> It's always a rope held by someone, whether honestly or not, whether accountable or not.
In a free market, that person is yourself.
> You're welcome to your choice, just don't get in the way of mine. I'm tired of do-gooders telling me my choices are wrong, my culture is wrong and my philosophy of efficient, compassionate, cooperative societies is wrong.
You have it backwards; They are not trying to get int the way of your method. The free market is all voluntary, and you can opt out of any thing any time you want. You go go off and make voluntary communes all you like. All we ask is to be left alone to do our thing.
But you know communes dont work. Almost nobody wants to participate, and those that do dont achieve much. So you know it cannot be voluntary. You know that your system requires universal theft and prohibition. You are the one who wants to interfere in other peoples freedom.
> that's naive because it's only looking at one transaction.
How many fraud transactions can you float? each one you add has a fixed cost, and if the fraud is detected or blocked you could also lose your funds forever.
> that's naive because it's only looking at one transaction. If the fraud keeps adding new transactions every epoch of the bitcoin processing then they increase their potential winnings by 10 also. So the ratio of win versus cost to win stays the same
This doesnt stack; if your attack is based on a six confirmation release of funds then all of your pending attacks with 5 or fewer fail.
so you have to undo at least R-1 blocks at cost with no benefit to yourself, depending on the nature of the victims. You also have to overcome any withdraw limits and IDV or else you can end up with a pure loss. Generally there are not many easy targets.
In the mean time; all new transactions add to the attack cost of all new ones, which means your ante-up for this attack is about 1.5 billion dollars, with no guarantee of success.
Unless you can control more than half of mining, prevent exchange security measures, avoid identification, and float enough funds at risk to make this all worthwhile, then its simply too risky and low return. And if you have that much money why bother ?
> but All cryptocurrencies based on "proof of work" are doomed.
That would be all cryptocurrencies. PoS has been proven to be equivalent and inferior to PoW.
> adjust the cost of doing that so that the amount of money being transacted is always less than the cost someone wold incur for confidently performing a 51% attack.
Lol, you need to re-read the white paper. Look for the math on "confirmations".
Its very routine to transact amount far in excess of the transaction fees and block rewards. but each subsequent transaction set contributes to the security of past ones, cumulatively. so you assertion is flat wrong.
> I can now look at all transactions with that wallet and see what you did.
What is a "wallet" in your mind? Do you realize that there is no such thing as a "wallet" on the public part of the blockchain ?
There is no way to start from a single address and determine which other addresses belong to a wallet or not.
Modern wallet software will not re-use any addresses, so its generally not possible to determine much of anything much else about the person or wallet beyond that one single address.
There are forensic tools which attempt to do so; but they only work on older wallets or other decrepit cases.
You are flat out wrong, and should retract your dis-informational posts.
People who shit on javascript are nearly universally poor programmers, its almost a reliable indicator.
All languages have quirks and foibles; but javascript is an amazingly flexible and powerful little language. Its as near a perfect unification of LISP and C++ as you could ask for, all wrapped up in a beautiful async event loop.
Small businesses are still subject to price fixing ; which is one of the main reasons why farmers no longer farm much. This is pretty much a defacto nationalization of all businesses because they cannot effectively operate.
They are also subject to random spot taxes by local officials and military, and paramilitary gangs working for the government.
In short - there is little incentive to work beyond subsistence unless you can hide your wealth.
If you can set a business prices, control all its inputs, and loot it at will, you "own" it for all intents and purposes.
> So you're saying "that's not REAL capitalism!"?:-)
No, that is not what he is saying.
He's saying its not pure free market capitalism. The USA is a mix of capitalism with other non-capitalist ideas mixed in.
No country is a perfect elemental version of any ideology.
Venezuela was far less capitalist and a lot more socialist than the USA. You can easily see how the closer one gets to socialism, the worse the results.
The USA still has some problems, and those we would ascribe to the USA being somewhat socialist.
The more capitalist a country is, the better off they seem to be. So naturally, to fix the problems remaining in the USA, we should try even more capitalism.
