Can you say more about what you mean about home ownership being a lifestyle as opposed to an investment?
I'm guessing what you mean is that houses require upkeep and they also come with certain benefits (e.g. more freedom with what you do with the house), but I'm wondering if you meant something different?
Possibly a long shot, but I was wondering if you knew of any sources of the CDC also taking this stance?
I have a vague memory that they also made similar statements, but I tried to find evidence of that recently and couldn’t find a source. I’d appreciate anybody that could link me to a source if they have it on hand / find one.
Fauci said in a 60 minutes interview back in March: "Right now, in the United States, people should not be walking around with masks" and "When you're in the middle of an outbreak, wearing a mask might make people feel a little bit better and it might even block a droplet, but it's not providing the perfect protection that people think that it is." [0]
However that was before the CDC issued in early april its recommendation to wear masks [1]
>Though health officials have warned Americans to prepare for the spread of the novel coronavirus in the U.S., people shouldn’t wear face masks to prevent the spread of the infectious illness, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, ...
Many people don’t have any financial role models in their lives, especially at young ages. It’s not like the school systems teach children about saving, and especially not in the more underfunded districts.
I’m much more inclined to blame maladaptive behaviors on systemic failures to educate people and to provide them opportunity than I am to blame individuals.
Sure, in every system with live agents there will be bad actors and those with poor behavior, but when the system is overrun with examples of this, perhaps it’s the system we should be looking at, not individuals.
I know this is true because I once worked at a contractor for a really boring (and highly regulated) gambling/lottery corporation earning twice as much as I do now and I was almost twice as happy as I am now (all else being roughly the same). The feeling of security that you get from even that kind of money is amazing so 6 times that amount must be euphoric.
Setting aside all the privacy risks associated by using a Webkit/Blink based Browser, using Tor inside Brave is like someone with a mask screaming "HERE I AM". Even though they have a mask on everybody sees you and hears you and your mask looks different to everybody elses so what's the point of the mask after all?
The mask only works if everyone is wearing the exact same mask. Which is the exact opposite of what Brave is doing.
I like terminal based music players when I’m doing work exactly because the terminal already feels like work, so it doesn’t feel as much like Tidal or Bandcamp or SoundCloud are open in the background and something I could get distracted by. For keeping it out of sight, tmux or any terminal multiplexer is great at that.
There are multiple terminal-based Spotify players, with the caveat that you need a paid Spotify account to use them (because they're incapable of playing ads)
I agree with the idea that fines based on the number of users affected makes a lot of sense. One question I have is how would you propose that number be calculated? In truth, I think the company whose data has been leaked should know exactly how many records have been leaked, but per-individual based fines create an incentive for them to underreport this number. Do you think that’s a problem, and if so, is there a good answer for how society could get an honest answer as to how many individuals are affected in a breach?
> One question I have is how would you propose that number be calculated?
As a percentage of worldwide revenue on a sliding scale.
> In truth, I think the company whose data has been leaked should know exactly how many records have been leaked, but per-individual based fines create an incentive for them to underreport this number.
Very true, so triple damages for wilful underreporting and/or criminal sanctions for individuals.
Idea: Create an incentive to overestimate — if the leaked data shows up online (pastebin/etc), and the volume of affected users is x% greater than the publicly disclosed figure, then fines are doubled (or go up by 3*x% or whatever).
Yes, elliptic curves are huge in cryptography, but they are also mathematically significant. They are the degree three nonsingular algebraic plane curves with at least one rational point. This makes them essentially "one step up" from the conic sections. The conic sections, of course, are well understood including the parametrization of their rational points. However, elliptic curves are much more subtle! We do not even have proven algorithms for determining the size of any elliptic curve's set of rational points, and in specific the algebraic rank of that set. The Birch and Swinnerton-Dyer conjecture is one of the millennium prize problems, and it relates elliptic curves' algebraic ranks to their analytic ranks. Elliptic curves are also very related to modular forms, and this connection is part of the theory that allowed Andrew Wiles to prove Fermat's Last Theorem. In the study of the rational solutions to integer polynomial equations, i.e. Diophantine Analysis, elliptic curves are one of the next stepping stones that must be more thoroughly understood before we can have a more complete understanding of polynomials in general. Their applications in cryptography and integer factorization are huge in applied mathematics, but they are also incredibly important subjects to fields like algebraic geometry, diophantine analysis, and of course, number theory.
I'm guessing what you mean is that houses require upkeep and they also come with certain benefits (e.g. more freedom with what you do with the house), but I'm wondering if you meant something different?