>working bid/ask spread when factories buy or sell on the market to make pricing dynamic and realistic
Does it deliver on the "realistic" part? My experience with most models is they make something that technically fulfills the ask, but often in a way that doesn't really capture my intent (this is with regular Claude Code though).
Yep, garbage in garbage out, I had some additional specs beyond the summary above, everything requires refinement as well, but honestly I never thought I was going to have a simcity/civlike clone in a couple weekends that's reasonably playable.
>The point of Bitcoin is to avoid exactly that sort of trust relationship, otherwise use the banking system.
Most participants don't care about this. For almost everyone, the point of Bitcoin is to go up. As long as they can find enough buyers that also believe it will go up, the rest is optional. Especially if it's temporary, for a one-time migration.
In practice, what you really need is consensus. As long as enough of the important participants agree, that's how it will be.
And since there are millions of identical copies of the entire pre-attack ledger out there, this should not be that difficult.
Potential future buyers might reevaluate whether this whole thing has any monetary value, but that's a separate concern. Bitcoin's market value was never about the technical details.
I'm not sure you fully grasped what was said in the parent comment. It literally does not matter anymore if we can all agree on the previous blocks, it would be impossible to identify who owns which wallet anymore. The seed phrase would be useless.
Ah, then yeah, in that case, it'd be basically over.
Maybe large exchanges would try to step in to make a fresh chain based on their combined account data, and just drop the people relying on self-custody. But I doubt the market would go for it - the uncertainty would crash it hard enough that it would never recover.
Yeah, it makes it sound like your attention is given as an act of charity. A lot of online discourse tends to be very "creator-first" framed, rather than "audience-first".
"Local history" is a very popular feature in the JetBrains IDEs (just search HN comments), and I remember similar tools appearing on HN several times in the past (for example https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29784238), so clearly there is demand for such functionality (or at least was in the past, when almost all code edits were manual).
I think the problem with such places is, they just become a dump for self-promotion by people who otherwise don't participate at all. The opposite of an actual community. That's why even reddit used to have a 10-to-1 rule of thumb about posts like that (which would be very easily gamed today).
Yeah, I think you're right. Asking people to give feedback and contribute instead of just self-promoting is like expecting everyone to maintain a 1:1 torrent ratio - it's just not gonna happen.
Yeah, but that's not the same, as most readers will just skip over that. What I said is more similar to HN's monthly "who's hiring" threads or "what are you working on" threads. Like https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46937696. I find those much more interesting.
Even if you trust the intentions of whoever you're giving your data to, you may not trust their ability to keep it safe from data breaches. Those happen all the time.
Does it deliver on the "realistic" part? My experience with most models is they make something that technically fulfills the ask, but often in a way that doesn't really capture my intent (this is with regular Claude Code though).