jsprogrammer

8 ms·

331.
by jsprogrammer 10y ago
Publishing a copy is not taking. Taking would be something like declaring exclusive use over the work (taking the copyright itself). Publishing a copy of something that already exists is an independent action that doesn't affect copyri
332.
by jsprogrammer 10y ago
>If the government takes your land and gives it to the public to build a new road, the Constitution says you have to be compensated. If the government takes your standard and gives it to the public to build a new law, it seems like the s
333.
by jsprogrammer 10y ago
I'm saying my coins were mined and only represent a solution to a vey specific problem. For someone to claim that the numbers I hold represent something else, is an error.
334.
by jsprogrammer 10y ago
If you show me a method of quantification, I can derive the definition. Value is being discussed (even though you appear to be using an unrevealed definition) as a quantity (maybe, I am wrong, and it is not a quantity), which means there mu
335.
by jsprogrammer 10y ago
The word is very special to this law as it is the core word defining "Digital Currency": >“Digital currency” means any digital representation of value You can't classify something as digital currency without knowing what
336.
by jsprogrammer 10y ago
Technically correct is the only kind; no pretense needed. >Playing dumb only makes you look dumb.
337.
by jsprogrammer 10y ago
Missing is a definition of what "value" is. My Bitcoin is a digital representation of the bits needed to solve a particular block. It doesn't represent value, but a numerical solution to a mathematical problem.
338.
by jsprogrammer 10y ago
I've never seen an Uber/Lyft vehicle I could stand in.
339.
by jsprogrammer 10y ago
You brought up the topic of ethics. I am just explaining why the argument, "sharing is illegal", sounds absurd to many people. As you noted, copyright laws respect many legally protected activities, like sharing media and holding
340.
by jsprogrammer 10y ago
>If you see anything that seems obvious, you can bet science already checked that out and moved past it and that it's more complicated than that. Science doesn't do anything. Even if it did, you should be able to look the obvio
341.
by jsprogrammer 10y ago
Owning what you don't possess sets you up for legal takeover. No one stops you from handing a book or disc to another person, in fact, entire governmental organizations exist to handle the logistics of freely sharing such artifacts. Sh
342.
by jsprogrammer 10y ago
Except that sharing is not illegal. The idea itself is absurd and sounds absurd when expressed. If you told people that sharing was illegal, the most common response you'd get would likely be, "lol, wut?"
343.
by jsprogrammer 10y ago
Where can I buy one?
344.
by jsprogrammer 10y ago
Most employers post-pay, meaning a portion of your earned capital is nearly always at risk as an employee.
345.
by jsprogrammer 10y ago
How often does spontaneous violence occur? If it looks like actions were deliberate and planned, wouldn't you need some other reasoning to believe that they weren't?
346.
by jsprogrammer 10y ago
The people watching make it possible. Stop watching and marketers might spend less or ratings might disappear or be counterfeit.
347.
by jsprogrammer 10y ago
No. The money was given to Facebook under the assumption that they would deal fairly.
348.
by jsprogrammer 10y ago
It is stealing, if it was intentionally undervalued to avoid a tax.
349.
by jsprogrammer 10y ago
>Repetition is good, of course, but isn't a replacement for good science in the first place. Repetition is science. >Define repetition. Google says: "the recurrence of an action or event." Science requires 1) a predicti
350.
by jsprogrammer 10y ago
>On the surface it looks like her departure is a huge loss to the academic world. And a huge gain for everyone else?
351.
by jsprogrammer 10y ago
You missed the first paragraph.
352.
by jsprogrammer 10y ago
What needs to be done for this to not have the Google requirements?
353.
by jsprogrammer 10y ago
The boss should not say, "it's perfect!", if the boss feels it is not....which is literally what this article is advocating. In the hypothetical situation described, I get the impression that the boss didn't even look cl
354.
by jsprogrammer 10y ago
The DAO code was reviewed [1] by the best security audit company in the world [0] and was/is made from irrefutable computer code [0]. [0] https://slock.it/dao.html [1] https://blog.slock.it/deja-v
355.
by jsprogrammer 10y ago
Can you give a non-synthetic, ie. natural, example data generation process? Edit: I don't know if people don't like the grammar, or what? How about this: Can you give a non-synthetic, ie. natural, example of a data generating proc
356.
by jsprogrammer 10y ago
"data" is your own perception, however. Can you give an example of a data generating process?
357.
by jsprogrammer 10y ago
"hacker": My transaction was valid and executed per the organization contract. Others then conspired to invalidate the transaction. Now, my transaction is dead.
358.
by jsprogrammer 10y ago
Except that we can't access reality completely. Assuming that there is a "true model" generating data is just that: an assumption with no real basis. Semantics is the essence of communication.
359.
by jsprogrammer 10y ago
I believe the Strong Free Will Theorem [0] rules out that possibility. [0] https://arxiv.org/pdf/0807.3286.pdf
360.
by jsprogrammer 10y ago
Which is a misnomer, because the data probably isn't generated by a model.

More ›