149 posts • joined 18 Jun 2009
Which language? Single or multi-threaded?
Writing a page of HTML is to code as painting my wall is to the Mona Lisa.
Re: Run on the bank? - read the wiki page
"But they have far more than £100 in deposits to cover it."
No! That is the whole frigging point, When the financial wizardry stops they have EXACTLY £100 in cash. And a nominal £900 in loans and a nominal £1000 in deposits. But there is only £100 in existence (in this closed system).
Re: Run on the bank? - not quite there yet...
Let's consider two actors, me and the bank.
I deposit 100k, they lend me 90k, which I deposit, they lend me 81k, which I deposit etc. etc.
There ever only was 100k, but the bank reports 1m in assets and 1m in liabilities. I report 1m in assets and 900k in liabilities.
something has gone wrong somewhere and "the same chocolate biscuit" just doesn't cut it. Not least because the bank and myself have access to much higher degrees of finance because of our 1m assets rather than my actual 100k assets. The bank is doing this with hundreds of thousands od customers.
Re: Run on the bank? - read the wiki page
I ain't Spartacus, you miss the part where the magic sauce is applied:
I store £100 at the bank, they are forced to keep, say, £10 on hand so they lend out £90. At some point in the scheme of things that £90 becomes a deposit again for someone else (not necessarily at that bank, but let's have a single bank to simplify things).
That £90 deposit (which is the loan from my original saving) then allows the bank to lend out another £81. The £81 becomes a deposit too which allows the bank to lend another £73 etc. etc.
Based on the £100 initial deposit the bank can lend, through just 3 iterations, £244 (and, when all is said and done, about £900 total). This is known as the money multiplier. Like I said, they lend out a multiple of the original deposit.
Run on the bank?
You can't have a run on the bank in Bitcoin, or you shouldn't, as the bank simply stores the money, unlike regular banks which not only lend out your deposits to others but engage in fractional reserve banking where they actually lend out multiples of your savings in spite of not actually having funds to cover it.
Which one sounds more like a shell game or ponzi scheme?
They took the label off - although there was something in Labs that allowed you to put it back on, but I think that's gone now.
Back into beta?
Not always an aggravating factor
"one of the statutory aggravating factors for sentencing for most offences (might be all offences - I'm a little rusty) is that the offence was carried out under the influence of alcohol."
"A gang of Muslim women who attacked a passer-by in a city centre walked free from court after a judge heard they were ‘not used to being drunk’ because of their religion"
Is this a case of...
Poacher turned Gamekeeper?
Yes, you cover it with tape first to prevent catastrophic destruction.
Terrible stats from the author
Have an upvote for getting there before me.
One thing though, why limit it to one, why not have a few pop their corks at once (geologically speaking)? Could be an extinction event for us if a few went.
Paris, as statistically speaking I should be shagging her next week.
Re: I like the part where he rejects the governments arguments about plaintiffs' standing
"a good read for someone like myself who believes in civil liberties"
Perhaps a book about Santa would be more appropriate this time of year. He's about as likely to show up in the US as civil liberties.
Get the big boys involved
If everyone complains that there is pr0n on google and bing then the filters will have to be removed sharpish - or the law will look like exactly what it is, capricious, ill thought out, unworkable, and pandering.
You ceased to be banks years ago, you are now IT centres. The sooner you realise this and invest appropriately, and promote and listen to IT people, the sooner you will overtake your competitors and enhance profitability.
Who cares about brake lights?
You don't need a red glow to tell you you're getting closer to the muppet in front. Lorry driver 100% at fault here.
Hint: It's called a stopping distance for a reason.
Fuck all you
Can I vote for a party that accepts up to, say, 7,000 deaths per annum as acceptable collateral damage to be the freest and most liberal (classical sense) country in the world where my government looks after big stuff and has a priority of protecting my freedom rather than my life?
In an article that has such pretentions then one cannot skim over such a basic assumptions as:
"I" exist as a meaningful entity for a period of time great enough for "me" to make a decision. This is basically untrue as the very decision making process the system (commonly known as you) undertakes changes in subtle ways that very system and so "I" change as "I" cogitate, consciously or otherwise, about any options.
"Do I make my decisions using recursive reasoning?" Yes, but is the I referred to here the conscious mind, or the complex, unseen, committee of brain parts that generally have a big neurological shouting match before your conscious self is even aware of it, by which point the decision has generally already been made and all your conscious mind can do is to rationalise the decision and/or punish/reward that decision to encourage less/more decisions to be made of that ilk.
