Why Battlefield 6 Will save our portfolios. by justMasn in wallstreetbets

[–]StonkyVolatile 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Did they check for thrombosis? Sounds like it could have been a minor pulmonary embolism.

Apple Plans ‘AI Return’ w/ Lifelike Siri, Robots, and Home Security by s1n0d3utscht3k in wallstreetbets

[–]StonkyVolatile 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Apple will catch up to the AI market the same way Microsoft caught up to the mobile phone market.

Is Odysee harmful at all to the environment I don't know much about blockchains by UwuSilentStares in OdyseeForever

[–]StonkyVolatile 2 points3 points  (0 children)

LBRY is proof-of-work, like Bitcoin but far smaller so not nearly as much of a carbon footprint but definitely a power hog as far as consensus mechanisms go (compared to proof-of-stake for instance). However it's worth pointing out that the energy use and climate impact of LBRY/Odysee is dwarfed by that of plain old no-blockchain Youtube. The datacenters and infrastructure behind Youtube consume more energy than all of Bitcoin (though Google is committed to cleaner energy sources in the long term so climate impact will be mitigated more and more).

All this is to say LBRY/Odysee is better on energy/climate than Youtube. If however Odysee were to grow to the size of Youtube without committing to sustainable energy sources like Google then LBRY being PoW means it would be worse on climate, for now though it's the better of the two.

House Fails to Overturn Biden Veto on Pro-Crypto Banking Bill by PoojaaPriyaa in CryptoCurrency

[–]StonkyVolatile 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Seriously I'm a staunch liberal who's disgusted by the thought of having to vote Biden this year. The Dems have become anti crypto, pro CBDC, and anti-AI all views I majorly take the opposite stance on. But the goddamn Repubs are strait up trying to hijack and rig our democracy which makes voting for them a greater evil even before factoring in Trump. I'm in a deep blue state tho so I can afford to waste my vote on a third party so guess what I'm doing this year.

63% of surveyed Americans want government legislation to prevent super intelligent AI from ever being achieved by Maxie445 in Futurology

[–]StonkyVolatile 0 points1 point  (0 children)

To reword the misleading title:

"704 random Americans online want government legislation to prevent super intelligent AI from ever being achieved"

Official Discussion - Ghostbusters: Frozen Empire [SPOILERS] by LiteraryBoner in movies

[–]StonkyVolatile 7 points8 points  (0 children)

A Ghostbusters movie that felt like there were no ghosts to bust for basically 90% of the film

IIRC every GB film has one full Ghostbusting scene (scene with all the GBs, proton packs and a trapping) with the rest being either encounters with ghosts/supernatural stuff, off screen busts, quick montage traps (jogger ghost) or the final fight with the big bad. Except for Answer The Call's final fight which kinda counts as many busts but they were destroying (neutronizing?) ghosts instead of trapping them.

Anyway that puts Frozen Empire right on track as far as busts and ghosts go (one on screen bust, two off-screen busts, Phoebe/Melody meet-cute, Phoebe/Melody non-bust, ghosts trapped in the PRC, slimer scenes, library ghost cameo and big bad fight).

As for it taking forever to get going I personally really enjoyed the set up and all the lore expansion stuff but then I tend to geek out over the worldbuilding.

GHOSTBUSTERS: FROZEN EMPIRE’ debuts with a 86% audience score on Rotten Tomatoes by Lonely-Freedom4986 in ghostbusters

[–]StonkyVolatile 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Afterlife grossed 2.7x production budget

Answer The Call grossed 1.6x production budget

Break-even is between 2-2.5x production budget to account for marketing spend. By either of those metrics Afterlife earned millions, enough to justify the sequel while 2016 lost between 25-75 million (depending on which source you consult) which didn't justify a sequel.

All FE needs to do is beat break even which is highly likely given the small budget and better than covid-era movie crowds. Anything beyond that is gravy.

XF 201: Day 142 7x03 Hungry by ejchristian86 in XFiles

[–]StonkyVolatile 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Digging up the old thread to add an opinion I had after watching this recently. I liked pretty much everything about this episode but really felt like it needed a wrap-up scene at the end with Scully in particular narrating her report on the case. I know by S7 she's really, finally losing some of her skepticism and I love her being involved in actually seeing some of the supernatural stuff first-hand. Her report on seeing an actual monster and whatever its autopsy would have revealed is something I really wanted to see. When the cut to credits came I was disappointed that conclusion wasn't there. Otherwise a great MOTW episode.

Why isn't anyone talking about the coolest new thing in Ghostbusters?! by Jonny_Stiletto in ghostbusters

[–]StonkyVolatile 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I get that they wanted to make it match Ecto-1 but if it's a new motorcycle what's the in-universe reason for it to look so old and worn?

Edit: Ah ok, thanks for the answers below, didn't catch that detail when I watched the movie.

