shawticus

This post might as well have just been titled "Launch House is really out of touch"

NFTs are not baseball cards, they're not JPEGs, they're none of this.

They are emblems of buy-in to a community or idea. Think of it like the next generation of crowdfunding.

Most of what people are saying here is really ignorant of the reality on the ground to be honest, so it's hard to say anything other than-- ya'll really don't see it, because you haven't bothered to look.

Given the way you see the world, I'd say you odds of being successful in this industry are probably higher than most.

I went to a "blue ribbon" school that was attached to a continuation school. It was a great school. Kids behaved well, very upper middle class. However, if you were doing at all not great for any reason -- C average, struggling with depression or learning, anything -- they would pressure you into the continuation school right next door. So you have one school operating as two schools so that they can pretend to be the top school in the state by moving the bottom set next door.

The guy who is complaining about having to learn new technology is complaining about not making enough money?

I would never hire him.

Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiightttttt

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2019/08/02/joe-biden...

TL;DR Biden is literally bought, paid for and supported by hedge funds (as is every other politician).

This whole "you people are crazy this is fine" mentality has got to end, we are in WAY corrupt times.

"The current interpretations of Section 230 have enabled online platforms to hide behind the immunity to censor lawful speech in bad faith and is inconsistent with their own terms of service. To remedy this, the department’s legislative proposal revises and clarifies the existing language of Section 230 and replaces vague terms that may be used to shield arbitrary content moderation decisions with more concrete language that gives greater guidance to platforms, users, and courts.

The legislative proposal also adds language to the definition of “information content provider” to clarify when platforms should be responsible for speech that they affirmatively and substantively contribute to or modify."

Can someone competently defend this not being used directly as a tool by Trump to prevent his deeply deeply harmful misinformation about the virus and other things from being censored?

"Promoting Transparency and Open Discourse

First, the draft legislation has a series of reforms to promote transparency and open discourse and ensure that platforms are fairer to the public when removing lawful speech from their services."

Brings me back to 2015.

Let me impart some wisdom, having taught myself to sew just about every possible fabric I could get my hands on chasing this particular dragon: Gloves will never work for consumer haptics. If you're putting fabric on the palm or under fingers you're doing it wrong.

I'm all for overfinger exo as long as I can 1. wash it and 2. it only needs to come in one size to fit the vast majority of people.

We've started a co-op like this to build cross platform spatial web apps (MMOs, metaverses, online virtual storefronts, etc). The project is MIT licensed but we're going after big contracts, especially trying to fill voids in the events and retail space. While things are being developed, everyone is living on a bit of runway contributed by one of the partners to make the project a reality.

If you're interested, code is here: https://github.com/xr3ngine/xr3ngine

Happy to discuss more about structure on Discord or w/e