https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diagonal_lemma#Proof

This proof consists of just 7 lines, but these 7 lines are considered to be fiendishly unreadable. The lemma itself says otherwise something very understandable and perfectly relatable:

logicSentence <-> prop(%logicSentence)

Meaning of the lemma: If prop(%s) is a predicate property of any logic sentence s, then there exists at least one true sentence for which this property is true and/or one false sentence for which it is false. The expression %logicSentence is the (numerical) description (encoded as a number) of the logicSentence. The remainder of Gödel's proof is just endless bureaucracy to establish completely precisely in/from what type of theory it occurs/can be derived.

If you leave out the bureaucracy, Gödel's first incompleteness theorem follows almost trivially from the lemma:

logicSentence <-> isNotProvable(%logicSentence)

Hence, according to the expression above, there exists at least one false sentence that is not isNotProvable (and is therefore provable) [a] or at least one true sentence that isNotProvable [b]. Hence, the theory in which this situation occurs is inconsistent [a] or incomplete [b].

Now, the bureaucracy in Gödel's full proof actually does matter, because his theorem holds for the Peano and Robinson formalizations of arithmetic theory but not for the Skolem and Presburger ones. The reasons for that can only be found in the bureaucracy of Gödel's proof.

We look down on godless individuals and we despise them. That is simply a non-negotiable part of our religious beliefs. So, whenever I get to deal with moral advice from the godless vermin, I just repeat the same remark all over again: We do not take lessons in morality from the godless vermin.

I usually work at the swimming pool of my condo here in SE Asia. I love taking swimming breaks. The other guys here at the pool do pretty much the same. These are the same people that I see at the gym when I work out. There are also a few retirees here who avoid cold winters in Canada. There's nothing lonely about my lifestyle. It is actually much better than working in an office.

Legal or illegal according to the laws in what jurisdiction? As international users, we obviously benefit from decisively reining in any American attempt at extraterritorial expansion. That is why, for example, we support the interdiction of American warships in the Black Sea (Russia) and the South Chinese Sea (China). I am waiting for the good news that either of these countries has finally sunk one of these vessels. That will be party time!

According to the article, "The Securities and Exchange Commission today sued Kik Interactive Inc", without clarifying in what jurisdiction they are suing them. It is about "the sale of one trillion digital tokens". It is therefore about the exchange of KIN tokens against other tokens such as BTC, ETH, USDT, or similar.

The KIN token is traded on 10+ different non-jurisdictional exchange platforms: https://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/kin/#markets

The American SEC cannot reasonably claim jurisdiction over the non-jurisdictional Ethereum platform, nor over any non-jurisdictional exchange platforms, because in that case, every country could do that too. If every country can do that, then no country can do that.

Why?

Well, in that case, KIK could trivially seek protection in North Korea or Russia, and prevent US enforcement by shielding under their nuclear umbrella.

Concerning KIK's marketing communications, it is not clear who exactly can regulate such messages: the country of message origination or the country of message destination.

We cannot allow US government departments to grab control over non-jurisdictional issues. That is absolutely not in the interest of international users. Therefore, it is necessary to encourage geopolitical adversaries of the USA to impede, thwart, and undermine any such attempt.

It may be necessary to formally prove that combined use does not introduce new vulnerabilities.

The phrase "What remains open for future work is checking for cross-protocol attacks", is quite ominous in this respect. For example, combined use could gradually leak private bits to the attacker. Therefore, the status of this combined use strategy is still the same as ever before: doubtful.

"Utilities like Telnet and remote control programs like Symantec's PC Anywhere let you execute programs on remote systems, but they can be a pain to set up and require that you install client software [%] on the remote systems that you wish to access. PsExec is a light-weight telnet-replacement that lets you execute processes on other systems, complete with full interactivity for console applications, without having to manually install client software [%]."

[%] They probably mean server software.

So, where is the server software itself documented? Is it started by default on each system? It seems to be some kind of poor man's version of SSH ...

Avoid jobs where it matters. A corporate drone cannot say what he wants, neither online, nor elsewhere, because the HR department could be watching. Ever since cashing out from my startup, I care even less about what any culturally-marxist corporate HR department may think about me.

> Reflect seriously on what problem to prioritise solving. I’ve spent a lot of time thinking about global health and animal welfare.

No, don't waste your time on problems that you cannot possibly solve by yourself. Work on stuff in which you can make a difference.

Mail: PO Box 2804, Grand Cayman KY1-1112 , Cayman Island.

I don't think anybody involved with the site has ever been to Grand Cayman. Apparently, they process 10 BTC/USDT transactions per minute; and that is just one of the hundred trading pairs.

Who can claim jurisdiction over that site? Maybe Grand Cayman, but when push comes to shove, I suspect that they won't be interested either.

What does it mean for an internet site to be situated somewhere? What country is that?

For example, http://dreadditevelidot.onion. Where is it situated? It does have an interesting discussion forum. It certainly has rules. Is it now supposed to appoint a liaison officer in Austria (and 200+ other jurisdictions)?

I am not going to name what obnoxious framework it is about, but I am waiting for another year or two before they unceremoniously abandon that stuff and start hyping the next Messiah framework.