rumblecat

Is there something like archive.is for substack?

Can you elaborate on the search for a part time gig? One of my pet theories is that the demand for full time engineers is more of a commitment signal than actually practical, as most people I know only actually work 2-6 hours per day while full-time. So it's rather frustrating that good part time roles don't seem to exist.

This perspective is about delivering maximum value, which is a worldview primarily of silicon valley and finance folks. Which is fine and a totally legitimate play for a limited set of high value subscribers. But if someone knows that value can be obtained by following someone, then they should already be doing so on the platforms where they are most prolific. Which means that this platform is not adding the entire value of 100+x gains, but rather the marginal value which probably wasn't worth capturing previously. Then the primary value of your service comes from convenience and discovery - but my impression is those two features are strongest when your service has a large number of diverse subscribers.

Something I've been wanting for some time but have been too lazy to implement myself is a similar system targeted towards utility rather than value. That is to say, targeted towards entertainment. Something like your favorite guitarist has a new side project, Patrick Rothfuss finally released Doors of Stone, your favorite director is releasing a new movie. Unfortunately most databases for this information seem to be either proprietary or inaccurate.

Currently it's done through the marketplace platform, so actually commissions don't track when you sell through other platforms. EIP-2981 aims to standardize this.

Depending on your view of platforms, this could be less than ideal. It should also be possible to modify the transfer function in the EIP-721 contract to be a swap, but this would require a new standard. In any case, it could be gotten around by an escrowed transfer with swap amount being set to 0. I don't think there is a way to prevent this.

The case for NFTs rests on a virtuous cycle between artists and buyers. On the artist side, there are temporary benefits, such as increased prices and pandemic-safe fundraising. But the killer feature is programmability - for example, it is possible to program the NFT such that the artist takes a chunk out of every resale on the secondary market. This means that as long as there are buyers, there will be artists issuing their work as NFTs.

The buy side is more complicated, because people buy art for different reasons. But there are benefits such as digitization making money laundering more convenient. The main issue is legitimacy concerns, but so long as artists can benefit from NFTs, they are incentivized to express the legitimacy of the NFT. In the equation of who gets to decide legitimacy, I would say the artist has the most sway.

Of course, it's entirely possible that NFTs will fail. First off, it could fail if the issuing blockchain failed or had a contentious fork. Secondly, it's possible that the primary blockchain or issuer for NFTs could change, which could reduce the value of "obsolete" NFTs. There is also regulatory risk. Finally, there is the possibility that people who abuse NFT system, such as repeatedly reissuing art or issuing pirated art, could poison the well. But that's entirely different from saying NFTs are doomed to fail and inherently worthless.

I'm looking at your docs, and the RUN REPEATABLE command seems really powerful. But if the state is broken after a run, like if you have some pods stuck at Terminating, how would you recover things?

Another question I have is how would you handle state that sometimes needs to update and sometimes doesn't? For example, it would be ideal to have a staging database that can keep having migrations and data added to it when new features are added, but we only want to checkpoint the changes to it from testing when the PR is actually merged.

Risk management is the correct way to go when uncertainty is high. Containment was the correct approach at the time.

When evidence starts coming in, then you can start applying evidence based approaches.

> Mortality rate: Mortality and morbidity rates are also downward biased, due to the lag between identified cases, deaths and reporting of those deaths [1]

> Among 3,711 Diamond Princess passengers and crew, 712 (19.2%) had positive test results for SARS-CoV-2 (Figure 1). Of these, 331 (46.5%) were asymptomatic at the time of testing. Among 381 symptomatic patients, 37 (9.7%) required intensive care, and nine (1.3%) died (8) . . . As of March 13, among 428 U.S. passengers and crew, 107 (25.0%) had positive test results for COVID-19; 11 U.S. passengers remain hospitalized in Japan (median age = 75 years), including seven in serious condition (median age = 76 years) [2].

Based on the second source, who can still seriously believe that the naive death rate is too conservative, because all the people in intensive care just have not died yet?

Look at the deaths/recoveries in Singapore and Hong Kong for more evidence [3][4].

Whereas, if you compare fatality rates reported by Germany, SK, HK, Singapore and other high testers vs China, Italy and Spain, it's pretty clear the latter are under-diagnosing mild/asymptomatic cases, which increase their fatality rate by a factor of 10 or more.

[1] https://necsi.edu/systemic-risk-of-pandemic-via-novel-pathog...

[2] https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/mm6912e3.htm?s_cid=mm...

[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_coronavirus_pandemic_in_H...

[4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_coronavirus_pandemic_in_S...