Token Daily

This is the first innovative service in lightning space i have seen for a long time. Great job for making the vision one step closer to realization!

2

PanneKopp 1 week ago

sorry, I still do not get why I should ty up some funds in LN just to receive a payment - this is completely the opposite of what Bitcoin was meant to be

1

VillaCaruso Redditor for less than 30 days 1 week ago

LN is bank 3.0, stop shilling this crap pls.

1

Danny1878 1 week ago

Would this work for merchants too who want to accept lightning payments? If channels are just opened up on the fly as required, it should work right? Or is there a limit on the amount of channels etc?

1

king-only 1 week ago

It works in POS mode as well...

2

Leithm 1 week ago

There is nothing wrong with lightning in principle. There is plenty wrong with a 1mb block size cap.

I think there is about 1,000 times as much crypto locked into the defi network if I am not mistaken?

3

3andahalfacres Redditor for less than 30 days 1 week ago

> There is nothing wrong with lightning in principle. um what? - Can't send money to someone who's offline like Bitcoin can. That's a regression in features. - Isn't backed by Bitcoin's record hashrate. That's why they're working on 3rd party watchtower services to watch over your money. So you're sacrificing security for low fees. - Has send limits based on your peers send capacity. /u/N0tMyRealAcct just found out the service he's shilling is capped to $450 - Merchants need to continously topoff their side of the channel... just to be able to keep receiving payments. Does that sound how you use money today? If not it's a regression. the list goes on. Lightning is literally a regression to Bitcoin's feature in every way AND you sacrifice onchain security for low fees. What a joke.

6

N0tMyRealAcct 1 week ago

u/leithm, beware of this user. He is intentionally trolling I believe and ruining any productive discussions in here with aggressive statements. Not interested in discussions at all. Only suppressing.

0

3andahalfacres Redditor for less than 30 days 1 week ago

no one falls for your lies. Here's /u/N0tMyRealAcct getting caught lying twice in the same claim then dropping the conversation when caught lying: https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/jbh8yf/bitcoin_cash_as_the_world_currency_what_it_takes/g9cwkac/ Did anyone in this thread fall for your lies?

1

N0tMyRealAcct 1 week ago

I dropped the discussion because you are nasty and are intentionally trying to misunderstand. Note to others, I’m willing to continue the discussion with you in the thread he linked to. I’m just avoiding this guy from now on.

1

3andahalfacres Redditor for less than 30 days 1 week ago

> I dropped the discussion because you are nasty and are intentionally trying to misunderstand. that's a lie: /u/N0tMyRealAcct summary of lies so far: - Bitcoin average blocksize is 1.2MB NOT 2.1MB - Channel factories might save anywhere between 55% - 90% in blocksize, NOT your claimed 96%. And to get a 90% channel savings you'd literally need to open hundreds of LN channels at once, which is NOT what the typical LN user does.

0

OverlordQ 1 week ago

When Bob wants to receive a payment but lacks inbound capacity, his Breez app recognizes the lack and issues two invoices using the same preimage: one to Alice requesting payment and a second to the Breez LSP.

Instead of limiting a single channel to 1M sats, Breez now limits the sum of all a user’s local balances to 4M sats.

So a whole lot of complexity and involving middlemen to only be able to send $450.

And you're trying to sell this as a good thing?

10

N0tMyRealAcct 1 week ago

> So a whole lot of complexity and involving middlemen to only be able to send $450. That is an arbitrary constant. But even if it wasn’t, Lightning allows for a lot of new use cases. There are trade offs but there are many more possibilities. Lightning is intended for you to buy chewing gum. It works well for that.

0

3andahalfacres Redditor for less than 30 days 1 week ago

wow $450 send limit. Why would anyone want to use LN when it's not even backed by Bitcoin's record hashrate AND be capped to such joke limits.

2

N0tMyRealAcct 1 week ago

If you want a bigger transaction the wallet can fall back onto an on-chain transaction. No issues here. It is backed by Bitcoins hash rate. As a protocol the Lightning protocol is cryptographically as strong as Bitcoin. Much unlike 0-conf which isn’t backed by hash rate at all. But that is as far as I will let you troll me away from the topic at hand.

