He addresses this in footnote 1 on the same page, though. "A different company, Sun, created the library. But because Oracle later purchased Sun, for simplicity I refer to both companies as Oracle."
Thanks for pointing that out -- I skipped over that first footnote. On my screen, it's on the previous page from the quote I posted (for what it's worth).
It does sound like that! The mistake there was to assume the failure of one mortgage was statistically independent of the failure of another, which is obviously incorrect for many failure scenarios. In this case, it it would be similar if all nodes were in, say, the same datacenter. That doesn't appear to be the case, but there may be other dimensions on which the network lacks the required diversity to support the reliability claims (disk vendor and age...? There must be others.)
Not really. Just probability.
If you have fully redundant services then ALL of them have to go down to have an outage.
Suppose you 5 copies with 75% uptime each.
The probability that all of them are down is 0.25^5 ~ 0.0009
Now of course that assumes they are uncorrelated, but since Sia nodes are distributed across the internet, that's likely as opposed to multiple servers at a few data centers like AWS.
They all run the same software stack though, so despite being deployed on diverse hardware, so they can’t claim to only have independent failure modes.
I mean, the concept actually works, but you have to understand what is actually going into the bundled product. There is no reason you couldn't bundle 100 million in mortgages that had a 10% default risk and sell 10 million of that bundle as AAA.
It is when you just start bundling everything and then saying the entire thing is AAA that the trouble starts.
The president controls the defense apparatus, which can label any country they wish a "threat to national security", which according to laws enacted since 9/11 can prevent American companies to do business with other countries. In the post 9/11, trumpian world, economic freedom depends on the mood of the president.
Just because the President has certain powers, doesn't mean he will be allowed to abuse those powers and remain unchecked.
If Trump tried to force all American companies to stop doing business in China by declaring China a "national security threat," his efforts would be immediately met with a challenge from the courts and he would very likely be impeached or removed from office. What would not happen is the rest of the government simply throwing up their hands because "the president controls the defense apparatus."
If it really worked that way, Trump would already have declared Mexico a national security threat, forced the government to fully fund the wall, seized all necessary lands via eminent domain and started building it by now.
It works so well that Trump is maintaining concentration camps where children are physically abused. And his appointments in the supreme court are letting him bypass congress and build a useless wall with money diverted from the military. If you think that this is normal, then you're part of the problem.
That may be part of it, but Starbucks has done a very good job of getting their regular customers to sign up for their loyalty program and online/app ordering, and to have them sign up for automatically replenishing (every time my balance goes below $10, load another $25) gift card accounts to use both features.
We use Nest cams for a baby/child monitor at nighttime. Haven’t seen the change yet, but I suspect it will make it so that this use case no longer works.
The Big Dig in Boston was full of the same overruns, delays, and even corruption. All worth it.
It's the best thing the city has ever done, far and away. Fundamentally changed the city and is responsible for incalculable property value and quality of life improvements in the city.
Massachusetts paid for many of it's own interstates before sick a system existed. You could see that in the old Central Artery being way out of compliance with standards. A compelling argument was that other states had their modern highways paid for them by the Federal government long ago while Massachusetts had done it themselves even before then.
Yes. Other states had their highways paid by the Federal government. Massachusetts had originally paid for its highways itself. The balance came due with the Big Dig, cost adjusted for 2000.
A frustration I have with Seattle local politics is the property taxes. The increase land value from tearing down the viaduct already results in higher assessed values that get paid by the property owners perpetually. Throwing in $100+ million "local improvement district" special assessments is a money grab, or as some have called it a "wealth transfer."
It's like saying everyone within a radius of a new light rail station or interstate on-ramp has to pay a one-time assessment, instead of infrastructure projects being for the common good.
The local improvement districts smell like corporate socialism, and selective taxation. More money for government to spend, more money for developers to receive, and the public don't care because it only affects rich people with waterfront views. Until the next "local improvement district" affects their neighborhood. It's a recipe for corruption and a slippery slope.
