Your comment makes sense, you have to anchor the moment to something not in the same axis as the target system pleasure/pain.

Plus is the article makes sense you want to keep that happiness around a little longer to help push a few more items into long-term-storage, not sidetrack the brain into dealing with pain from peppers.

The "muscle" maybe called ego. It is usually this that tries to hold onto the nonsense it thinks is important.

Without the ego there is only the present and the only thing to do in the present is process all feelings without attachment (it is the ego trying to do that 'attaching'). The relaxing you are taking about is the non-attachment.

You run your program 3 times on 3 different hardware setups, get 2 complete results and compare results, which are the same ? The other computation did not complete.

Are you sure you have this right ?

My understanding is the difficulty increases as the limited block range pool gets exhausted, kind of like a quadratic, it just so happens over time that the number of folks mining and the mining performance has also increased.

The fee's get paid to parties involved in signing a transaction. The longer the transaction history of the block the more computationally expensive it is to assist signing. Multiple nodes need to sign a transaction before a systemic consensus is reached that the bitcoin did change possession (i.e. proof of spending) and also ensure double spending is difficult. So over time no one will sign transactions for free, since they become computationally expensive.

The original block finder simply got to spend that block first, he needed other nodes to sign this spending and he may have needed to pay fees to those signing nodes as well as the bulk to the receiving node.

There is no situation that all fees for the infinite lifetime of the block get paid to the original finder. (This is my interpretation of your comment).

My knowledge of bitcoin is very limited and it has been a while since I first looked up on what it is. Please feel free to correct me.

"these days" ? What era was the date it did not have this ? You mean the PHP ecosystem has opened its eyes to finally using some good methodology.

> At the end of the exam, the examiner said this to my uncle: "Well, you passed, but I question your integrity."

"That is your job, suck it up!"

These figures are not completely accurate picture. Most streaming content comes off a load cache boxes on the large ISPs own network. All ISP peer in at least one of their national peering centres to exchange traffic with other national ISPs to reduce the transit requirements. Most internet traffic never leaves the country, UK people use UK google, UK ebay, UK ecommerce sites.

So for example Netflix, BBC, BT TV and things like Windows Updates and Game downloads all come from local cache boxes that are either located inside the ISP network (at a cost to the CDN) or are within the national peering exchange centre and do not stream down transit links.

Sure the cost of 10Gbps links at a national peering centre are expensive but no where near that of you are quoting for transit from a tier-1.

> If you drink something acidic, the total acidity level of your stomach will be more than if you drink water.

Total volume would increase, the PH would increase towards 7 (go from 1.35 to maybe 2.123) making the overall acidity lower.

So the term would be more correct to say the acidity level is lower (just like taking alkaline stomach salts to ease indigestion).

The exact amount of change depends largely on the relative volumes involved, the dynamics of how they mix, but that is largely irrelevant for drink as everything ingested is usually with a high water content already.

> Since it supresses appetite, you tend to eat more.

Huh.... appetite is the brain response to going hungry and getting a desire to eat via hormonal / chemical changes within the body.

Suppressing this response means to loose the desire to eat, which is not necessarily the same thing as feeling full, but more like eating becomes a chore, as the satiation (pleasure) response is dulled.

So your comment makes no sense, when your appetite is suppressed you eat less. What happens with sugar is the high glucose levels triggers short term higher energy and to associated stimulant effect from that, and the lack of real hunger satiation response allows the users to gorge too much sugar, whilst at the same time not providing any wholesome nutritional value (lack of variety of micro nutrients - from candy)

There is an old wives tale of giving the children of the family a small amount of candy, before 1950s in time before the main meal of the day. In order to suppress the child's appetite and thus not require as much of the scarce/expensive wholesome food. The largest plate of food is given to the bread winner of the household.

So to me it all depends on who, how and when the sugar is given. A few sweets and hour before a main meal reduces the amount eaten, a soda drink given immediately before or during dinner increases it.