2

3andahalfacres Redditor for less than 30 days 1 week ago

> If you want a bigger transaction the wallet can fall back onto an on-chain transaction. No issues here. And pay high fees again? why? > As a protocol the Lightning protocol is cryptographically as strong as Bitcoin. Yeah that's why in Bitcoin you don't check in on your money because hashrate secures it, while in Lightning you do check in on your money because no hashrate secures it. Care to tell me why watchtowers are a thing if hashrate secures it? just yesterday /u/N0tMyRealAcct was caught pushing lies and twisting numbers and dropped the conversation after 2 lies: https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/jbh8yf/bitcoin_cash_as_the_world_currency_what_it_takes/g9cwkac/

5

N0tMyRealAcct 1 week ago

Beware all, this user is I believe intentionally trying to poison any productive discussions.

0

3andahalfacres Redditor for less than 30 days 1 week ago

You got caught pushing lies yesterday. You claimed blocks are 2.1MB when they're actually 1.2Mb and claim in the future schnorr and channel factories will produce 96% saving, when it's closer to 50% rofl https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/jbh8yf/bitcoin_cash_as_the_world_currency_what_it_takes/g9cwkac/ your own words /u/N0tMyRealAcct

2

alturigo 1 week ago

“Inbound liquidity remains an issue, but it is now an issue for engineers and developers to worry about, not users.”

These guys get it.

3

Danny1878 1 week ago

Amazing stuff.

2

hungdoge 1 week ago

How do I download this and play with it? Can't find it

1

king-only 1 week ago

Android: https://play.google.com/apps/testing/com.breez.client iOS: https://testflight.apple.com/join/wPju2Du7

1

bitusher 1 week ago

Excellent.

This is what it is like using breez all day long -

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cOmUpp3J9Ck

2

almkglor 1 week ago

Zero-reserve makes theft attempts costless. It is fine if Breez server is demanding 0 reserve but the client is allowed to demand non-zero reserve, but if Breez does require the client to demand 0 reserve, it allows Breez to steal funds.

Though as noted in their zero-conf channels, Breez is already in a position to potentially steal funds from users when the user receives via a zero-conf channel that has not deeply confirmed yet. This is fine if e.g. the user is buying Bitcoins using a fiat ramp with Breez directly (the fiat part is always tr*st-requiring anyway), but not so much for general payments. Though as noted as well this is time-bound, once the channel is deeply confirmed it won't matter. Zero-reserve is more concerning, unless Breez allows clients to demand non-zero reserve while demanding zero-reserve itself.

1

king-only 1 week ago

Breez has 1% channel reserve, the risk is entirely on the Breez end.

1

almkglor 1 week ago

Okay, thanks for clarifying, the article does not inform this.

1

king-only 1 week ago

np. You were right to comment. Since we already reduced the channel reserve (only on the client end) to a near-dust value before this update, I didn't see a need to explain it, but maybe I should add it.

1

almkglor 1 week ago

Yes. To those who stumble on this thread: note that removing the reserve on the client side only makes theft attempts *costless*, but not necessarily *successful*. Breez presumably can afford to run their nodes 24/7 with near 100% uptime and presumably has some kind of watchtower setup, so even if clients could theoretically drain their channel to 0 and then attempt to rewind time to when their channel had more at no risk to themselves, they would still not succeed in practice often enough to hurt Breez. So this is an acceptable policy for Breez to follow, assuming they have good redundancy and so on.

2

infernalr00t 1 week ago

Right now LN wallets are doing all the boring work so we can move stuff in a few years.

Congrats.

5

3andahalfacres 1 week ago

Can I send money to someone who's offline like Bitcoin Cash can?

Am I capped to certain send limits or uncapped like Bitcoin Cash?

Is Lightning backed by Bitcoin's hashrate or must I periodically sign in to prevent theft or eventually hire a 3rd party watchtower service?

5

fresheneesz 1 week ago

I love Breez. Such an easy app. The main thing I want it to do tho is run an android service that listens for attempted direct payments so I can pay someone directly without requiring them to take out their phone. Then it would truly be a replacement for venmo.

I have a couple questions:

A. What fees does Breez pay to open channels for its users? Like, how is it calculated and what are the average costs it takes on?