"Can I model and simulate – at least partially – my own behavior and that of other deciders?" Yes, but not very accurately. Unless one simulates the brain (and hormones and electrolytes and neurological pathways in the gut and blood sugar and ... etc.), in which case computing power could allow all your decisions to, potentially, be either perfectly predicted or statistically predicted (depending on whether QM uncertainty plays any part in the biochemical-neurological processes). If a computer can predict your decisions before you make them, then in what sense do you have 'free will'? Even if you cannot know what you will do as that feeds into an infinitely regressing feedback loop (which isn't necessarily true) then the fact outside observers can know in advance your precise actions and reactions (and potentially set up scenarios to push you to certain, known outcomes) means you are not free.
Just because I can't see the predictions of my own behaviour beforehand does not make me free any more than my inability to see my opponents cards at poker makes them random.
In both legal and medical terminology a donor* must voluntarily give whatever thing is being donated. I would strongly suggest that none of the foreskins used here were voluntarily surrendered by their owners.
2. (Medicine) Med any person who voluntarily gives blood, skin, a kidney etc., for use in the treatment of another person
3. (Law) Law
a. a person who makes a gift of property
b. a person who bestows upon another a power of appointment over property
*Okay, in organ donation the next of kin gets to make the legal decision as the donor is not legally able to make that decision.
Snowden for NSA chief
The problem is none of the politicians will come out and say that a few Boston bombings are a cheap price to pay for the freedom and prosperity that the US (pre-9/11) enjoyed. Even a 9/11 per year is a cheap price to pay - although placing locks on the cockpit doors would stop terrorists using planes as fuel-laden guided missiles. But apparently fear, paranoia, xenophobia and claims of "making America safe" play better in the polls than freedom.
"his premature death"
What does that even mean?
Re: What does automated trading add?
Automated trading allows, among other things, people to buy or sell large amounts of shares at the most efficient prices by spreading trades throughout the day and placing most of them when the volume would be least noticed. It also allows shares to be bought as soon as a pre-chosen price is hit maximising the number bought/sold at that price.
Basically, if I have an automated trading tool it allows me to hide my knowledge about demand/supply of a share from the market as a whole. This is generally beneficial because it allows the share price to reflect the fundamentals of the underlying assets and dividend streams rather than knowledge about what some person is doing. c.f. Gordon Brown (economic genius) informing the markets that he would be selling billions of dollars worth of gold a day before he actually did it, artificially depressing the market price and costing the UK billions of pounds.
Your models repeatedly fail to predict climate, your models about what will happen to countries 'in danger' have proven to be flawed, there is no serious prospect of redistributing any carbon-esque taxes to those who actually suffer from changes to the climate so... yeah, let's retool our entire economy, starve millions, and cost countless future economic benefits so that governments can impact consumer behaviour and further snoop into our lives.
Let scientists do science, let economists tell the politicians likely economic impacts and then, and only then, let the politicians decide which of the available options are most palatable to the populous.
"You do realize that proper hard crypto would take a computer with the mass of the universe several times the lifetime of the universe to crack, eh?"
There are several problems with your assumption:
1. That the NSA don't have a quantum computer with (at least) 2048 qbits
2. "Proper hard crypto" doesn't have a backdoor
3. The (likely Intel) chips doing the "proper hard crypto" don't have NSA backdoors
4. The OS (Windows for most people) doesn't have an NSA backdoor
The NSA and their ilk have been poisoning the well for years, releasing code with known weaknesses, being employed in corporations to snoop and find weaknesses, threatening corporations to comply to their wishes, inventing the 'crime' of not telling cops your password(s) etc. etc.
Plus, the wetware is usually the weakest part of any security system.
Re: brought to you by the same people who want a "porn filter"
Ah, but they don't want a "porn filter", they want broadly worded legislation that can be used at a later date against (the) people for reasons of their choosing.
A bit like they (mis-)used the Terror Act to detain someone who had absolutely no legal, logical or proximate relation to anything terror-related, a fact that was already known to them as shown by their refusal to ask any terror-related questions of their prisoner.
Re: If you've got nothing to hide, then you've got nothing to fear.
If you've got nothing to hide, then you're doing it wrong.
Re: I agree.
Unfortunately the majority of those who were very wealthy before the crisis are (relatively at least) better off than they were before. It is the slightly wealthy and the middle class who are paying.
Blair's got millions, Brown's doing the lecture circuit rather than acting as MP (his job!) and Balls is Shadow Chancellor. Those tasked with regulating the banks have mostly got jobs with banks now, some of those in the banks are now working as regulators...