Do you really think its completely impossible for any place, any country, and society at all to escape poverty unless they can trade directly with the united states?
If uncle same averts his gaze from you and shuns you, do you fall into the stone age, and build a prison island wherein it is illegal to escape or complain about the conditions?
Maybe, just maybe trading with the vast majority of the world, even receiving massive subsidies from friendly countries, should be more than enough for any nation to succeed or fail on its own merit.
I always feel dirty when paying for copyright content - which I would only do because it is massively easier, convenient, higher quality, and very cheap. But I always feel like a sellout - supporting the cesspit of holly wood and their advertisers and propagandists. Not supporting the pirates, and providing some torrent hosting makes you feel bad that you arent helping good people out. Being forced back to piracy at least you know you are being more morally pure even if it is a hassle.
> Point being Toys R Us didn't die, it was murdered.
No, it died. The writing was on the wall for a long time.
The leveraged buyout was just a way to accelerate the inevitable. When you have access to massive debt creation tools, you can play games like that. What they did is create a bunch of money in order to jump the line of debtors and suck the marrow from the bones of the dying beast before it hit the ground. The real losers are the debtors who were not in on the game.
When it became obvious that the outlook was bleak, suppliers should have demanded better terms or even Net0 payments. ToysRUs defacto creditworthiness had defacto dropped to zero, and some sharks smelled the blood in the water first.
In a post-dollar economy, this might not be possible
> Now the EPA came along and suddenly you have to pay fro proper disposal. Your company is less profitable. The small guys, the ones most likely to running on the edges with little profit now become unprofitable.
Slight adjustment there: The EPA has no problem shielding companies like BP from hundreds of billions in pollution lawsuits, such as wrecking the entire gulf of mexico.
The EPA working as designed to protect he big polluters from competition.
If you actually cared about pollution, it would not be solved via regulation but by liability.
Regulations increase pollution and reduce competition.
> Node.JS isn't as good at being a microservice as any of the other options.
Strange, I have written microservics and orchestration layers in go, java, perl, python, js, c++, vanilla c, and even bash. Node seems to be the fastest and best by a wide margin. Hell, half the work of a typical c++ microservice feels like reimplementing a good chunk of node.js's core anyway.
All the important bits of a js microservice are hardware optimized or written in c++. So stitching the app logic together in node.js gives you a daemon which outperforms java and python by a mile. The only time I resort to go is when i need a very small docker image for a special purpose service. otherwise, I cant see not doing node. (with the exception of very stable super performance critical daemons, then back to C++)
I like many languages, but I think you are being a bit biased in your opinion. If it was so terrible, wy the hell is it being adopted at such a breakneck speed anyway ?
Is not 100% test coverage a good thing anyway? I go for that in any serious non toy project. Its not even particularly hard to do if you keep things modular.
Slashdot Mirror
They rolled their own custom elliptic curve, amateurishly.
They have mandatory support for weak/broken RSA modes.
https://paragonie.com/blog/201...
> It's always a rope held by someone, whether honestly or not, whether accountable or not.
In a free market, that person is yourself.
> You're welcome to your choice, just don't get in the way of mine. I'm tired of do-gooders telling me my choices are wrong, my culture is wrong and my philosophy of efficient, compassionate, cooperative societies is wrong.
You have it backwards; They are not trying to get int the way of your method. The free market is all voluntary, and you can opt out of any thing any time you want. You go go off and make voluntary communes all you like. All we ask is to be left alone to do our thing.
But you know communes dont work. Almost nobody wants to participate, and those that do dont achieve much. So you know it cannot be voluntary. You know that your system requires universal theft and prohibition. You are the one who wants to interfere in other peoples freedom.
Check yourself.
> that's naive because it's only looking at one transaction.
How many fraud transactions can you float? each one you add has a fixed cost, and if the fraud is detected or blocked you could also lose your funds forever.