B. Why not splice in new balance into the same channel rather than creating new channels? Wouldn't that reduce channel complexity as well as giving more optimal avenues for adding funds to a channel?

1

king-only 1 week ago

Thank you! We have the Lightning Rod to implement for offline payments: https://medium.com/breez-technology/introducing-lightning-rod-2e0a40d3e44a Splicing isn't yet implemented. There are advantages to working with multiple channels like not being dependent on a specific peer. We are going to add 3rd party LSPs into Breez, so multi channel is important. Now that we have MPP, it's much less complicated to manage.

4

fresheneesz 1 week ago

> Lightning Rod I see that article is from a year ago. However I couldn't find any way to pay someone while their app wasn't open in March or April. When was that incorporated into the app? How do I use it? > We are going to add 3rd party LSPs into Breez, so multi channel is important. > not being dependent on a specific peer ... add 3rd party LSPs into Breez Gotcha, very cool!

1

king-only 1 week ago

We didn't yet implement it... Soon I hope...

3

Bitcoin_to_da_Moon 1 week ago

after having routed hundreds of thousands of transactions over thousands of channels

that gives a hint at how many transactions are happening in the whole LN space - ALOT! and nothing is recorded, nothing has to touch the mainchain and we all get solid privacy.

5

zv099 redditor for 4 weeks 1 week ago

When do you think we Breez will be out of beta mode and we can just download it from the app store?

2

king-only 1 week ago

Let's see how the RC goes... EOY hopefully...

3

zv099 redditor for 4 weeks 1 week ago

Jesus, this really is amazing! I was a Lightning skeptic in the past but this is a LOT of work and is exactly what's needed to make it work seamlessly.

Anyone still doubting Lightning in good faith should look at all the work like this. Most people won't so it's an uphill battle for a while but it's clearly working and will win out.

LSP...does that stand for lightning service provider?

12

king-only 1 week ago

Thank you ❤️ And yes: https://medium.com/breez-technology/introducing-lightning-service-providers-fe9fb1665d5f

4

Immediate-Host 1 week ago

this is what we need to get lightning mainstream, awesome work and article, I liked it a lot.

!lntip 5000

14

king-only 1 week ago

Thank you ❤️

4

lntipbot 1 week ago

Hi u/Immediate-Host, thanks for tipping u/king-only **5000** satoshis! *** *[^(More info)](https://www.reddit.com/r/lntipbot/wiki/index) ^| [^(Balance)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=lntipbot&subject=balance&message=!balance) ^| [^(Deposit)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=lntipbot&subject=deposit&message=!deposit 10000) ^| [^(Withdraw)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=lntipbot&subject=withdraw&message=!withdraw put_invoice_here) ^| ^(Something wrong? Have a question?) [^(Send me a message)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=drmoore718)*

1

2 14 3

trynewideas - @trynewideas 1 week ago

> Another example is business productivity apps architected as web services. Early products like Salesforce were easier to access and cheaper to maintain than their on-premise counterparts. Modern productivity apps like Google Docs, Figma, and Slack focus on things you simply couldn’t do before, like real-time collaboration and deep integrations with other apps.

I'm not sure I'd consider any of these brand new things, even in the context of cloud nativity. CSCW works in particular go back to the mid-80s! They aren't new things, but iterations on old things -- the iterative gap is so large that they _feel_ new, but the changes they provided improved accessibility to existing functionality, not innovative new functionality.

- Networked CRMs were preceded by so, so many database frontends.

- Google Docs was bought-not-made, and its components were also preceded by peer-to-peer collaborative editing tools outside of the web browser (SubEthaEdit, but also Instant Update, Aspects, and other early 90s/00s groupware suites).

- Collaborative drawing and design software go all the way back to Xerox PARC projects like Videodraw.

- Slack wasn't even first of its breed!

GCA10 - @GCA10 1 week ago

Presumably DOTB and DBNT should be pitched to investors -- and funded -- in very different ways.

Doing old things better is very amenable to metrics, lifetime value of customer, market-adoption forecasts, cost of customer acquisition, etc. This is the land of venture money with milestones and ever-growing rounds as success unfolds. (Or asphyxiation if success doesn't happen.)

