herendin2

>Crypto Is a Threat to the U.S. Financial System

Yes, that's what it was designed to be

> Can’t be right, can it? It would make the Sun (over 4 billion years old) an enormous outlier.

Yes. That fact that I'm thinking made me think I was certainly wrong

If I got the math right, then about 1 in every 32,000 stars in the universe goes supernova each year. That's scary. But I think I'm getting the math very wrong.

edit: I guess my error might be related to confusing a probability factor with the number of incidents in a period.

edit: The right answer is probably up to 1 in every 10bn stars go supernovae in the universe each year (or 1 in 10bn die and a fraction are supernovae). Thanks: yzydserd and zild3d

$175M quickly becomes meaningless in this context, believe me. It's already much more than you need.

That research was published before Bolt hacked another 0.1 seconds off the record, when he cut it down in one event from 9.69 to 9.58

I don’t think the research stands up.

I don’t see that there’s any good text to vid generator for your needs currently

They’re restricted or not good enough

Wait a month or three

Couldn’t it be as simple as a face recognition unlock?

There’s an option on iPhone’s FaceID to require eyes open and looking at phone to unlock, but this might have been deselected. Or it could be subverted.

I agree that alignment would be a massive challenge. There aren’t even cameras on the satellites to help with visual alignment. There’s also the possibility of damage from the pushing or the ion exhaust, more so if the imperfect alignment sets them spinning

The Starlink satellites were not released into the correct orbit. SpaceX is using their ion thrusters to try to raise the orbit, but Elon Musk said this isn’t likely to succeed.

Could SpaceX use one satellite to push another?

This procedure would deliberately sacrifice the pushing satellite, but maybe give the pushed satellite enough additional delta-v to reach a working orbit.

I think I understand how a mining pool works. How would "huge payment commissions and payment pools" reduce the high PoW energy costs which the research claims? (I won't say the theory in the original post is correct. I am agnostic about that, as it's a hard equation to resolve)

The conclusion, if my understanding is correct, is that it is, but other cryptocurrencies may not be

Quote:

First, coins like Bitcoin, which are based on the proof-of-work algorithm, are likely more energy intensive than mainstream finance. (But note that this intensity seems to be declining with time.) Second, coins like Ethereum, which are based on the proof-of-stake algorithm, are likely (far) less energy intensive than mainstream finance.

So that’s what the data says. But somehow, I feel like this evidence will satisfy neither the crypto critics nor the crypto advocates. And that’s why in the appendix, I add some obligatory speculation. But for now, let’s conclude with just the facts. To date, it seems clear that Satoshi’s claims about Bitcoin’s superior ‘efficiency’ have not come to fruition.

Quant was her real name, and it's an interesting one

(1988), not 1899