Besides being used in jewellery, gold and silver have other practical applications, particularly gold.

It's used in electronics, aerospace and medicine among other fields. Industries are interested in buying gold for it's practical applications.

But by that definition cash is useless.

I'm not a cryptocurrency fan, but I don't think this is a good argument against it, anything people ascribe value to (however dumb one thinks it is) has.. value.

If I can swap a bitcoin for $20k then a bitcoin is just as useful as $20k.

Rice and beans have a hell of a lot more utility then silver and gold. The later definitely don't derive their value from utility.

Sure, but the price of gold doesn't really follow industry trends -- it's got more to do with the fact that it's a historical store of value / object of desire for the masses.

It's afford to rent not afford to own. There are people with full time jobs living out of cars.

I'm sure at 100k you can afford to rent a one room apartment.

Yes, of course. OK, renting is another story.

Americans use the word apartment as something that is rented. You don't buy an apartment, well unless you're a landlord. It's owned by somebody else.

I think the way you are using the word is our "condo", perhaps.

gilles.leblanc@gmail.com

Coyotes have only killed two people in North America in all of recorded history (and if you check recorded history for wolf attacks it goes back at least to the 1800s). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coyote_attacks_on_humans

A 3 year old child in 1981 and a 19 year old woman in 2009. Both victims were alone at the time of their attacks. Coyotes killing humans is an exceedingly rare occurrence.

Not that it provides much statistical evidence, but the wikipedia[0] article (regarding the 19 year old girl) talking about the coyotes specifically mentions how coyotes didn't use to be in that area of Canada, but were likely there as a result of rapid adaptive evolution[1].

Obviously that doesn't statistically show that they're getting more aggressive, but it's not something you can easily ignore either, given the lack of other coyote attacks.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taylor_Mitchell

[1] http://rsbl.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/early/2009/09...

You cannot make sense of an emerging phenomenon by looking at century old records of superficially similar phenomena.

The 3 year old case sounds like an outlier, regular coyotes getting at an unprotected child.

The case of the 19 year old may be the canary on the coal mine. A fully grown adult should have scared off the coyotes, but that's not how it happened. We should be asking what was different in this case and why the expectations were not met.

I don't see how you can call 1 case an emerging phenomenon. More over that there haven't been any other cases since.

I don't think we should be afraid, as the OP mentioned, of coyotes stalking our children in the parks because of one isolated incident.

> I don't see how you can call 1 case an emerging phenomenon. More over that there haven't been any other cases since.

It is really easy, you start with one model of reality, then a piece of evidence comes that does not seem to fit the model.

The first step is to formulate hypothesis that explain that gap between the theory and the practice. Normally, the next step would involve gathering evidence that disproofs each hypothesis, and whichever you cannot disproof, it is the real explanation (which either will confirm your model or provide raw material to refine). Since I have no strong incentive to investigate this particular cases, I will just let be.

However, what I pointed out in my first comment is this: If you brush under the carpet every piece of evidence that do not seem to fit your model, you will end up with a broken model and a very bumpy carpet.

> you start with one model of reality, then a piece of evidence comes that does not seem to fit the model

This is not emergence of a new phenomenon, this is an outlier[0]. There are always outliers. Claiming that a new phenomenon is emerging necessarily implies multiple data points to distinguish it from isolated statistical anomalies, which will otherwise be regarded as simple outliers caused by factors isolated to that incident.

There's an important difference between "brushing under the carpet evidence that does not seem to fit your model" and simply regarding such evidence, tentatively and in the short term, as an expected statistical anomaly until there is sufficient data to recognize a trend. There is no trend here, and until there is, it is completely reasonable to treat isolated incidents as outliers.

0: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outlier

These coywolves are twice as big (by mass) as a coyote. It would make them much more dangerous, I'd say.

I think that's the point, these are more dangerous than the Coyotes of yore.

Of course. When you're dressed properly you can go out and enjoy yourself every day of the year.

I live in Canada and I like the rainy days of autumn and the cold days of winter. I feel like I have the trails almost to myself... and sometimes I do :)

I have made some small contributions or tried to, to some open source projects in the past and I must say, Servo has been the most welcoming and most beginner friendly. The team has clearly made it a priority and it shows.

Personally for me the hardest part has been finding easy issues. While the Servo team does a great job of creating them, there's a lot of people vying for them. And then, even harder, progressing from these to bigger harder issues, which is where I'm still at.

It's a real challenge keeping those good first issues (https://github.com/servo/servo/labels/E-easy ) around! It seems like no matter how many we make, they're claimed within a day or two and fixed within a week. Hopefully, as you and others progress to bigger and harder issues, you'll be able to help us open some more of those good first ones :-)

That is overall what I have found in the Rust community. Everyone is always helpful and the community is very welcoming. This is good for Rust lang, as by its self, is not the most noob friendly.

Nice to hear :)

I'm actually working on making rustc easier to contribute to. It's already not very hard to work on (you don't need to submit groundbreaking patches to borrowck for a first bug, plenty of easier things to work on!), but the framework that helps newcomers ease into contribution needs work.

https://users.rust-lang.org/t/mentoring-newcomers-to-the-rus...

(Currently I'm cleaning up the easy issues list and adding hints/pointers to the questions)

If you have any specific feedback, I'd love to hear it!

Makes me think of those binary clocks which are made up of columns of leds. A friend of mine has had one of those for years.

Hard to tell the time at first but it's surprising how fast you can learn to read the time reasonably fast.

Shouldn't he rather be playing with his friends doing normal stuff 10 years old do.

He's gonna be able to do this kind of work for decades starting in his twenties. What he won't be able to do his reclaim his lost childhood years.

Shouldn't he do whatever he likes?

You don't have kids do you?

Thanks!

As for the link, I hadn't checked back the new submissions. I'll go over it.

If you do create and android version let us know. I would be interested in using this on android.