> that's naive because it's only looking at one transaction. If the fraud keeps adding new transactions every epoch of the bitcoin processing then they increase their potential winnings by 10 also. So the ratio of win versus cost to win stays the same
This doesnt stack; if your attack is based on a six confirmation release of funds then all of your pending attacks with 5 or fewer fail.
so you have to undo at least R-1 blocks at cost with no benefit to yourself, depending on the nature of the victims. You also have to overcome any withdraw limits and IDV or else you can end up with a pure loss. Generally there are not many easy targets.
In the mean time; all new transactions add to the attack cost of all new ones, which means your ante-up for this attack is about 1.5 billion dollars, with no guarantee of success.
Unless you can control more than half of mining, prevent exchange security measures, avoid identification, and float enough funds at risk to make this all worthwhile, then its simply too risky and low return. And if you have that much money why bother ?
> but All cryptocurrencies based on "proof of work" are doomed.
That would be all cryptocurrencies. PoS has been proven to be equivalent and inferior to PoW.
> adjust the cost of doing that so that the amount of money being transacted is always less than the cost someone wold incur for confidently performing a 51% attack.
Lol, you need to re-read the white paper. Look for the math on "confirmations".
Its very routine to transact amount far in excess of the transaction fees and block rewards. but each subsequent transaction set contributes to the security of past ones, cumulatively. so you assertion is flat wrong.
> I can now look at all transactions with that wallet and see what you did.
What is a "wallet" in your mind? Do you realize that there is no such thing as a "wallet" on the public part of the blockchain ?
There is no way to start from a single address and determine which other addresses belong to a wallet or not.
Modern wallet software will not re-use any addresses, so its generally not possible to determine much of anything much else about the person or wallet beyond that one single address.
There are forensic tools which attempt to do so; but they only work on older wallets or other decrepit cases.
You are flat out wrong, and should retract your dis-informational posts.
why do you think a single transaction tells you much about past ones?
If you dont know how bitcoin works; why post nonsense?
Hint: it doesnt work that way
People who shit on javascript are nearly universally poor programmers, its almost a reliable indicator.
All languages have quirks and foibles; but javascript is an amazingly flexible and powerful little language. Its as near a perfect unification of LISP and C++ as you could ask for, all wrapped up in a beautiful async event loop.
This is likely just a fairly amateurish security protocol implementation sold at inflated prices to people flush with cash.
Its really not all that hard to do secure communications... if actual criminals used something called "ironchat" they deserve what they got.
photons could be gravitationally attracted to matter and gravitationally repelled from anti-matter.
that would leave things symmetric.
Small businesses are still subject to price fixing ; which is one of the main reasons why farmers no longer farm much. This is pretty much a defacto nationalization of all businesses because they cannot effectively operate.
They are also subject to random spot taxes by local officials and military, and paramilitary gangs working for the government.
In short - there is little incentive to work beyond subsistence unless you can hide your wealth.
If you can set a business prices, control all its inputs, and loot it at will, you "own" it for all intents and purposes.
marx defined communism as a single monopoly on all things economic and political. The USSR achieved that.
> So you're saying "that's not REAL capitalism!"? :-)
No, that is not what he is saying.
He's saying its not pure free market capitalism. The USA is a mix of capitalism with other non-capitalist ideas mixed in.
No country is a perfect elemental version of any ideology.
Venezuela was far less capitalist and a lot more socialist than the USA. You can easily see how the closer one gets to socialism, the worse the results.
The USA still has some problems, and those we would ascribe to the USA being somewhat socialist.
The more capitalist a country is, the better off they seem to be. So naturally, to fix the problems remaining in the USA, we should try even more capitalism.
> Most likely, the intelligence agencies of a hostile foreign government swayed the outcome of our presidential election. How is that not a big deal?
You mean a hostile domestic government.
C.T.R/ share/blue are doing exactly what you suggest, and the legacy media and social media are all in on it.
This whole russia excuse is a laugh a minute when you can see actual americans being silenced every day.
> Having people pay for security that should always be present is essentially extortion.
Why? That doesnt do much in the big picture.
