admyral

As someone who builds websites for money, I couldn't agree more. I rarely get to bill for making incremental changes, I get to bill for implementing features. Spending money to implement and log a properly restrictive Content-Security-Policy doesn't seem like wise use of my clients limited budget.

AMD should thank Nvidia for failing to produce enough cards to meet demand.

> Everybody knows the technology is not ready And by what standards are you gauging its not ready? My point was if you wait until it becomes "safe enough", you'll be waiting forever because Tesla would be forever at the mercy of whose rules govern what "safe" means. Roads are hazardous places and unfortunately accidents are going to happen.

What I do know is that the Autopilot system will never be distracted, will never fall asleep, will never drive intoxicated or recklessly, will never disobey traffic laws like humans do. Tesla also has a financial incentive to improve their technology to prevent this from happening. Unlike humans who, for the most part, have far less incentive to drive more carefully.

As good as a human at what? It's 100% better at not falling asleep behind the wheel or driving while under the influence which statistically are the most common cause of traffic accidents.

We don't yet have evidence that Tesla's using Autopilot are any less safe than human drivers. We do have plenty of examples of traditional auto makers negligently ignoring safety regulations, manufacturing faulty vehicles and also causing fatalities. But somehow we don't hear the same pleas for sympathy for those souls.

No offense but this is exactly the attitude that inhibits progress and led the auto industry to languish in mediocrity for years. If you wait until the technology would prevent all accidents, you'd be waiting forever.

I see little distinction between a shitcoin ICO and a fart app on the App Store. A fool and their money are easily parted.

I find nothing righteous about a system designed for a select few to profit from maintaining the illusion our money is safe and secure in a vault somewhere. That illusion has already cost people their life savings without any attacks or user error required. But the difference is they are deemed "too big to fail", so when they screw up, they get bailed out while everyone else loses it all.

More egregious is economists insistence that the continuous debasement of our currency combined with skyrocketing consumer debt and stagnant wages due to automation will not end badly. These are the same economists that couldn't possibly predict what would happen when bankers and creditors were allowed to produce billions in worthless financial derivatives and sell them as triple-A investments.

What's so righteous about the status quo that makes skeptics feel so compelled to defend it so vehemently by degrading Bitcoin?

But it seems we should be far beyond Denial and Anger stage and well into Bargaining and Guilt at this point. Don't worry, he'll join the chorus of "blockchain is good, Bitcoin is bad" rhetoric soon enough.

Initially I think due to disruption to banking and government monopolies. Outrageous fees, pitiful interest rates, and financial services only accessible Monday through Friday 9-5 and sometimes on Saturday seem pretty archaic today. People who never had access to a bank can send money to anyone peer-to-peer like cash. Millenials largely prefer to invest their money into cryptocurrencies over traditional assets, which I believe has largely been monopolized by a firmly established few.

Unpopular opinion around here, but Bitcoin. The idea that we have technology now which can help address global wealth inequality just makes me happy.

In my opinion, distributed ledgers and mutable blockchains based around trusted actors are business as usual and frankly not very interesting. Bitcoin could actually make everyone's life a little better. Isn't that what technology was meant to be?

Your perception of technology changes as you age. Anything new in your teens and 20s is hailed as a innovation sure to change the world in profound new ways. In your 30s-40s, weird and burdensome, no better than the traditional ways of doing things. Past that point, you'll view everything as borderline destructive and proof of society's decline.

Depending on where you live, house destroying disasters like earthquakes, floods, and storms have similarly fatal consequences but are statistically more likely to occur. My point is make reasonable preparations and insure any valuable belongings, but thinking about it too much doesn't make it any less likely its going to happen to you.