Maybe paying more is something that should be explored...
I think for $500-$1,000 a month per person you would have widespread behavior change in most companies, and it wouldn't really even be that expensive in the context of total healthcare+wellness program spending.
Yup this also mean that Tesla's radar and camera systems had 5 seconds to realize it was driving straight into an unmoving concrete barrier and did nothing...
by 'blockchain-based' they mean, a normal election happened with traditional voting, and then some of the vote counters uploaded the tally of the votes they counted to a private blockchain
Is that data that valuable though? Its not that unique, off the top of my head there are several companies that have similar datasets, Every movie theatre chain, every online movie booking service, every movie review site
Here were mine
Here were a few of mine, I’ve tried to get into ethereum a couple times
- installing mist and getting it to sync is very difficult and time consuming
- connecting to a testnet and getting ether on the testnet is also very difficult
- most ‘cool’ dapp ideas rely on oracles to publish data about the real world into the block chain. When you dive into it you realize that such an Oracle would be very very expensive to run for even trivial usecases.
I think the hate comes from some shady stuff the big brewers have historically done to push out smaller brewers, limiting tap and shelf space for craft, sponsoring laws that reduce ways that beer can be sold direct from the breweries or adding fees that hurt small players
Sportsbooks in general don't mind winning players though, especially big ones. They make money off the vig and move odds to get equal money on each side of the bet so that they'll make money either way.
There has to be more to this story. I would like to hear the bookmakers side of this. Perhaps the researchers were scripting or triggered some other kind of security tripwire.
Winning $900 split across several different bookmakers is absolutely nothing in the sports betting industry.
William Hill, one of the companies that the researchers claim restricted them is a multi billion dollar company. They aren't sweating small time bets like this.
EDIT: I noticed that the screenshots they used as proof their bets were restricted are for bets on very minor football leagues (Australian semi pro football), its common for betting limits to be lower for games that don't see a lot of betting action & is not proof enough to me that the bookmakers lowered their limits globally
A possibly simpler solution would be to not have assigned places to vote that are based on your ID & DOB.
Just vote at the polling place most convenient to you, and announce available polling places on posters around town, or facebook & twitter if you prefer.
If you want to really see what the environment is like now, read the bitcointalk ico announcement threads. It's absolutely insane. Very little of that stuff makes its way to hn.
People are raising money with 10 page vague 'white papers' with ideas that make no sense or are completely unworkable on the blockchain.
There is very little skepticism or research with these icos . Most of the commenters are trying to help the project and receive tokens in return, do tasks to qualify for free tokens ( bounties ) , or promote the ico so their token value increases
If there was a good way to short individual ico tokens it might bring some sanity
My hunch is location, iron yard had a bunch of locations in 3rd and 4th tier markets where there just aren't that many programming jobs. Even in Austin which is probably one of the better markets they had, entry level coding jobs are somewhat scarce compared to demand for them
I use their papa johns codes frequently, they always seem to be good for 40% off - however lately I've noticed papa johns trying to cut out the middleman and run their own coupon adwords offers
If I received a resume from a collegiate track person I would probably google them out of curiousity to see how fast they were, and in this case I would realize it's a fake name and resume, I wonder if that had any effect on the results
I think for $500-$1,000 a month per person you would have widespread behavior change in most companies, and it wouldn't really even be that expensive in the context of total healthcare+wellness program spending.