Doing brand new things probably is far more likely to start via bootstrapping, passion projects, university research and other areas where open-ended curious inquiry is tolerated better. Dixon (OP) loosely acknowledges this when he writes that entrepreneurs "usually spend many years deeply immersed in the underlying technology before they have their key insights."

Eventually the path forward will be clear enough that the VC/metrics folks can show up for later financing rounds and do their thing. But I'll argue that venture's metrics-driven feed-or-starve system is more likely to mess up this early exploration than to help it.

Even though VCs will insist that they are equally good at both.

rossdavidh - @rossdavidh 1 week ago

"The most common mistake people make when evaluating new technologies is to focus too much on the “doing old things better” category."

While I get what they're driving at, I think there are good reasons to focus on this; you have some plausible chance of getting it right. The track record of people, even really smart people who work in technology, being able to predict the 'brand new things' that technology will be used for, is awful. Plus, if you want to get the technology up and running, it needs to get used for something old (better) first. If the early moviemakers hadn't made play-like movies first, they might never have learned enough about film to make movies that weren't like that.

Just because the early uses of a technology are doing old things better, but the later brand new things turn out to be a bigger deal, doesn't mean the 'old things better' phase was a mistake. It is probably necessary.

shahbaby - @shahbaby 1 week ago

I used to wonder why there's always a constant flood of new new technologies, frameworks, products, etc. instead of improvements over existing solutions.

Now I believe I know why; it's about growth for the business, at all levels. New technology may give the business a competitive edge but more importantly it will give the developers who created it as well as those who learn it, a career boast.

This is why we get things like software updates for a UI that no one asked for.

In the end, the core idea is that "good enough" is never enough. Because improvements, not maintenance, drive careers forward.

altacc - @altacc 1 week ago

Also known as sustaining innovation vs disruptive innovation.

When you’re embedded in a technology or business it’s harder to come up with something totally new, your perspective is often limited by your situation (everything is a nail when you have a hammer). As something brand new can also be damaging to the current business model, it feels uncomfortable.

Often you need somebody with the right mix of experience and independence (plus enough capital) to create something truly disruptive.

megameter - @megameter 1 week ago

You can market your end results as an old thing, but if it's ever the case that you aren't introducing a thing new to that market, you have a speculative hot potato, not a good business. If the neighborhood already has five boba shops, the sixth one that opens is facing a lot of competition.

Which in some respects doesn't mean you have to be innovative at any point, just well timed and positioned. Underserved niches often love "more of the old stuff" if it brings back something they thought was lost. And bringing back the old stuff can be a gamble just as much as doing a groundbreaking thing; in that case, having a way of doing it better is a great derisk.

ksec - @ksec 1 week ago

How do we define new things though?

Search Engine, Smartphone, Digital Cameras, PCs what else? All of the leader in those categories were Doing Old Things Better.

It wasn't about Doing Old or New. It was simply about the timing and Roadmap. Apple Newton had all the right idea, but the technology was far from ready and 15 years ahead of its time.

Netflix? Remember there was a War between Windows Media, MPEG and RealVideo before the days of Flash Video Streaming?

To me, doing new things is Invention. Doing old things better is innovation. At the end of the day, all it matter if there is enough Value creation, it seems to me DOTB or DBNT is the wrong question to ask.

aabhay - @aabhay 1 week ago

What are some examples in the DBNT category that created unicorn startups? I know lots of DBNT that happened inside of large companies (e.g. Bell Labs). What are some examples of cases where the companies were able to create massive market share from scratch?

Common examples of DBNT were really just DOTB:

Google -> not the first search engine

Apple -> not the first computer/music player/touch phone

Spotify -> not the first music streaming platform

Nvidia -> not the first GPU

maverickJ - @maverickJ 1 week ago

Sometimes you just have to copy what worked for someone else in their venture and apply it to your own venture. I know that the world tells us that we need to be original; that we need to come up with new ideas to apply to our lives, careers and businesses; that we are special. However, I believe that sometimes, we can achieve tremendous success not by trying to come up with new ideas but by leveraging ideas that have already been tested by someone else.

