• Announcements

    • UnderDawg

      A Few Simple Rules   05/22/2017

      Sailing Anarchy is a very lightly moderated site. This is by design, to afford a more free atmosphere for discussion. There are plenty of sailing forums you can go to where swearing isn't allowed, confrontation is squelched and, and you can have a moderator finger-wag at you for your attitude. SA tries to avoid that and allow for more adult behavior without moderators editing your posts and whacking knuckles with rulers. We don't have a long list of published "thou shalt nots" either, and this is by design. Too many absolute rules paints us into too many corners. So check the Terms of Service - there IS language there about certain types of behavior that is not permitted. We interpret that lightly and permit a lot of latitude, but we DO reserve the right to take action when something is too extreme to tolerate (too racist, graphic, violent, misogynistic, etc.). Yes, that is subjective, but it allows us discretion. Avoiding a laundry list of rules allows for freedom; don't abuse it. However there ARE a few basic rules that will earn you a suspension, and apparently a brief refresher is in order. 1) Allegations of pedophilia - there is no tolerance for this. So if you make allegations, jokes, innuendo or suggestions about child molestation, child pornography, abuse or inappropriate behavior with minors etc. about someone on this board you will get a time out. This is pretty much automatic; this behavior can have real world effect and is not acceptable. Obviously the subject is not banned when discussion of it is apropos, e.g. talking about an item in the news for instance. But allegations or references directed at or about another poster is verboten. 2) Outing people - providing real world identifiable information about users on the forums who prefer to remain anonymous. Yes, some of us post with our real names - not a problem to use them. However many do NOT, and if you find out someone's name keep it to yourself, first or last. This also goes for other identifying information too - employer information etc. You don't need too many pieces of data to figure out who someone really is these days. Depending on severity you might get anything from a scolding to a suspension - so don't do it. I know it can be confusing sometimes for newcomers, as SA has been around almost twenty years and there are some people that throw their real names around and their current Display Name may not match the name they have out in the public. But if in doubt, you don't want to accidentally out some one so use caution, even if it's a personal friend of yours in real life. 3) Posting While Suspended - If you've earned a timeout (these are fairly rare and hard to get), please observe the suspension. If you create a new account (a "Sock Puppet") and return to the forums to post with it before your suspension is up you WILL get more time added to your original suspension and lose your Socks. This behavior may result a permanent ban, since it shows you have zero respect for the few rules we have and the moderating team that is tasked with supporting them. Check the Terms of Service you agreed to; they apply to the individual agreeing, not the account you created, so don't try to Sea Lawyer us if you get caught. Just don't do it. Those are the three that will almost certainly get you into some trouble. IF YOU SEE SOMEONE DO ONE OF THESE THINGS, please do the following: Refrain from quoting the offending text, it makes the thread cleanup a pain in the rear Press the Report button; it is by far the best way to notify Admins as we will get e-mails. Calling out for Admins in the middle of threads, sending us PM's, etc. - there is no guarantee we will get those in a timely fashion. There are multiple Moderators in multiple time zones around the world, and anyone one of us can handle the Report and all of us will be notified about it. But if you PM one Mod directly and he's off line, the problem will get dealt with much more slowly. Other behaviors that you might want to think twice before doing include: Intentionally disrupting threads and discussions repeatedly. Off topic/content free trolling in threads to disrupt dialog Stalking users around the forums with the intent to disrupt content and discussion Repeated posting of overly graphic or scatological porn content. There are plenty web sites for you to get your freak on, don't do it here. And a brief note to Newbies... No, we will not ban people or censor them for dropping F-bombs on you, using foul language, etc. so please don't report it when one of our members gives you a greeting you may find shocking. We do our best not to censor content here and playing swearword police is not in our job descriptions. Sailing Anarchy is more like a bar than a classroom, so handle it like you would meeting someone a little coarse - don't look for the teacher. Thanks.

