makes a deposit (say of ERC20 USDC to earn interest, around 3.0% currently) on https://compound.finance, that data is freely available and the "receipt" becomes another token (the ERC20 USDC cToken). [1]
This token can now be used for other things, on any other protocol, without the involvement of compound itself. For example, there is a "compound" pool on https://curve.fi that allows users to deposit cTokens so that they can earn interest on their stablecoins while also providing liquidity for stablecoin swaps and earning swap fees as well on top. [2] In fact, with this pool, the user can deposit/withdrawal just pure ERC20 USDC instead and curve will deposit/withdrawal that into/from compound on behalf of the user, again, with no involvement of compound at all. (other than interacting with its "immutable" smart contract)
This deposit then gives the user back another ERC20 token "cCrv" that can then be used in other DeFi protocols without the involvement or authorization of curve.
In contrast, in traditional web2, companies gatekeep this information so hard that there are 10B+ companies such as plaid that mostly just scrape user bank account data. Just recently AA is suing The Points Guy for scraping their website. [3] I recall there's even a comment in this thread about someone getting their own scraper banned because they were trying to scrape their own data.
Mortgages are generally securitized. High level, a pool of unrelated mortgages (think different parts of the US, different types of borrowers, different credit ratings) are packaged up together and then split into different tranches. Say you have tranches AAA-B. These different tranches are sold to different parties with different risk appetites.
Each tranche has a set interest rate, and AAA will have the lowest, and B the highest. Say like 2.5% for AAA and 7.2% for B. AAA is the most "senior" and B the most "junior".
When borrowers pay back their monthly payments, first the interest gets distributed to AAA->B, then all the excess goes back paying the principal of AAA. Once AAA is fully paid back (say 5 years later for a 30 year loan), the AAA bondholders no longer care about the mortgage, and the excess gets paid towards AA principal (then A, BBB etc). This keeps going on until every tranche gets fully paid back.
By structuring it this way it's "almost impossible" for the more senior bondholders to realize a loss.
Obviously there is more risk for B bondholders (given they are being paid 7.2% interest). So in this case, losses in mortgages are borne by B principal holders until they get exhausted.
Zooming back into the pre-payment risk, it's entirely possible that prepayments/refinances will allow the more junior tranchess to avoid as much principal loss as expected while picking up that juicy yield. (note when the yield for more junior bonds are 7.2%, anyone buying these already planned for some amount of realized losses)
This pic from wikipedia illustrates some of the concepts https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tranche#/media/File:Risk&Retur...
Eg by type (surgical,duckbill,n95,kn95), by budget (budget, price/performance, premium), ships now on amazon, doesn't ship now but better in some way if you're willing to wait, etc.
Also I was looking at the 3m 9210 that you have 2 entries for in your table. The breathability is quite different between the two samples (98 vs 242). Is this expected? That seems a lot of variability for the same mask.
When I came back to the US, I could not log into the account anymore. First of all, it would force me to receive a text or call with my EU number even though I never turned ON 2fa. Then, when trying to recover it further, I can answer all the questions correctly and then google says "Google couldn’t verify this account belongs to you."
By now, the EU number has probably already been recycled and the contents of the account are completely inaccessible to anyone (even though I _know_ all of the credentials/recovery details).
Other companies like mint and byallaccounts largely did the same thing and were aquired at $170 per account and $33 per account respectively. So obviously someone is making money on keeping your data gatekept.
For example, when someone makes a deposit (say of ERC20 USDC to earn interest, around 3.0% currently) on https://compound.finance, that data is freely available and the "receipt" becomes another token (the ERC20 USDC cToken). [1]
This token can now be used for other things, on any other protocol, without the involvement of compound itself. For example, there is a "compound" pool on https://curve.fi that allows users to deposit cTokens so that they can earn interest on their stablecoins while also providing liquidity for stablecoin swaps and earning swap fees as well on top. [2] In fact, with this pool, the user can deposit/withdrawal just pure ERC20 USDC instead and curve will deposit/withdrawal that into/from compound on behalf of the user, again, with no involvement of compound at all. (other than interacting with its "immutable" smart contract)
This deposit then gives the user back another ERC20 token "cCrv" that can then be used in other DeFi protocols without the involvement or authorization of curve.