The game is rigged, yet we play it anyway while turning a blind eye to those who are rigging it since those we ask to do something about it are eyeing up their own payoff in the near future.
Couple of problems...
Companies spend money lobbying government officials to grant a tax amnesty to onboard hoarded cash. Bribed officials accede.
Cash rich company buys its own shares rather than invests; share price spikes options and performance benefits to senior management go through the roof. Or, failing that, buys other companies to justify ever higher management salaries (it's a bigger company now, right?)
To maintain high share price and inflated P/E ratio (or profitability) company fires workers.
That's what happened last time.
"one less caterer, one less PR secretary, one less electrician, that could be your wife, girlfriend, brother being laid off"
Awesome, economic illiteracy and casual sexism thrown in just for laughs.
"Quite why the Whitehall bureaucrat should rush to the defence of a banker in his Docklands penthouse who is downloading torrents 24x7 remains a mystery."
Let's look at the other side:
Quite why the Whitehall bureaucrat should rush to the defence of a multi-billion dollar industry in order to quash some civil offences using criminal sanctions remains a mystery.
So a government that launches illegal wars, murders its own citizens without trial, tortures and indefinitely holds people, some of whom have been found innocent, is complaining because companies with a fiduciary duty to minimise tax are obeying the laws the politicians wrote?
Bet you the US gov. gets very interested in this
Deposits to poker (or any international gaming sites) by US citizens has been effectively barred by the US govt. strong-arming the credit card companies (VISA & Mastercard), will they do the same to Google?
Re: Second hand CDs...
Indeed, but my point, if I had one, was that it makes no difference to any rights holder if you download illegally or buy a second hand CD. So why would they prosecute you for downloading for free rather than paying £9.49 for something that nets them no benefit - obviously assuming there was no legal way to buy it in your region that would pay the artist or publisher.
Second hand CDs...
Make the label and the artist exactly the same amount as pirated music.
The license fees are sunk costs. Once the auction is over the operators work on a profit maximising pricing scheme in which sunk costs play no part - the prices will be the same if the license costs $500m or $1.
The only way round this is to have a beauty contest where the roll-out speed and pricing levels are part of the ranking process - which isn't exactly free-market...
Re: Oh, well...
Or 3 pints of bitter and 2 packets of peanuts?
Re: Point of fact
Except I can choose to travel on Arriva or use Centrica without having to pay for Virgin or EDF as well.
No, Wo's on first.
Wookies or Ewoks?
none of the traffic is visible to any of its staff
Great, how about governments, advertisers, bots, etc. etc.?
You deserve to go bust for this. RIP Nokia.
Re: Free as in "complimentary for paying customers"
I went to my local Punch tavern and shouted out, "Is Fibbles here, I need to buy him a beer!"
And was promptly ejected.
Re: Starting figures are well out
How many transport workers are in the public sector? Is it all those bus drivers on Arriva, the Virgin train staff, FirstRail?
Public sector is way too big, many of the tasks done by the local or national government should not be done by the state and those that are tend to be vastly overstaffed, targets focussed and have exceedingly perverse incentives.
"or how elegant its user interface is"
Business code has no user interface...
Everything else is marketing.
Until the next guy's daughter gets called a slut online and we're back to locking everyone up.
The law is an ass. Why doesn't the law specify this? Why do we have to (belatedly) rely on a touch of common sense when people have already been charged and the public generally scared into behaving in a manner the knobs think is becoming?
...distorts the market.
"includes the costs related to the human health effects of fossil fuel–caused air pollution"
This is one of the main points of a state, to ensure that the harm caused by A is borne by A and not passed on to B. Without this there are exceedingly perverse incentives and a severe misallocation of scarce resources resulting in sub-optimal use of resources and lower economic growth.
In a closed system maybe...
Unfortunately in the real world local companies cannot compete against the big boys because they ship profits to lower tax places and your local coffee shop goes bust.
Also, corporations tend to hoard cash waiting for tax holidays to on-shore it which results in non-productive capital being stashed away, and even when it is on-shored it goes to already rich shareholders or executives whose marginal rate of consumption is significantly lower than those at the bottom of the economy to whom taxes could redistribute corporate profits.
Do the users get a cur of that to replace their (torrents) legal data?
A coalition of the willing must be formed to invade - NOW!!! They could potentially hit us in 45 months.
Prolog's the daddy.
It could also be argued Elite's Energy and Shield system are similar...
The real problem here is that by avoiding taxes they are able to out-compete the local coffee shops who have no off-shore subsidiary to hold their profits and so must pay tax.
I don't care, burnt bean water is overpriced and tastes crappy anyway.