I used to walk to and from school by myself, and after school I'd walk to the bookstore by myself, apparently most other kids aren't interested in reading at all, before heading home for dinner. It was a merely ten minutes walk, but other parents are somehow surprised. Fortunately, I've only encountered nice strangers who gave me free snacks and all that, but now I think about it, I just felt super lucky nothing really happened.
I read the comment about the unreliability of economics, however I do like to point one thing, most economical model fit well when the economy is doing ok or within a certain range of parameters, until something outside of those safe area happens. Think of 2008, and think of the economical impact of the pandemic. It's impossible to account for in prior models and thoughts as those are nonlinear events almost no one can predict. This is the thing with economy, we can only know a bit about our position and surroundings, but we have no way of knowing if we are in a local optimum, or if we are approaching a tipping point that invalidates all prior models. There are variables that don't matter until they reach a certain mass, there are metrics we simply can't find quantitive method to measure, let alone to predict. Economics is always messy, and with a lot of the classic thoughts proven wrong, we should be wary of any of the assumptions we make.
Except that some economists did predict the global financial crisis based on their models. The thing that marked them out was that they were all heterodox economists. Largely the predictions were based on a solid understanding of the financial system, something mainstream economics completely ignores.
https://voxeu.org/article/no-one-saw-coming-or-did-they
It's a bit backwards looking in that it can assess known quantities.
But far beyond 'Black Swan' events it's hard to account for innovations, geopolitical shifts, things that change the dynamic.
Plastics, the dishwasher, women in Engineering and the workplace, the birth-control pill and Rock and Roll combined to shift things in ways we could not put down in math, at least beforehand.
But the biggest 'black hole' is that it does not account for consumer surplus: we only measure what is bought and sold, at that price. We don't measure the leverage gained by consumers for cheap fashion, the benefits of more variety in goods, more vacation, shifting to bikes from cars etc..
The data is still a beneficial area of study however.
We're mass enabling the zones that have asked for Beta access and will be going GA soon. Email me at celso@cf if you can't wait; we'll try to prioritize.
You can use the SMTP relay from other providers. The free tier should be enough for a personal account or two. For example AWS SES, Mailgun, Sendgrid, etc.
Language is the classic case for network effect, the more people speaking one language, more information would be communicated in that language, more beneficial it will be for learning such language.
It doesn't take Einstein to understand that George Floyd could just be anyone in that scenario.
To focus on his personal history is simply irrelevant and is in disrespect of the judicial branch and the principle on the separation of powers. No one is contending the truthfulness of his criminal history, but he didn't die as a result of that, he died as a result of the disregard of human life by an officer of the executive branch.
Even if you don't like BLM, which is okay, it stretches too far to claim it a terrorist group.
Please don't just reduce it to 'facts you don't like', facts won't get you banned, but those claims the OP made are more than that.
Do you care to elaborate? I understand it might look similar in style, wouldn't call it a replica though, a lot of the fonts are similar. For example, maybe a detailed pixel to pixel comparison why it might be a replica?
It is not a replica, they are similar in style (they’re both neo-grotesk). Also the design of the letters can’t be copyrighted in the US, only the files (.otf, .ttf etc.) can.
For anyone who's fresh to cyber security, the fundamental axiom of it is that anything can be cracked, only a matter of computations (time*resource). Just as the dose makes the poison (sola dosis facit venenum).
Suppose you have a secret, that is RSA-encrypted, we might be looking at three hundred trillion years according to Wikipedia with the kind of computer we have now. Obviously that secrecy would have lost its value then, and the resource it requires to crack the secret would worth more than the secret itself. Even with quantum computing, we are still looking at 20+ years, which is still enough for most of the secrets, you got plenty time to change it, or after it lost its value. So we say that's secure enough.
