You say this could not have been pulled off by a private entity, but I would argue the Japanese train system is equal, if not better and to my knowledge is privately ran.
> If the markets are like this when there are a few hundred cases in the UK and US, what will they be like when there are tens, or hundreds of thousands of cases and major cities are in lockdown?
Investors are trying to judge the likelihood of these very events and selling / buying accordingly. Markets are based on predictions.
Exactly. When the virus is at its worst is when the market will start to bounce back because recovery will be priced in. The markets are all about the value of the future. That’s why it’s all kind of a joke to me. Its based on hopes and dreams(or fears and nightmares) instead of how a company is actually doing.
Of course, but those predictions are only based on available information. We probably won’t know which companies will be worst affected, or where. There’s no way anyone could have predicted Lombardy would be the first part of Europe to be hit so hard. When particular companies, regions and industries turn out to be more severely affected, they will take the hit asymmetrically, but that will hurt the overall market. The current impact us being gauged fairly tentatively IMHO.
For example it’s likely several more airlines will go to the wall, but we don’t know which ones yet.
I was stating my initial interpretation from the title alone.
It should be a given that responding in a chain with the OP stating 'By crypto they mean cryptography here.' I have ascertained the 'crypto' in the title now refers to cryptography.
I forget not everyone is capable of understanding subtext. The subtext of explaining how trivial it is to check, is that the comment is not needed for every single post with the word crypto
The part "it's sometimes not one-sided", taken literally and minimally, tells us only that there are some people whose own actions reduce their dignity. Given a sample population of any size, this provides no additional information about the topic under discussion: there are some asinine people everywhere.
What information could the poster have been conveying, then, if not nothing? In context, I think it's clear that the intended update for readers was to raise the possibility that tomrod's indignities were self-inflicted.
It could be that the poster was trying to smear tomrod, or that they were baiting tomrod into responding at length (if so, success!), or that they genuinely didn't consider the implications of their comment, or something else entirely that was too subtle for me to catch. Probably only they will ever know. :)
We're not talking web-scale here, either. There are 1,600 caucus sites in Iowa. My understanding is that only the organizers/officials even need this on their phones. So we're talking on the order of 10-20k users, max.
My intuition is that the bigger problem is with the caucus format itself, and especially the new rule changes. The app, with its strict data entry requirements, likely didn't cover a lot of corner cases and so people had to call in to ask what to do. There was one caucus on TV last night that had problems because a bunch of people left after first alignment and organizers didn't know how to tally their votes.
When some confusion -- any confusion -- happens, that doesn't fit into the app's forms, people are not going to trust it and will revert to calling the IDP/DNC offices to see how to proceed.
This makes more sense to me than actually the app melting down under load which was implied from some reporting.
Then if the Iowa DNC (or whoever) didn't staff up the phones to the usual levels as expecting most results to come through the app, you can kind of get to how something this ridiculous happened...
Either way it's a complete lack of pretty basic testing/training, whether it's with real life users or the scale of the app, or whatever it was, they seem like pretty preventable problems from the outside looking in.
I'm sure it is related to the fact they can report N new users to shareholders. I can't see what else explains their complete lack of dealing with obvious fake/spam accounts.
I don't think just measuring the carbon footprint is giving you an accurate measurement.