sudoscript

You deny the statistic in the article. Then you use corporate speak like "we internally think about things..." Then you link to a blog post titled "Measuring Prevalence", which doesn't have a single data point with a number in it. Not to mention that it's another mess of CorpSpeak that sounds like a PR committee wrote it, not a human being.

The problem is not your intentions. It's clear that you actually want to engage people, given that you're replying actively on this board, even to impolite comments. The problem is the style of communication. It sounds constructed, artificial, developed through a process, like you and a bunch of people are sitting there drafting replies and tweaking until you have something that won't come back later and bite you in the butt. The problem with that strategy is that you end up saying very little of meaning at all.

So maybe to make things more concrete - is there a statistic on measuring the impact of recommendations that you do agree with that you can share?

So abstract mathematics are leaky, and applied mathematics are not (you don’t have to know how they work to apply them, e.g. regression).

I can copy text in Safari on iOS. What are you on?

I don't know about others, but it's not boring reading for me. I appreciate it when someone points out the downvotes and responds, as OP has done here.

We shouldn't treat downvotes the same was we do trolls and ignore them.

It's rare because it's hard. It's much easier to just pretend you have a hammer and treat everything like a nail.

Where are you next week? This is a show I'll travel to follow.

It’s a trade off between convenience and security. Consumers _do_ care, just not enough to put unusual amounts of effort in. These moves by Apple make it much easier, and could become things consumers expect from their devices, since they don’t have to give up convenience to have them.

I've actually been thinking about doing something similar in India. How has it been going for you?

> What’s wrong with that argument?

At an individual, probably nothing. But at a macro level, apathy is equivalent to a lack of legitimacy, which is a big problem. If the cancer of apathy spreads too far, the entire system comes crashing down.

It’s like a party where your job is to bring one of the mixers. You don’t bring yours, nothing that terrible happens. No one brings any, and the party becomes a disaster.

But what about the Big Pop?

Currently we trust information by the source it comes from. It’s an authority-based model.

Consensus shifts that trust from authority figures to others in your group. Bottom-up trust instead of top-down.

What do Joe and Jane think about the mountain of debt they’ve had to pile up? What do they think about the bankers who decide what happens to their money, and the politicians who decided to bail them out? Do they really have abs much faith in USG as you say? By the last election, largely seen as a middle finger to governing elites, I’d say probably not.

Yes, they like the convenience of the dollar but they are also suffering from the consequences of fiat money. You might say they’re too stupid to understand that, but there are many Joes and Janes who understand gold and may even want to go back to a gold standard. If they can understand gold, they can understand the value of Bitcoin.

>> There’s an association that still lingers between a “community” and a physical location — the idyllic small town, say, or the utopian village, real or imagined. It evokes a cozy, friendly, simple place in which people live in easy harmony and cooperation, each with a role to play, each mattering to the whole.

>> “Community” makes everything sound better. It makes “the activist community” sound approachable; it makes “the skin-care community” sound important; it makes “the Christian community” sound inclusive and kind; it makes “the medical community” sound folksy and skilled at the bedside; it makes “the homeless community” sound voluntary; it makes “the gun rights community” sound humanistic; it makes “the tech community” sound like good citizens.

All these "communities" that we're told we're part of all the time are really just labels. Very few of them actually have the organic bonds or genuine feeling of comraderie that real communities are supposed to have. They exist, but are much fewer and far in between than everyone uses the word for.

> The very common complaint on Ada user groups and forums is the licensing model. Most companies avoid GPL like the plague.

What's wrong with the GPL?

Except investors. This "collaborative platform" angle is clearly designed with the IPO roadshow in mind.