I've also heard "quintuple" pronounced "quin-TUH-ple" when used as a verb and "quin-TOO-ple" when used as a noun or adjective, so there's a part-of-speech distinction as well...
Being mostly self taught I had a few of these. First couple of months working with other developers one would come up every week or so. Luckily not very embarrassing. The new juniors have a few too!
Isn't less better when hot air drying? In my experience when I've had very small loads due to accidental spills they dry quickly. I do understand that more water dilutes detergent, though.
Yes. That's the point. The volumes I was referring to were the volumes of the appliances' tubs, not the volume of the load. The assumption is that the load is constant since it needs to go from washer to dryer.
I buy the tide unscented stuff, and its cheaper per unit, and I have a subscription set up from target. Maybe Frey isn't for me, but I feel like its too expensive. I feel like my opinion matters in this because I am a man.
It's a great point! We're not for everyone, and particularly if you don't care about the fragrance, we're probably not for you (although we do focus on treating your clothing better as well as making a positive impact).
I dont think about what my clean laundry smells like, other than that it smells like clean laundry. Ideally, though, I want my clean laundry to smell like nothing at all.
When all the boomers sell, the sudden influx of houses on the market is will lower prices so that people like me (I'm in my early 30's) won't have to pay a million dollars for a 2 bedroom condo. On the other hand would falling housing prices cause another recession (I'm no economist) cause me or other people like me to lose their jobs and not be able to afford a house anyway?
Similarly, my joke is that bitcoin is an alien species or hostile AI's bloodless, costless, infinitely scalable weapon to get potential spacefaring competitors to abort themselves by subverting their star's energy to fruitless labor.
The government already mostly uses accounting instead of physical money so moving to a really expensive way of doing accounting probably wouldn't save money.
I think they were trying to intimate that a large-scale adopted cryptocurrency could replace large swaths of financial infrastructure (this is a sort of pie-in-the-sky ideal, but something like it could happen) - picture a cryptocurrency replacing the federal reserve, VISA, the european central bank, brick-and-mortar bank branches and credit unions (partially), etc. It couldn't replace everything, and new things would become necessary, but I think there is potential (even if small) for it to provide enormous value at least on the order of its energy consumption.
Traditional ways of doing all those things are faster and cheaper than blockchain.
Transaction clearing between banks isn't particularly fast, but that's because of legacy legal issues more than it is anything technological. The actual transfer of large sums can happen very quickly.
"If everyone agreed with me, there'd be no disagreement!"
Most of the things that crypto proponents tout as features (transaction irreverisibility, lack of inflation, etc.) are in fact bugs, and they just don't realize it because they don't realize how finance and economics actually work.
Tapping your watch and wondering "why isn't everyone using crypto already??" is never going to yield useful results, so you do actually need to address these issues.
>Most of the things that crypto proponents tout as features (transaction irreverisibility, lack of inflation, etc.) are in fact bugs, and they just don't realize it because they don't realize how finance and economics actually work.
These are not inherent features of cryptocurrencies, there are cryptos with reversible transactions and inflation.
> (transaction irreverisibility, lack of inflation, etc.) are in fact bugs
They weren't bugs for the thousands of years when gold was used.
> they don't realize how finance and economics actually work.
You probably mean the last 40 years of finance and economics, since our modern monetary system has really only been around since Nixon took the US off the gold standard after the US over spent due to the Vietnam war and Charles de Gaulle started to exchange his dollars for the quoted rates of gold.
Transactions with physical currency are reversible, just not easily so. And solid gold was rarely used as a day to day currency, so you would have an amalgam which was subject to inflation as the government either changed how much gold backed it, or phsycially reduced the amount of gold in the coin.
For thousands of years people used actual gold, especially countries moving money back and forth between them.
Inflation in its current form didn't really exist. The exchange rate for gold of a country's currency didn't change much, if at all. The dollar went from $20 per ounce, to $35 per ounce during FDR, then lost the vast majority of its value, getting us to over $1,300 per ounce that we have now.
Physical money requires the person giving it back physically. Crypto currencies have a chain of transactions, you can just send the balance back to one of the addresses it was sent from. There isn't much difference there.
I had a similar experience, and at an engineering university no less. The career center was very good if you were a mech/civil/elec engineer wanting to work for a big co, which was maybe 70-80% of undergrads, but that wasn't me. Very glad I turned down almost all their advice and stuck to my LaTeX resume.
If it's like corn in Iowa, yes, many just hold it and hope for the price to go up. It seems unreasonable, but commodity prices are just that low; selling at the wrong time can be worse for your bottom line than doing nothing. Especially since many farmers go into debt to pay for the initial costs of planting, fertilizing, ...
You tend to see a lot more corn in storage (occasionally this is just huge piles of corn covered with a tarp!) right after harvest time, precisely because that's when the prices are the lowest. There's a surprisingly big market for huge containers that are designed to store crops for long periods of time.
For instance, the effect was that Goldman lost money, while some other guys made money - what's the harm here ?
Moreover, the trade being busted, the guy that initially made the money, probably found himself in a very uncomfortable position, since chances are he already covered his risk and hedged the lucky trades. So overall, he lost money just because Goldman was able to force the rules in their favor.
Unfortunately, markets are rigged, just as most things -> the bigger you are, the more influence on the rules and how they are applied you have.