LenP

Members
  • Content count

    7,300
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About LenP

  • Rank
    Anarchist
  • Birthday 09/22/1968
  1. Disrupt in this context simply means to substantially change the way an industry (or govt) operates. Ethereum and smart contracts allow for massive disintermediation, since most functions of lawyers, accountants, and book keepers can exist as code in a smart contract. It will mean that the effort in standing up a functional govt or banking system drops to a small fraction of what it once was. Just as the first Internet revolution did the same for many business sectors. A traditional pipeline business could never grow as fast as companies like Google and Facebook, there was far too much friction in scaling a traditional pipeline business. I expect the same to happen here, except with governments, banking systems, and the industries that feed off same. What that means in practicality is that there will likely be far fewer failed govts going forward, with far less fraud and corruption. It also means that the US could lose a considerable amount of influence in the world, as advantages begin to accrete to "start up" govts and banking systems. The privacy thing for me is less interesting. Since the Blockchain is a permanent immutable record of every transaction, once someone can tie your key to you, and they only need to be able to do this once with one transaction, they then have everything. There are some places, such as with companies like Linkedin or FB, where you may be able to retain more control over your data, but when it comes to remaining "anonymous" with govts and three letter agencies, I don't see it happening. It does mean that agencies like the NSA and CIA are then playing on a much more level field with Joe Public, and there is something good in that. I don't doubt that some "intelligence agency in pajamas" would have already been able to link all Trump's accounts and reconstruct what his books look like for HuffPo if this were 20 years in the future. Interesting stuff for sure.
  2. Blockchain tech is going to be huge. I think it likely that it will dwarf the effects the Internet of the 90s and 2000s on economies across the world. The Internet so far has disrupted media and commerce in very significant ways. Blockchain will do the same to banking, central banks, currency, law, and governments.
  3. ^ This. All humans are prone to congitive biases, the training, it seems, in far too many cases serves to amplify these rather than mitigate their consequences. I would be interested in understanding what Oakland is doing differently.
  4. I did roughly the same with AAPL. Of the crypto currencies, I would look at Ethereum. That is where all the real money is going. There is a lot going on with govts looking at blockchain as a way to cut fraud and reduce overhead and tax payment delays. At the same time, there is a lot of private investment in blockchain tech related to everything from fin tech to supply chains. Ethereum is at or near the center of a lot of those investments.
  5. The study has a flaw, I think. They are not offering people money, they are offering people the chance to win money. The other side of it is the people have to read something, with the choice being something they agree with vs something they disagree with. So the calculation is more complex than "would you read something you don't agree with for $3 or $4". Instead it is, I could read nothing and have no chance to win any money, or I could read something I like and have some chance to win money, or I could read something I don't like and have a chance to win a little more money. I would say this is more of an example of people balancing the maximizing of income potential with doing what they enjoy. An interesting follow up would be if they gave people the option to do both and have a chance to win $15.
  6. Bingo. As to Kellyanne, politicians, or at least the ones that get elected, tend to have questionable ethics. They will hire anyone who can help them get elected.
  7. We have given up a whole lot of privacy, and the NICS db is very comprehensive when it comes to criminal records, not so much when it comes to mental health records. The problem is that in many cases it is the same people who complain about the incompleteness of the NICS db who fight turning over mental health records to NICS in order to fix it. Much like the Republicans in congress proving govt is incompetent by being incompetent. It is dishonest. The other issue then is what is a reasonable amount of time to extend for further research. The reality is that no amount of time is enough if we don't commit resources to actually performing a full all out investigation, and we will never do that. The NICS system is really pretty good, if we compelled states to turn over mental health records, it would be even better. In the cases where it fails now, no amount of time would be sufficient to correct it as there is no budget or will to actually perform a lengthy manual investigation, and even if there were it would often fail as well.
  8. Back to the OP, just because they are not similar in all ways, does not mean they are not similar in some ways. They are both constitutionally protected rights, they are both controversial, and there are those who would promote laws which serve no real purpose other than making it more difficult to exercise the right. Keeping it in that context, courts are likely to interpret a precedent from one of the two in how it treats the other. Obviously, they are not identical. Waiting 15 minutes for a nics check to pass is not a substantial infringement, but that does not mean there are not numerous gun control laws which are designed to do nothing more than to make exercising the right more difficult, just as the laws requiring trans-vaginal ultrasounds and waiting periods for abortion are designed primarily as a way to make exercising a constitutional right more difficult. The rights are not the same, obviously, but the way that the political opponents of those rights use the law to try and circumvent their constitutionally protected status, and the way the courts are likely to rule on the constitutionality of those laws is similar.
  9. It is only effective at muddying the waters, not generating real support. If there were some real science that came out which linked solar panels on your roof to birth defects or cancer, then I would not be surprised to see them build up their troll competencies.
  10. When you excuse a racist as a product of his upbringing and allow that he is a "nice guy", you are part of the problem too, not "the problem", but part of it.
  11. You are seriously underestimating what it takes to build something like Facebook. I know a bunch of dot com CEOs, the ones that end up with billions really are smarter than the ones without. Or at least smarter when it comes to how you build a billion dollar business.
  12. You don't have to like FB or Mark Zuckerberg, but it is silly to say his success is the result of luck. There are about a million ways he could have fucked up that business, look at all the other Social Media sites that have wasted away. Myspace had a huge lead on them and blew it. Give credit where credit is due. I don't want him running the country, but if I was funding a startup, I sure would like him as CEO.
  13. How's your Spanish? Even after 27 years of marriage, I only know the words that shouldn't be spoken in polite company. Thanks for the link.
  14. Is this real? They mention it being first reported by CNN, but a search of CNN turned up nada.
  15. I hate to interrupt your stream of consciousness bull shit but there are a hell of a lot of poor people in urban environments that don't hunt. You and your acolyte Jeffie are scraping the barrel for justifications. Pitiful really. That is true, but it is also true that those people eat like crap which leads to obesity, heart disease, diabetes, and all sorts of other health problems. Hunting is not necessary for survival for pretty much anyone these days, however it is the most cost effective way to eat meat which is not horrible for your health. We went through 500+- pounds of Venison and Elk in the last year, it would cost a lot more in terms of money to eat that same quality of meat than what it cost me to hunt it. With the new role I have taken on, that is almost certainly what is going to happen this year, I simply won't have the time to do the hunting and so it will cost me. I don't know about in Poland, but the ground beef you can buy at a supermarket here is not really suitable for dog food, and half the time the steaks are actually glued together scraps made to look like an actual cut of meat. In almost all cases, the meat is full of antibiotics and hormones. You pay through the nose to get anything of quality like what Austin raises.