You are correct on the initial model, and I wasn’t really clear.
I think there’s been a proliferation of the ledger beyond what the original design spec accounted for (exchanges) and it’s going to require an amount of horsepower to move currency at an escalating level, while also scalping more on the moves of that currency.
It’s easy to imagine a universe it’s the large holders financing the machines to avoid total collapse and propping up the ledger. What’s not is how parity comes to pass.
I dig Last Week Tonight but this segment, like most general current cryptocurrency outlooks, only focuses on the frauds. It's saying the crypto market is trash due to the scams. Sure, the scam aspects are infuriating as they generate negative connotations, but through due diligence in research the scams become vividly clear. The white papers for Bitcoin & Vechain are phenomenal. When comparing the white papers of Luna, Terra, Dogecoin or anything similar to BTC's or VET's, any investments made after seeing these differences are 100% on the investor.
yeah the over-emphasis of public hate which conflates the principles of cryptocurrency with the scammers, can only really benefit the existing financial power structures imo
unless i've misunderstood something...?
for sure the scammers need to be ridiculed, but scammers have been around probably since we lived in caves, if not earlier, so blaming crypto itself doesn't seem right.
It is not clear how much money Lapsus$ has made from its cyber-crimes. No companies publicly admitted paying the hackers and the hackers did not provide the passwords to seized cryptocurrency wallets.
They won’t provide the wallet passwords, that’s the key part.
He will remain at a secure hospital for life unless doctors deem him no longer a danger.
Is this even legal?
Despite having his laptop confiscated, Kurtaj managed to breach Rockstar, the company behind GTA, using an Amazon Firestick, his hotel TV and a mobile phone.
Well, that’s impressive, but I wouldn’t ever hack on closed-sourced stuff through the clearnet, now they have legal proof against them. That stuff logs everything.
Rockstar Games alone told the court that the hack cost it $5m to recover from plus thousands of hours of staff time.
$5m from what? For publishing footage of a video game?
The Amazon item is their storefront. They are the direct supplier.
About Seller
This seller account is the official Amazon account of SatoshiLabs s.r.o, the founder and manufacturer of the Trezor wallets.
I mean sure, maybe Amazon pays poor folk $16 an hour to open Trezor packages and install hacked firmware… I’ll reflash mine when I get it in my hands. Thanks for the heads-up.
Edit: I just got mine. This packaging is extremely tamper evident. They glue every seam. This has never been opened.
If I point a gun to your head and tell you to send me all your bitcoin, you will probably do so, and then you will call the police to tell them that I robbed you at gunpoint. The police will then arrest me and make me return the bitcoin to you that I stole. When you call the police after I stole your Bitcoin, are you trusting a centralized authority to decide whether or not the transaction was legitimate? After all, if I check the blockchain, the transaction seems perfectly fine.
Blur and OpenSea, the leading NFT marketplaces, both have measures in place to attempt to stop the sale of stolen NFTs. Should we trust these centralized platforms to decide whether or not a token should be tradable? Should we demand they abolish these theft protections in the name of decentralization?
As long as there exists a state with an authority on violence, Bitcoin being decentralized is a mere technicality. All power comes from the barrel of a gun. If the state wants to take your Bitcoin to pay for another war, they can do so regardless of what the code says by simply having the police knock on your door.
Do you want to abolish the state altogether? If you think all centralized authority is bad, what are your thoughts on the crypto space getting increasingly centralized? What do you think about Yuga Labs buying up other top NFT collections? Should they be allowed to do this and if no, who should stop them? How does Bitcoin solve any of the problems you outlined and do you really think that if the government hadn’t been able to print money, they wouldn’t have found another way to bail the banks out?
If I point a gun to your head and tell you to send me all your bitcoin, you will probably do so, and then you will call the police to tell them that I robbed you at gunpoint. The police will then arrest me and make me return the bitcoin to you that I stole. When you call the police after I stole your Bitcoin, are you trusting a centralized authority to decide whether or not the transaction was legitimate? After all, if I check the blockchain, the transaction seems perfectly fine.
Bitcoin can’t solve theft and has never claimed to. Neither can our existing banking system. Bitcoin can guarantee that money can only be in one place at a time. The only theft Bitcoin can solve is the theft of government’s inflating the money supply and reducing your dollar’s purchasing power. It can change the theft of irresponsiible central banks. That’s it. All a transaction on the blockchain tells you is that the person with that private key can own the money, it doesn’t establish who that person is or should be, the same way if you have $5 USD and spend it at a hot dog cart, the hot dog vendor has no way to know how you acquired that $5 or who the that $5 “should” belong to.
Blur and OpenSea, the leading NFT marketplaces, both have measures in place to attempt to stop the sale of stolen NFTs. Should we trust these centralized platforms to decide whether or not a token should be tradable? Should we demand they abolish these theft protections in the name of decentralization?
I have nothing nice to say about the NFT marketplace or any of the actors in it. NFTs are a joke. Interesting tech but in 99% of cases used for completely garbage purposes. And no, some random startup running a NFT website shouldn’t be in charge of your ownership of your coins or NFTs or anything. Like many things that are bad in crypto, people think Bitcoin = stupid monkey JPG NFTs = Ethereum = Dogecoin. They are all different things but they get painted with the same brush in the media unfortunately.
As long as there exists a state with an authority on violence, Bitcoin being decentralized is a mere technicality. All power comes from the barrel of a gun. If the state wants to take your Bitcoin to pay for another war, they can do so regardless of what the code says by simply having the police knock on your door.