How about: never treat control of a phone number as a security factor?
There are so many good ways to do second factor auth; a legacy phone line account should never be a part of the mix.
Ive tried to use it but could never stay interested... I suspect they are dropping it because noone uses it. RSS seems to by dying as a technology.
Do you really think its completely impossible for any place, any country, and society at all to escape poverty unless they can trade directly with the united states?
If uncle same averts his gaze from you and shuns you, do you fall into the stone age, and build a prison island wherein it is illegal to escape or complain about the conditions?
Maybe, just maybe trading with the vast majority of the world, even receiving massive subsidies from friendly countries, should be more than enough for any nation to succeed or fail on its own merit.
Once again, socialism only has itself to blame.
I always feel dirty when paying for copyright content - which I would only do because it is massively easier, convenient, higher quality, and very cheap. But I always feel like a sellout - supporting the cesspit of holly wood and their advertisers and propagandists. Not supporting the pirates, and providing some torrent hosting makes you feel bad that you arent helping good people out. Being forced back to piracy at least you know you are being more morally pure even if it is a hassle.
> Point being Toys R Us didn't die, it was murdered.
No, it died. The writing was on the wall for a long time.
The leveraged buyout was just a way to accelerate the inevitable. When you have access to massive debt creation tools, you can play games like that. What they did is create a bunch of money in order to jump the line of debtors and suck the marrow from the bones of the dying beast before it hit the ground. The real losers are the debtors who were not in on the game.
When it became obvious that the outlook was bleak, suppliers should have demanded better terms or even Net0 payments. ToysRUs defacto creditworthiness had defacto dropped to zero, and some sharks smelled the blood in the water first.
In a post-dollar economy, this might not be possible
> Creating jobs for the sake of jobs is a horrible reason. Basic income.
Let me complete that last sentence: "Basic income ... can never work."
Dont push for a doomsday policy that can only end in disaster.
Jobs will take care of themselves. Neo luddism is lame, uneducated, and dangerous.
> We've built a civilization around the notion that if you don't work you don't eat and we're about to run out of work.
This is the same old idiotic luddism that sent people into a panic over the cotton gin.
Newsflash: it doesnt work that way.
> Now the EPA came along and suddenly you have to pay fro proper disposal. Your company is less profitable. The small guys, the ones most likely to running on the edges with little profit now become unprofitable.
Slight adjustment there: The EPA has no problem shielding companies like BP from hundreds of billions in pollution lawsuits, such as wrecking the entire gulf of mexico.
The EPA working as designed to protect he big polluters from competition.
If you actually cared about pollution, it would not be solved via regulation but by liability.
Regulations increase pollution and reduce competition.
> Node.JS isn't as good at being a microservice as any of the other options.
Strange, I have written microservics and orchestration layers in go, java, perl, python, js, c++, vanilla c, and even bash. Node seems to be the fastest and best by a wide margin. Hell, half the work of a typical c++ microservice feels like reimplementing a good chunk of node.js's core anyway.
All the important bits of a js microservice are hardware optimized or written in c++. So stitching the app logic together in node.js gives you a daemon which outperforms java and python by a mile. The only time I resort to go is when i need a very small docker image for a special purpose service. otherwise, I cant see not doing node. (with the exception of very stable super performance critical daemons, then back to C++)
I like many languages, but I think you are being a bit biased in your opinion. If it was so terrible, wy the hell is it being adopted at such a breakneck speed anyway ?
you can get near 100% line, function coverage with hardly any effort. You can also get very decent branch coverage without much more.
If you keep things modular, and keep a strict rule of not importing other code beyond the absolutely necessary, its really not hard at all.
When I find someone's project has trouble keeping up with unit test coverage, the diagnosis is usually spaghetti.
Is not 100% test coverage a good thing anyway? I go for that in any serious non toy project. Its not even particularly hard to do if you keep things modular.
How can uber not set your fares? Do contractors decide how much they want to be paid each day in the UK ?
Today, my salary will be one million quids!