What's absurd is this crypto maximalist take.
You can't just make up your own permission and punishment system, and then expect the legal system to just step aside and let it handle all disputes, especially when it comes to fraud. That's like founding your own city in an existing country, and declaring all existing law obsolete. I know some people think this is a real possibility, but the real world doesn't work like that.
IANAL and all, but bad/unfavorable contracts and literal deception/fraud are two different things, at least in the legal system. Not everything that's technically possible is also allowed, obviously.
Compare it to using a security flaw to hack into a system. Technically you're only using the official API, maybe in unusual ways, but still. But you're doing it in bad faith and causing harm, maybe pretending to be someone you're not or injecting fake data into the system, and that can make a difference.
It's not. They tricked some MEV-Boost bots into doing bad trades.
Here is a more detailed explanation of the exploit.
The Pepaire-Bueno brothers exploited a bug in MEV-boost's code that allowed them to preview the content of blocks before they were officially delivered to validators, according to the indictment.
The brothers created 16 Ethereum validators and targeted three specific traders who operated MEV bots, the indictment said. They used bait transactions to figure out how those bots traded, lured the bots to one of their validators which was validating a new block and basically tricked these bots into proposing certain transactions. [...]
So hardly an attack on any core system of cryptocurrencies.
Why stop half way? All you need is a benevolent dictator, shouldn't be too hard to find, right?
Some of these points are good, some are just absurd. Letting "the state" handle everything and hold all the cards, and then actually believing that it won't be coerced and corrupted or that there won't be strong disagreements about how to handle things is just delusional and wishful thinking on a grand scale imo.
I agree that most modern countries need to strenghen the public sector, but you still need checks and balances between powers, individual responsibilities and freedoms, real-world economic feedback and incentives, and so on.
I hope at that point we have enough capable alternatives. Like, hopefully around the time they add ads is also the time when open-source models and apps have caught up again.
You have to provide the user, group and file name as the next three guesses, just trust me!
They could just choose someone to send to the debate, doesn't have to be a candidate for the presidency.
I'm no fan of the right, but some of the rules only exist to prevent smaller alternatives from getting traction, especially in the media.
It's a group therapy called !linux@lemmy.ml, we always have free seats!
If you have an always-on-and-connected device then you can self-host their bridges. It preserves e2ee because messages are de- and reencrypted on your device, and it's relatively easy to set up.
It can be a bit annoying sometimes, but there are solutions for almost anything, like alternative clients and frontends. I also think it's important to remember that this is not an all-or-nothing situation. Every little bit of privacy you can preserve helps, even if you still have to use their services sometimes.
If your example is mostly about chat then Beeper might be a good option for you. The messages on FB and IG would still go through Meta, but at least you don't have to install their apps.
Yea, it's pretty easy if you already have a server. All you need to do is run a docker container, and change the identity.sync.tokenserver.uri setting in about:config. On mobile you have to enable the debug mode by going to "Settings > About Firefox" and tapping the Firefox logo a few times, then go to the new "Sync Debug" settings entry.
The container above only runs the sync-server though, you still have to log into a Mozilla account to use it. There is a replacement that includes the whole stack, but I haven't tried that one yet.
It's hard to overstate what a nothing-burger this article really is! Let me break it down:
- Signal got $3 million from the Open Technology Fund at some point in its development
- Some anonymous source alleges that the OTF's ultimate goal is to promote US foreign interests
- The current chairman of the board Katherine Maher worked at the National Democratic Institute and Wikipedia before
- The same anonymous source says she was recruited because of connections to the OTF
- She has at some point voiced the opinion that a completely free internet without regulation just reproduces existing power structures, and that balancing regulation and 1st amendment rights is a tough problem
- Signal doesn't have reproducible builds on iOS (it absolutely does on Android btw)
- Some people feel like Signal chats come up more often than they should in court cases and media reports
That's it, that's the whole story. That's the reason why the Telegram guy of all people thinks you should be careful, and better use his chat service instead, and the Twitter guy agrees.
I mean, reproducible builds on iOS would be nice, but that platform has much bigger problems from a privacy/security/sovereignty/freedom standpoint anyway. And the rest is just nothing turned up to 11.
Yep. It's e2e encrypted, and you can even self-host the sync server, if you don't want to rely on an external service. Pretty much a no-brainer.
Just a heads up, trying to buy Uranium for the reactor on Ebay will get you in trouble real fast, so be careful!
I think some of the arguments are quite flawed. Bitcoin itself has most of the properties it is said to have, but it lives in a world that doesn't and so some only really apply if you manage to stay inside the system. Like, your Signal chats are private as long as you don't copy-paste them to Facebook.
Regarding self-custody/decentralization and using custodial services: The problem here is not that those properties don't apply to Bitcoin, but that some people just choose to give away control over their wallets or not use Bitcoin itself for certain transactions. Can't blame that on the currency, unless you think it can't be done any other way.
Regarding privacy: I don't think any serious "Bitcoiner" advertises Bitcoin as private. The message has always been that it's "pseudonymous", that you have to take extra steps in order to make it anonymous, and that it's transparent instead of private by design.
Regarding transparency/inclusion: These paragraphs actually argue about privacy again. One is trying to spin the existing transparency into a negative, which is a valid opinion but not something "Bitcoiners" are wrong about. The other circles back to the idea of staying inside the system. Bitcoin transactions are inclusive, but ofc you can still get into trouble if you have to fear external repercussions and can't stay anonymous.
The reason the Jedi use prosthetics to train is because live lightsabers are so good.
Debrid services are usually cheaper (as low as $2.5/month), but you're limited to public trackers with them.
So I know what AC3 means of course, but what does AC3D mean in some releases?