I agree also with the fiber meaning fuller sooner with smaller portions. But that is also true of complex carbohyrates and complex protein (i.e. not whey hydroyslate, but regular beef), actually anything with a higher calorific requirement to metabolize. It costs calories to break down certain foods, water soluble glucose requires less (as do fats) and things like fibre get in the way of the process so its slower and less efficient thus using more energy.

> 3) Copyright abandonment requires a formal, explicit statement

Because it is necessary for someone to have asserted their "Copyright" in the first place, to then provide a license to abandon those Copyrights.

If no one asserts Copyright what stops an evil entity from claiming they hold Copyright (when they do not) and then announce they did not grant public domain status to this work. It needs the real Copyright holder to assert their claim on the work first.

It is not risky at all. They should have made her an offer for the price the H1B was hired for.

Maybe a simple change in the law is required, make the company officially document as a matter of public record minimum quorum of Americans that were offered the post, including their CVs, how they found the position and comments in those Americans own words relating to the application process. This allows an amercian who thinks there was foul play in the process to make public comment based on facts. This is then has to be put up on a public single notice board for other job hunting Americans see and apply.

Make this an additional paperwork cost to being able to apply for a H1B visa. That is completely public and open to scrutiny by any American. This is the problem with a behind closed doors concessions made by the American people to some American corporations (yes corporations need to understand it is a privilege not a right). There should be more transparent oversight.

> GPL principles

What is this, you mean complying with GPL licenses when you produce a derivative work ? This is a legal obligation not a choice.

> open source is indeed to save you money so that you don't reinvent the wheel

The GPL way is that when you choose this path (to leverage other peoples open source work), then you provide the same openess that you consumed to all those downstream who you redistribute all or part of your changes.

Note the use of the word redistribute, this is key to the additional requirements the GPL consumer has imposed on them, if you keep your modifications private.

The grey areas here are around what counts as redistribution and what counts as a derivative work. Some stances on these areas are that redistribution is any copy created of software and supplied (so includes firmware, downloadable parts of a website, but does not includes server side parts of a website or code executed as a some kind of trade secret process). The derivative works includes any substantial part of the software that can not be removed without disrupting function, or substituted for an alternative implementation. Keeping the GPL parts as a DSO/DLL can assist this his process, providing you can demonstrate it is substitutable.

What can Ghostery do that RequestPolicy can not ?

https://www.requestpolicy.com/

It Ghostery just targetted as abusers of 1x1 img pixel and tracking cookies ? As RequestPolicy seems to be a generic solution from any information not coming from the target website you are visiting.

Hmm maybe true today, but at your next business contract renewal your terms will be different.

>> you would have to scrutinize the key material in many thousands of connections before you would even start to suspect something was wrong.'

A few iterations of their plugin, to also examine key information and find a safe way to report such concerns.

https://www.eff.org/observatory

The Session Key of the SSL session is what they seek to control. So this is a matter for a secure key exchange protocol to fix.

I don't understand how storing information inside a cookie (which is presumably inside the HTTPS connection) helps the attacker. Since in order to examine it they would have already brute forced their 100 million known keys to find the one that worked. So why do they need any extra information from the cookie.

Maybe a cryptographer can explain if key exchange protocols such as DH are immune to this kind of concern, since don't both ends pick their own random numbers, to derive a usable symmetric cipher key. So as long as each end can trust their own local random number generation isn't the exchange immune to this attack even if you presume the other end uses same (not random number) every time. They still can not control my RNG and my RNG perterbs the resulting master key. So we just need to make sure there is enough entropy from one ends input to satisfy their ends security concerns.

No the real problem here is having the remote endpoint simply persist and store for later lookup, or forward in realtime the agreed key the client and server used of any SSL session along with a timestamp and the IP address and port number tuples. This you can never protect yourself from. You have to ask the question, what data would I trust the endpoint with, just like any other kind of relationship ?

More encryption is good, because then at least there maybe whistle blowers and loss of reputation costing the relevant company some financial penalty, hopefully 10x more than the bribe.