If a recession is bad enough some will panic and pull it all out.
The reality is that crypto is not essential—it’s convenient and has potential but it’s value is backed by what? Other financial assets are backed by stuff like voting rights in a company or a physical asset.
Hence: people will dump crypto first.
I suppose Ethereum is different because it is backed by the functionality provided by the distributed Turing machine and all applications which rely on that. So the folks who wouldn’t pull their money out would be product owners who rely on the blockchain as a revenue stream.
My question would be who holds the price up high? Institutions or the broader public holdings of ETH?
Oxygen, heat, water, food. In that order. At least crypto is 'backed' by math. I expect the currency to dump will be related to who, and not what, is backing each asset class.
In my opinion if social media is important to society the way it seems there should be a government funded social network for users and businesses. In the USA like NPR and PBS.
The problem is companies selling peoples data and optimizing the algorithms on probability. Instead what if everyone paid some taxes to have a social network which helps people interact and businesses promote themselves, you can get rid of the ads AND the algorithms. Let users customize settings which dictate the algorithm.
You better be sure the incumbents would fight tooth and nail make this look like a very unattractive idea and lobby heavily to make sure it will never happen.
Instagram could be use as a “snapshot” of the real thing. If I were a photographer I would use it to hook folks into browsing the full version on my website (and buy prints if they’d like).
The fact is, with huge DPI densities of photos the best way to view something is a very high quality print at scale.
Real life > Flickr > Instagram (in terms of visual quality). The limitations of canvas form factor is a huge damper on visual arts. A square canvas is VERY different than a rectangular one, or a hexagonal one.
But the humble square is perfect for instant grammification.
I'm a photographer on the side and I doubt many people end up on my site from Instagram: the funnel is just too awkward. I mostly found selling prints to be a bit of a waste of time - high touch, low return. Instead, I focus almost entirely on government entities or reasonably sized operators who will commission projects. I've had more commissioned projects than I've ever sold prints, and the former pay x0 times as much and are far more fun and interesting. But where your first point works is that in that mode, you don't need a lot of people visiting your site and getting in touch, you just need the few, right people.
Met a photographer the other day who said he sold about three prints a week, with a margin per print of $150 (after framing, shipping, etc). A day rate for a commissioned job is likely to be $1-2k.
Flickr and their ilk is where you meet other photographers. Instagram is where you get in front of people with photography budgets, IMO.
I don't think many are putting squares on Instagram - it's almost all 4x5 in the main feed or 9x16 in Stories. Whatever fills more of the screen, at least in my industry.
However, I shoot a lot of panoramas^ and resent that Instagram is such a terrible place to show them!
Have you tried 360 photography / meshing? It may allow for those gorgeous long image to fit on mobile better, not really sure. I've been toying with pannellum[1] , and displaying 360 mesh's, its fairly good on mobile. [2]
No, never tried it. Some people split panoramas into multiple photos that people then swipe through, but that's awkward if the initial shot doesn't hold its own when viewed in isolation. Another option is rendering it out as a panning video, which I could try but haven't yet bothered.
However, my work increasingly shifts from photos towards video as that's where the demand/money appears to be. So I shoot loads of panoramas and then they just sit there unless someone licenses them.
Not very well. For a long time, I struggled to focus on one thing, and eventually gave in to just do everything I wanted to do. There are definitely pros and cons, and I certainly neglect many of my projects. But it's making for an interesting life.
Flying a drone and taking photos seems very disconnected to photography for me. But that's just me. The photos are great however. But it feels like a "photographer" who also just uses their phone.
Seems like a pretty arbitrary line to draw, especially phone vs camera. Modern cameras have software assisting too. Strikes me as gatekeeping, but you're welcome to your opinion.
I had two jobs last year shooting video for my country's national tourism authority - I shot half with my phone, and half with a tiny gimbal camera (Osmo Pocket) that uses the phone as the monitor/display/interface. I got paid, got two holidays, and the content went out to several million people. I'm perfectly OK with being someone who (amongst multiple cameras, four drones, etc) "also just uses their phone". :)
Don't worry. I'm definitely on the fence with this.
I am not the kind of anti-software purist. But I am definitely against fake elements in a photo, which there are more than plenty in Instagram and other photo sharing platforms.
>A square canvas is VERY different than a rectangular one
I agree and I'm very much used to a ~35mm aspect ratio. That said, medium format film (120/220) was usually approximately square so it's not an objectively "bad" aspect ratio.
Instagram has stopped using square dimensions for a long time. In fact if you want to lose followers, you should maintain your photography dimensions and scale. If you don't post in "iPhone portrait" mode, you will soon disappear from the algorithm.
Context is important though. For instance, developers applying for management position with no management experience. In other words just because they work at a company does not mean they are qualified for the position there (or elsewhere). Those people would likely quit out of resentment.
I think in many cases people think they deserve a promotion based on seniority—but they don’t show signs of going above-and-beyond. Simply working somewhere longer does NOT warrant any merit increase in my mind. Doing extra things to help the company in ways beyond ones role deserves merit increase/promotion.