It’s more nuanced than that but, sure. Bitcoin makes it a lot harder. A lot harder. It’s much easier to simply inflate the money supply and spend that money without people’s consent than round up people, point guns at them (or use some other, less direct form of coercion) and tell them to give up their Bitcoin. The state controls the banks, BTC puts you back in control of the economic power those banks hold. Ultimately, if the state asks the bank to turn over your funds, they will, you cannot control that. You can control whether or not to say “no”. If you stick to it, and they kill you, they still do not get your BTC. Let me ask you, if Putin had to send his goons door-to-door in Russia to collect funds for his invasion, don’t you think that reaction from people might be a little different than if Putin just turns on the money printer and slowly eats away the savings of his people? How might the vietnam war have gone differently if not only was there widespread opposition but the government had to double the tax rate or confiscate people’s BTC? Through a particular lens like this, BTC can be a tool for global peace. Wars of aggression are much harder to start without central banks backing them. It does not make war impossible, but it changes the rules of the game and the scales which can be tipped.
Do you want to abolish the state altogether?
No. The state has many important jobs which we currently cannot replicate any other better way like paying for common goods (roads schools etc), providing an imperfect but important check against runaway effects in the capitalist economy (market aggregation leading to monopoly, destruction of the environment for profit, etc). I hope humanity will continue to experiment with, iterate on, and improve what we think the state’s function is and how it should function, just as we should with money and our economy.
If you think all centralized authority is bad, what are your thoughts on the crypto space getting increasingly centralized?
It’s bad, I have no love for centralized digital currencies. Decentralization is key to cryptocurrency being something which enables access to democratic and open markets.
What do you think about Yuga Labs buying up other top NFT collections?
Haven’t heard about this and don’t care about it. NFTs are a joke.
How does Bitcoin solve any of the problems you outlined and do you really think that if the government hadn’t been able to print money, they wouldn’t have found another way to bail the banks out?
#1. I agree the bailouts were necessary given the circumstances. The way they were carried out wasn’t great for example bankers giving themselves massive bonuses with bailout money, but something had to be done to prevent the collapse of the banking system in insert_country_here. The question is how to we avoid getting into those circumstances in the future? Part of the answer is having hard currency. The second you start making promissory notes, lending, and especially allowing the private sector to be involved in lending, you will inevitably end up in situations where banks fail. So the central bank becomes their backstop. But what happens when the central bank fails? This happens. The reality is that anytime you have fractional reserve systems, you run the risk of a bank run. You can have the safest economic policy in the world as I would argue the US is generally seen as having, but there are economic shocks you simply cannot prepare for, and when those happen, you will have bank runs. With BTC, if you hold BTC, you don’t need to worry about that because nobody can print more to bail out unelected, irresponsible bankers for making decisions you had nothing to do with.
#2. If fiat and Bitcoin are to continue to co-exist, I imagine the government would still print their way out of the problem. Or perhaps they would raise taxes. Bitcoin isn’t concerned with how to solve the problems of other economic systems, it’s only concerned with providing a strong, robust currency which it has faithfully done for 15 years.
Thanks! My experience with both of these was that transactions would take time and would cost money. A friend showed me Bitcoin’s Lighting Network and that was an improvement. But being built as a layer on top of the original network is too complicated for my simple mind, and I think that there was a fee associated with the transfer too. I am looking for a project that uses a minimalistic approach without the bulk. It doesn’t have to be widely available.
Maybe things have improved with Bitcoin and Ethereum since I tried them. If a friend pays $10 for a pizza to share and I want to send him $5 right away, is it simple to do this with either Bitcoin or Ethereum? Or will it cost me an additional $2.5?
Also, if I want to pay for my groceries. Can I pay with either of these quickly and walk away, or would I need to stand by the payment terminal for 10 minutes until the transaction goes through?
I am thinking about the “ideal world” in which the specific tech is widely adopted. Obviously as it stands today you can’t pay with crypto at the grocery at all.
Thank you! So far, nano is the one that I find most appealing, and I have tested it in practice and it works very well! A worry I have with it is that it appears like the long-term success of the project depends largely on the few people who run the Nano Foundation. But it aligns well with what I want, and it is much more environmentally friendly than proof-of-work systems, so it is my top choice at the moment. But it has been a few years since I have looked at the coins, and I see that there are over 22,000 now! So if there are other more recent projects similar to nano I’d like to learn about them. Something similar nano but more community-driven, like Monero, would be ideal.
I haven’t used Dash, so I will get some and test out how it works in practice.
as for specific projects, LTC, BTC, XMR are all interesting because they hit various combinations of the above, with LTC being the most interesting to me.
I am looking for a fiat replacement, not an “investment”. I need that replacement to be simple, reliable and absolutely solid.
I rather say “Monero” even if I dislike this coin and the community for various reasons. I need to agree that the Monero role in the wide crypto landscape is quite unique at least for now.
There are more idealistic people in the community that technical. It is hard to discus technical blockchain things: consensus, state, contracts, zkp and how those could be useful for the further improvements of the protocol and the ecosystem. The development is slow as the result with a lack of community vision about the future of the protocol. The situation is slowly changes as the coin gains more popularity.
BTW @cypherpunks was right. Anyone can view the contract deployment transaction and see the value of secretNumber that was passed as an argument to the constructor.
As much as I enjoy dancing on NFT’s grave, I can’t say I’m thrilled about the fact that Musk’s tweets have this much sway. Well, he is about to own the platform, I suppose. But come on. Environmental harm? Nothing. Throwing money away for literally nothing? I sleep. Musk makes an off-the-cuff tweet about NFTs? EVERYBODY HOLD THE FUCKING PHONE. I hate how this world works sometimes.
crypto
Top
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.