At this point people are talking past each other because "centralization" can be used to refer to many things. The author's analogy is arguing about the direction/standardization of the technology, and the proponents of the technology are talking about the user data.
Dell has a 32 inch 8k display which is ~280 ppi in stock.
https://www.dell.com/en-us/work/shop/dell-ultrasharp-32-8k-m...
In real life, if I talk to people about crypto they are curious and open to learning about it and most just don't have the time to learn about it.
However, when I go online and see a post about NFTs or crypto, there somehow is always tremendous backlash, generally by people not involved in the space. I'm curious what about this space brings out the critics moreso than other hot-button issues. Especially since crypto adoption doesn't really impact these people's lives the way other issues such as abortion, vaccine/mask mandates, or drug policy does.
I had found something on stackexchange to do this for previous gen macs, but was unable to replicate for current gen. This is something I would be willing to pay for. https://apple.stackexchange.com/a/179204
I figure with the HDR display there must be a way to control the actual backlight brightness.
https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/subcultures/corporate-art-sty...
If bitcoin mining uses co2 producing power (because the economics supports it), is that the fault of bitcoin or the government for not sufficiently taxing the negative externalities of that means of production?
We can actually start with 1 question: If electricity demand from PoW mining spurs new renewable plants to be built, is that bad for the environment?
I (and many electricity companies) actually think PoW mining is good for the grid/renewable adoption in the long term. Let me explain why:
Some indisputable facts to get us started:
1. Most renewable electricity has unpredictable supply
2. Introducing marginal capacity of the same type gives diminishing returns. Eg: you're producing more during high supply times where electricity rate is low. During lower production periods all of the same type of renewable will be producing less so you can't even take advantage of the higher rates.
3. Rational bitcoin miners will turn off their machines when cost of power is greater than marginal return.
As a result, PoW mining will help the economics of building new wind/solar plants. Eg, currently it may not be profitable to build a new wind plant because base load is too low that the excess power generated would need to be sold off at 0 or even negative prices. However if bitcoin mining could be turned on during these times and off during periods of high demand, there will need to be fewer peaker plants in operation and it would positively affect the economics of opening a new wind plant.
Bitcoin mining only cares about the cost of electricity at a given time, it is not like most other electricity demands that are very time based. With the large variance of electricity generation by renewables, I think bitcoin can in the future help smooth demand according to the real supply/demand curve.
It's kind of like a different implementation of the Tesla utility grid batteries. Instead of deploying batteries, you force the grid to build more renewable capacity (that the miners are paying for) that miners use except in peak periods, where you turn off and effectively provide the grid with more power.
Since then, I've lived in 6 different cities, 5 different timezones and worked on countless side projects. But all this time, HN has always been my most visited month after month.
I can always count on this place to keep me up to date with the latest tech trends and read discussions between reasonable people. Thank you all and especially dang for keeping discussions high quality. Especially as the quality of content on the rest of the internet deteriorates in the pursuit of virility.
It's a testament to you all that place feels the same as it did 10+ years ago.
Just for more context, I was thinking data tables: like this.
Due to the nature of x*y=k pools, the spread would just be 2x the fee (but increases based on how much you transact vs how much liquidity there is). Or you can think of it as 0 spread with 1bps fees on both sides for the usdt/usdc pools.
Even more so because the regulated exchange and popular unregulated exchanges have 0 and mostly <20% wash trading respectively.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9O551__3ppM
Another interesting fact about tungsten is that its density is 99.75% of that of gold. So essentially you can model how heavy something is if it was made out of pure gold with tungsten. Additionally, apparently gold counterfeiters sometimes put tungsten inside of gold bars to fake gold
Maybe if masses of people go into apple stores and save photos on demo phones that collide with the files they're looking for. Do those phones get scanned? Will apple ban their own app store accounts?
https://cointelegraph.com/news/coinbase-removes-backed-by-us...