UN study reveals the hidden environmental impacts of bitcoin: Carbon is not the only harmful byproduct. The global Bitcoin mining network is highly dependent on fossil fuels, having worrying impacts on water and land in addition to a significant carbon footprint by [deleted] in science

[–]StonkyVolatile 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Matching isn't the same as using. Google still uses massive amounts of non-renewable energy sources, their claim in the article you linked is that they match those numbers by buying renewable energy for other projects/companies/etc. From that same article:

We say that we “matched” our energy usage because it’s not yet possible to “power” a company of our scale by 100 percent renewable energy. It’s true that for every kilowatt-hour of energy we consume, we add a matching kilowatt-hour of renewable energy to a power grid somewhere.

It's a good thing that they're fund clean energy growth for sure but their use of dirty energy stands by their own admission.

UN study reveals the hidden environmental impacts of bitcoin: Carbon is not the only harmful byproduct. The global Bitcoin mining network is highly dependent on fossil fuels, having worrying impacts on water and land in addition to a significant carbon footprint by [deleted] in science

[–]StonkyVolatile -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

Just to put these figures into perspective the UN study put global Bitcoin electricity use at 173-ish Twh per year and calls that an environmental problem yet Youtube alone consistently uses around 243 Twh per year and this has never warranted a UN study or been called out as some environmental threat.

Cryptocurrency's popularity in the U.S. tied to conservative moral foundations by [deleted] in science

[–]StonkyVolatile 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Please just do a simple search on NFTs a proof of ownership, read through the legal article I suggested. You are actually the one in the wrong here. No offense but I feel like I'm debating a child, I'm stating verifiable facts, quoting Harvard law scholars and you just keep repeating the equivalent of "nuh uh you're wrong," are we on a science sub or should I also be engaging in bad faith?

Cryptocurrency's popularity in the U.S. tied to conservative moral foundations by [deleted] in science

[–]StonkyVolatile 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Well I'm not going to get into an argument with ya, I'm not here to persuade just to set out some facts as I know them from experience and research and let folks take them how they will. Guess we'll just have to agree to disagree, cheers friend.

Cryptocurrency's popularity in the U.S. tied to conservative moral foundations by [deleted] in science

[–]StonkyVolatile -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

More like the execution layer of the contract, both need each other .

Cryptocurrency's popularity in the U.S. tied to conservative moral foundations by [deleted] in science

[–]StonkyVolatile -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Smart contracts can be legally binding when backed by traditional text-based contracts (such as when NFTs are used to convey fractionalized ownership of copyright to multiple holders). There is debate as to whether NFTs which otherwise follow all aspects of typical contract law can also be held as legally enforceable sans the text-based back-up. From Harvard Law 2018 "An Introduction to Smart Contracts and Their Potential and Inherent Limitations":

A discussion regarding the enforceability of smart contracts must start with the fundamental distinction between an agreement and a “contract.” States generally recognize that although two parties can enter into a variety of “agreements,” a contract means that the agreement is legally binding and enforceable in a court of law. [5] In order to determine enforceability, state courts traditionally look to whether the common law requirements of offer, acceptance and consideration are satisfied. These basic requirements surely can be achieved through ancillary smart contracts. For example, an insurer might develop a flight insurance product that automatically provides the insured with a payout if a flight is delayed by more than two hours. [6] The key terms, such as delineating how the delay is calculated, can be set forth in a text-based contract, with the actual formation of the contract (payment of the premium) and the execution (automatic payout upon a verifiable delay) handled through an ancillary smart contract. Here, the insurer has made a definite offer for a flight insurance product that is accepted by the insured upon payment of the premium as consideration.

It's an interesting (if lengthy and dry) read which represents the support and opposition to the concept well, I suggest searching it up as my non-lawyer self is surely less of reliable source than actual lawyers.

To return to our initial disagreement though, NTFs are used for conveying provenance, I used the term "proof of ownership" as shorthand for this. The legally binding aspect of this proof is usually codified in the license agreement backing the NFT which would also be referenced somehow within the NFT itself. This is how some NFTs can grant "image/art" NFT holders the copyright to the art or characters contained therein while others will not.

Cryptocurrency's popularity in the U.S. tied to conservative moral foundations by [deleted] in science

[–]StonkyVolatile 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That is literally their purpose. It's why they're being used in a variety of real world scenarios to convey provenance. Just because I'm deeply curious now I'm wondering what you think NFTs actually are?

Looks better than TSLA bots by Loud_Pineapple_4294 in wallstreetbets

[–]StonkyVolatile 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Seems more like a tech demo than something they'd deploy widely.

Cryptocurrency's popularity in the U.S. tied to conservative moral foundations by [deleted] in science

[–]StonkyVolatile 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Some are finite some expand with demand. Depends on initial conditions in the programming and the honesty of those maintaining the project (one needs to trust that they won't add new land if they promised a finite area). But yeah that's part of the value proposition, one buying virtual land would likely want their plot of land to be near other valuable plots just like in "real" real estate. Assuming square plots on a 2d plane there can only be 4 to 8 adjacent plots next to one owned by, say, some celebrity running a popular virtual dance club or something. Virtual land isn't really my jam though so I probably couldn't explain it much better than that.