Any idea how this impacts things like the Citizen app? It's helpful to see if there is violence or similar risks nearby, particularly in major metros. Would be a shame if they were cut off from being able to provide that info to the public to help protect themselves.
For anyone considering working with Peter, our firm has been a client for 10 years, have sponsored 5-10 green cards and 20+ visas. Peter has been amazing to work with and we've gotten emphatic thank you notes from people we recommended to him.
I know this sounds crazy, but how about we apply the law equally to everyone? I have a difficult time seeing how targeting or generalizing any group of people rather than individual likelihood of tax evasion is an appropriate application of resources.
Rental units generally change hands much more frequently than owned homes. Accordingly, rental units offer a more real-time view of housing cost trends.
There are also a lot of homeowners who locked in at a very low interest rate (both new homes and refinancing) with little incentive to move any time soon.
I build financial market infrastructure and in the last twelve months I've seen companies in my industry presenting at AWS and Splunk conferences, and a Cassandra meetup.
There are lots of great technologists in the space that are just like the rest of us and love sharing ideas. There are definitely NDAs in place, but "financial infrastructure" generally refers to processing systems, not trading systems. The former is increasingly utilized, while the latter generates alpha (i.e. where you actually make money).
People like sharing ideas about processing infrastructure because everyone benefits when the rest of the market gets better at it also. Your efficiency is only as good as your counterparties' efficiency. If their system breaks, you still have a broken trade that costs you operational time and money no matter how good your infrastructure is.
There is a lot more wrong with what this author wrote, but in the interest of time I'll keep my answer to the question asked.
How do you mean? There are examples of formal verification working in the video. The resulting compiled smart contracts are on the live Ethereum blockchain.
Agreed. There's something to be said about maximizing productivity and relaxation time. Also, it's nice that they have a business model that works from a remote location, but personal interactions with clients go a long way for most companies.
TradeBlock is a venture-backed digital currency (i.e. bitcoin) data company that serves institutional clients. We also conduct proprietary research on topics ranging from market trends to block chain analytics.
* Our infrastructure currently updates thousands of trades per minute, with a distributed network of scripts querying hundreds of APIs
* We serve our clients with live data through a real-time websocket, historical data from our database, and a visual analytics toolset
* TradeBlock’s engineers work closely with our research and analytics teams, empowering the world’s most advanced insight into a technically-complex and rapidly-growing market
Role
* Further the development of our front end in React, HTML5, CSS3
* Optimize interfaces for maximum efficiency and consumability
* Contribute to platform-wide UX / UI decisions
* Visualizations of linear and graph data
Ideal Qualifications
* Experience with HTML5, CSS3, Javascript/JQuery, Bootstrap, React.js, D3.js
* Passion for data visualization and digital currency technology
* Ability to design user experience from mockup through implementation
This same justification was used for obtaining personal financial information from bank accounts (see US v. Miller, 1976).
My problem with this line of logic is that it can be applied to anything not owned directly by the person under surveillance. For example, let's say you rent an apartment. Can the government force the landlord to install mics and cameras without telling you? It's not your property, so do all of your fourth amendment protections disappear?
You're double counting the yuan fees and ignoring the bitcoin fees. The exchange makes 0.3% on the 340,000 XBT (1,020 XBT, or about 625,000 USD) and 0.3% on the 1.25 billion yuan it was traded for (3.75 million yuan / 615,000 USD). The buyer and seller each only pay fees on one side of the trade in the currency they obtained in the transaction.
edit: That's why the section you quote only has around half of the figure shown in the headline.
1). Interest and principle on USTs are paid in USD, so the notion that the Chinese government simply "wants to send those dollars back to the US" is bunk since they're ultimately getting more back
2). If the Chinese government wanted to directly influence USD value, they could also simply hold onto the USD as currency reserves to take it out of the market / reduce supply
By buying US debt, China is doing the same as the Fed: lowering yields/increasing prices of USTs via increased demand. This allows the government to keep borrowing large amounts, which in theory should offer the cash needed to continue buying Chinese goods.
Moreover, USTs are by far the most liquid high-grade paper available. Pretty much the only possible investment to support volume of the size China needs.
And, while not likely to be used in the near term, this is absolutely an investment in defense. Chinese officials have openly supported the notion that large holdings of Japanese debt could be used as a crippling weapon, why wouldn't that apply to the US?
"those saying the federal heath insurance exchange cost $634 million are incorrect. The official said this figure includes all of the company’s contracts for a Health and Human Services Department program over the last seven years"
It's funny how analogous this is to the underlying debate driving modern politics.
Should the state (Rockstar in this case) offer direct monetary provisions to the citizens without requiring productivity in exchange? The tough part is that both sides of the argument make sense. It's not fair that some players have had an unduly difficult time getting started, but it would also be unfair to diminish the value of the achievement of people who have succeeded by distributing gobs of cash to satiate the masses.
The analogy breaks down in that there's no inflation in GTA (as far as I'd guess, haven't played), but interesting nonetheless.
Given the size of the market and the amount of hashing power required to do that you'd almost certainly lose more money from not mining during that time than you would make on the trade.