I caught a cold in May.

How the hell do you catch a cold in May?

Good morning! Start every day with a smile and whatever else.

(2020 quote)

Hell, we used to take credit cards even when power or comms were down. Just take an imprint, the customer signs it. They get a copy, the store keeps a copy, a copy get mailed in for processing.

Carry cash you idiots.

(Context: there's a massive blackout in Spain and Portugal that has taken down card networks, among many other things)

no fuckin way, my cities casino is doing a bitcoin giveaway

it’s denominated in dollars but hey at least they’re trying 😂

And what would we do with the radioactive waste?

What are your main reasons to have second and third nsecs on Nostr?

Sometimes it matters what order you put things in. In the Faketoshi03 opposition, I failed to notice that the problem with the patent was not just that it wasn't novel or inventive, but that it was also fatally flawed because it had been amended badly.

The Opposition Division (OD) helped out with this when they raised an objection of added matter, which in the end was enough to kill the patent. The patentee has appealed the decision and is trying to get this overturned. This will, I expect, not work.

The problem comes down to how the features of claim 1 were ordered - as set out by the OD in their decision. Feature F1.6 has to come after F1.5 because you can't provide the further blockchain transaction if you haven't first searched for it.

We argued this in the opposition and objected that the claim was impossible to implement because the further transaction could not be provided if it was absent. The patentee then deleted the words "or absence" from F1.5, thereby admitting that this was the intended order.

This seems to have triggered the OD to look more closely at where the features all came from. Here are the original claims the patentee said provided basis for claim 1 of the patent: 1, 3, 6 and 7. See what the order is?

A plain reading results in the "monitoring or searching" step coming *after* the "providing a further blockchain transaction" step, contrary to how it was presented in claim 1 as granted, thereby adding matter. This was enough for the OD to find the patent invalid.

The patentee is now arguing on appeal that the order doesn't matter, even though they had made an amendment that depended on the order we argued for. In reply, we will be saying that they are wrong and that they are now trying to backtrack from their own admission.

This is another case that is going to take a while to resolve, possibly a couple of years, but it seems clear already where this is going.

When your censorship scheme is just a regex.

Accretion is the answer. If you study what MSTR has done, you can apply the same principle here. Every MSTR holder has more sats per share then yesterday, and the day before that, and so on and so on. Ask an AI about accretion to get there. Good luck :-)

Just because AI said it, doesn't make it true.

Just like podcasts

💪🏻

I’m not thinking in the short term, this is far out tech. If I had a profile and the AI knew my preferences - my seat position, mirrors, climate temp, radio station, map/route would all be set before I buckle my seatbelt. If AI self drive was statistically safer than human I would want that for my next 8-hour drive with the kiddos in the back.

As for the spying, bugs, hacks, errors - how is that any different from what we have now? You could create a hardened OS that could essentially run offline.

I’m not saying it should happen, but there’s a non-zero chance it could shift that way.

I prefer older cars without the modern tech. But society is moving in this direction. You don’t think someone will make FOSS that you can override the OEM spyware? I run my own server, why can’t my car have a local, self-contained version of the same?

What network card are you using?