I’d argue more times than not, folks consider time-spent on the job a sole factor in guaranteeing that promotion.
For instance, someone new might join a company and have a skill set above and beyond folks who have 2+ years of seniority. That new employee might demonstrate exceeding merit in two months of employment—and in my mind, the new hire should get the promotion.
Granted, that’s comparing two employees who work at a company already. I suppose in the interview process it would be based on fact (existing employee) versus word of reference and how well the new hire sells their abilities.
And that’s why I’m not in management because I’d rather not have to deal with making those decisions!
I personally have language fatigue after playing with various languages over two decades.
The thing I hate about rust is abbreviated keywords like “fn” and “mut” because it sounds like fricken mutt. A function is a function not a fn, and is it really so hard to type “mutable”?
There’s more important things in life to worry about than rewriting codebases in language Z.
An old habit of mine: Avoid symbol-speaking or abbreviation-speaking. I verbalize "fn" as "function" and "mut" as "mutable" the same way I verbalize "std::unique_ptr" as "standard unique pointer" and not "stid unique pooter".
"fat arrow" would just be symbol-speaking. Assuming you are referring to the match syntax in rust[1], I verbalize "PATTERN => EXPRESSION" as "on $PATTERN, do $EXPRESSION".
I don't read code in English, even though I'm a native speaker. So its kindof a silly question: this would only come up when walking someone else through the code. I internally read code using data-flow and control-flow graphs. The written abbreviation is just shorthand for a specific type of graph vertex (or edge).
Why not skip the keywords altogether and use an ACTUAL λ symbol. Funny thing we have UTF8 everywhere but no one uses it… People are still typing ASCII in markdown files, but there’s Unicode symbols to render tables and whatnot directly in a text editor… but here we are :)
I never understood the push for terseness in newer languages. Are there any IDE's or text editors today that don't do code completion? Code coloring helps too. Usability is improved with full words imo...
Someone purportedly writing authoritatively for an audience. You don't get to just invent history out of whole cloth because you "don't have time." If you don't have time to write a factual article, you don't have time to write an article.
So now this piece of crap is out there on the internet for the rest of time, permanently memorializing completely nonfactual statements. Fake news. Literal definition of. Wonderful.
I don’t get the naming of said device. Brand identity is important and a Ploopy just doesn’t sound very serious. I mean, ploopy rhymes with poopy. The little mouse plooped a ploppity plop.
I think there is because “rent” and “lease” implies your intent is to stay there short-term. “Buy” says you literally are buying the home whether it’s with your money or someone else’s via some mortgage terms.
With an Apple device it certainly is muddy waters because you purchase hardware while simultaneously in some weird lease agreement for the software.
I guess it’s like buying a house in a gated community with very strict home owners association. You can purchase the house but if you want to put a new door on it you gotta go through the motions to ultimately get denied the color you want, etc.
And if Apple was the association they’d have a neighborhood watch ensuring 8PM curfews.
In a home owner's association, the home owners are part of the association. You have to play by the rules, but you are also part of the body that makes the rules.
In this case, the party setting the rules is more like the rich person who originally built and "sold" the houses (but still enforces curfew, and changes the rules whenever they feel like it).
As they said, with leasehold or some things with freehold it's not quite so simple.
I used to have a leasehold house, which I "bought" but also sort of rented, or at least rented-ish the land while owning-ish what was within the bricks.
I have a freehold house now, but there are restrictive covenants which technically govern what I am allowed to do to my own property (these are not council/etc permissions but private ones).
Indeed, until recently I lived in a freehold house which had a covenant saying my hedge could be no higher than 4' high, couldn't change the colour of my front door, couldn't park a van on my drive, that I had to pay a specified private company money each year to do various things, with no say over that company.
The term "buy", at least in the UK when it comes to housing, is a sliding scale.
I nominate Sweden to be the weirdest country when it comes to housing ownership.
When buying a flat or a non-detached house, you usually fall into an ownership law called "bostadsrätt". In essence, you don't buy a house. You buy stocks in a housing association, which grant you the right to use the chosen flat/house. The housing association is pretty much run like a company, with a yearly board meeting, a CEO, a CFO, etc. Your ownership is proportional to the surface area you bought.
It’s not much different in the US. Leasehold arrangements are less common, but still possible, particularly when dealing with “mobile” homes (that generally aren’t mobile at all once placed).
The reality is that crypto is not essential—it’s convenient and has potential but it’s value is backed by what? Other financial assets are backed by stuff like voting rights in a company or a physical asset.
Hence: people will dump crypto first.
I suppose Ethereum is different because it is backed by the functionality provided by the distributed Turing machine and all applications which rely on that. So the folks who wouldn’t pull their money out would be product owners who rely on the blockchain as a revenue stream.
My question would be who holds the price up high? Institutions or the broader public holdings of ETH?