I live in Magnolia (Briarcliff), and the claim that this is about bridge capacity is nonsense. It's about poor people being in a wealthy neighborhood, nothing less and nothing more.
It would added 200 households, who would live primarily in townhomes and apartments, into an area that has roughly 9,500 households, the majority of whom live in single family residences. This is not going to make a noticeable change to our commutes.
I agree we need to invest in infrastructure for Magnolia, but that problem is orthogonal to this development.
I've divested from oil companies, not because I think it will change corporate governance at XOM or BP, but because I like to buy things that I can hold for a decade or three, without thinking too hard about them.
I don't want to spend my time thinking about when, precisely, XOM and BP will have peaked. I'd rather just get rid of them and free up that mental space to concentrate on what's next in the world of energy generation, storage, and transmission.
For most people that's the wrong question. If you have capital that can be applied to long term resolute ideals you likely don't have to worry about capital in general. We all know fossil fuels have have an expiration date. We can easily state that money invested in building next generation power acquisition, delivery and storage will displace them. But again, you need a stack of chips to play.
This is a good idea, unfortunately when it comes to investment it is not enough for a company to be in the right track. It also needs to dominate the market, which is more difficult. For example, lots of companies were created in the Internet bubble, but only a few survived and came to dominate the market.
I disagree, because historically major cryptos have allowed known attacks to succeed if they targeted a member of the public at large, and have defended only if they targeted named insiders.
The expectation, at this point, is that defense will only occur if you are an elite insider. An unknown user may or may not be such an elite, and thus may or may not get defense.
> I disagree, because historically major cryptos have allowed known attacks to succeed if they targeted a member of the public at large, and have defended only if they targeted named insiders.
Surely you aren't going to make such a statement without examples! I can think of examples where things were attacked, including some of the largest value destructions, and insider status didn't help. For example, the multisig thing that happened to Gav Wood (the second time).
If your lone example is the Dao attack, that looked like successful governance to me.
The astounding, insane decision to use "libraries" aka delegate call in any immutable smart contract always boggled my mind. The amount of space saved is so ludicrously small as to beggar belief. Hope the 10k or whatever worth of space savings (about 20 transactions worth) was worth it.
Anyway, he didn't get a roll back, and the $200m in value that disappeared didn't either.
Well he's not a US citizen and unless he's insane, his corporations are offshored in a 0% domocile. It's really only a problem for Americans; everyone else who has their shit together can stick their corporate shell on Cayman or whatever.
It would added 200 households, who would live primarily in townhomes and apartments, into an area that has roughly 9,500 households, the majority of whom live in single family residences. This is not going to make a noticeable change to our commutes.
I agree we need to invest in infrastructure for Magnolia, but that problem is orthogonal to this development.