And once you hit the <1 millisecond level, it's hard to even get reliable measurements, which makes compliance for "same time delivery" really really freaking hard.

Keep in mind, when you're talking about the nanosecond level, you're at the point where the length of cabling between the systems matters.

Sure, there's a lot of new tech coming out, especially with using GPS to synchronize clocks, but it's still a major issue.

So let's replace banks with... banks?

The overhead costs that bitcoin will save are just the wire transfer fees. Beyond that, there's still lawyer time, intermediary escrow fees, etc. Those will not change.

Uh, that's pretty much the definition of "unprofitable".

I like... air, instead.

The 1.5mm jack, on the other hand, is the standard audio connector for just about every consumer-grade device in the world. Not sure what the upside is for Apple, even with them owning Beats.

So no, it's not a good idea for more of it to be out there.

https://www.credit-suisse.com/us/en/

I fail to see the difference, other than the fact that you're doing it instead of those people.

The problem seems to stem(from a ruling last year linked here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7722956) from the fact that ANB didn't actually specify that the license was staying with it instead of getting sold as a packaged part of one of their subsidiaries.

For a core tech requirement, that's amazingly idiotic, no matter what size organization you're in.

Non-out GBLT people have problems with this stuff constantly, not only with Facebook screwing up and accidentally reveling information that was set to private, but with others publicly getting outed by well-meaning friends or family before they're ready to out themselves.

Again, the damage is done when the information is revealed. You have to remember, for a lot of people the stakes aren't just avoiding a pile of baby-related coupons and spam in their e-mail. It is literally life and death for some people. While yes, we can punish the release of the information, it does not stop the damage from happening when the information is released. We should have stricter privacy protections, but at the same time, we need to have a conversation about what privacy actually means, and what the risks are for revealing information to someone else.

The best way to remain private is to ensure that you don't tell anyone else the information you wish to be private at all.

But why would a privacy minded person even be willing to give third parties their information? Once it's out of your hands, it's out of your control. Forget the sale of information by Facebook or Twitter. What if they get hacked, and their entire database gets exposed to the world? You can't control that.

This is why, even before the internet, those who wanted complete privacy turned into literal hermits.

If one is truly concerned about privacy, they shouldn't make that information available at all. So no Facebook, Twitter, or use of Google services.

The problem is scale. 1 apartment getting rented on AirBnB probably isn't a problem for anyone at all. But if it's 1%? That's a significant reduction in available housing. Given that NYC already has a gigantic housing and real estate problem, anything that can conceivably compound the issue will get attention.

In this case, the data race is fairly minimal, since we're talking about a 4 byte integer being used as a boolean flag. Operations like x = 1 for 4 byte ints are pretty much guaranteed to be atomic with x86, and worst case, you go through 1 more iteration of your loop than you would have otherwise(which your code should account for at any rate with locking for critical sections). Any change to the int should cause the while loop to exit.

It should be a volatile(C pre C11) or atomic(C++11/C11) integer if you're passing it between threads, though.