The article https://leveragethoughts.substack.com/p/originality-is-not-t... provides a case study.

rvr_ - @rvr_ 1 week ago

I don't believe in 100% original work. Everything is build upon the past. Doing new things will always be some form of doing old things better.

ryanSrich - @ryanSrich 1 week ago

Find products with low NPS and high fragmentation. No need for an entirely novel idea. Even the best products we use everyday were very likely not brand new ideas.

colordrops - @colordrops 1 week ago

Then there's doing old things better by doing brand new things, e.g. tesla and SpaceX.

innagadadavida - @innagadadavida 1 week ago

This all depends on where you draw the lines.

One could argue that nothing really new has happened since digital audio, video, computing and communication - all technologies that are 50years old.

All that has happened is that they got cheaper, faster, smaller. Most certainly, a16z has invested mostly in startups that just fall into this category and very little in building fundamental tech.

mrmonkeyman - @mrmonkeyman 1 week ago

If you think Salesforce is just same old, but online, you don't know Salesforce.

Google docs, Figma and especially Slack rehash old ideas. Hardly any new ideas there. Wrong examples.

Show all comments on Hackernews

25 5

HumanRelease8544 1 week ago

I've heard this narrative summed up in other places: "COVID is killing men - women most affected", a little bit like the article titled "1 in 4 homeless are women", again trying to draw attention to the "issue" in a flawed and disingenuous way. I would rather cook dinner and do some house work than be on a ventilator.

3

BowtiepastaMasta 1 week ago

Can you coles notes the article for me?

1

BigChungusonthewheel 1 week ago

Am I stupid or something because I don’t see what this has to do with gender. The person who wrote the article is trying to suggest ways to make life better for the future. Did I miss something?

7

Greg_W_Allan 1 week ago

Haven't you been watching the news for the past six months. Coronavirus kills twice as many men as women but WOMEN MOST AFFECTED.

1

Ok-Tennis-5720 1 week ago

I only found one mention of gender: Accelerating gender equality can be a global game-changer. For the most unequal countries, closing the gender gap could increase GDP by an average of 35 percent. And investing in our young people is investing in our future. They need access to health and education, and also access to the internet—because that gives them access to the digital economy – so critical for growth and development in the future.

3

Zachvishek 1 week ago

But the thing is that means harming someone to progress another one. Not doing anything about those who lost job but doing this wouldn't effect the economy at all.

1

Ukman_44 1 week ago

If gender equality really did result in a 35% increase in GDP I would expect it to naturally happen for all market driven economies

1

WhatsThatThingCold 1 week ago

That percentage is from looking at current developed countries and how women labor participation increased gdp. It already happened “naturally”, this policy is just an accelerator, because it takes time.

1

Ok-Tennis-5720 1 week ago

I agree. I didn't write all of that, it was text copied from the website.

1

_Last_Man_Standing_ 1 week ago

fucking cunts

1

IGRIVKO 1 week ago

https://youtu.be/wZr_KRwZfhY и видео с акценти от нейното изявление, с леки препратки към крипто валутите и #bitcoin от автора на материала.

1

FuzzyApartment 1 week ago

Beginning of the end of the USD as the world reserve currency is what came to mind when I read this nonsense.

1

spe59436-bcaoo 1 week ago

Original Bretton Woods moment: https://wtfhappenedin1971.com. Absolute scum

1

SatoshisVisionTM 1 week ago

That was nixon's decision to take the dollar off of the gold standard. Bretton woods was in the forties post-ww2, and tethered the USD to most other currencies.

1

neo_mkl 1 week ago

The IMF is the bitch to the Bank of International Settlements in Basel.

1

structee 1 week ago

Can someone explain what this will mean? I always understood Bretton woods was a huge deal.

2

fremeer 1 week ago

Bretton woods was basically everyone in developed world deciding to go on a gold standard. It last officially something like 25 years. But realistically it lasted much less because banks had started to circumvent it in the 60s. The reason it was important was because they didn't use one countries currency as the reserve. One issue with a reserve currency is that when it becomes the dominant form of credit currency because of trade you end up needing that country to provide liquidity assistance to the whole world. I'm not sure how it would work because a lot of the current issue is the central banks as a whole are run by neoclassical people. They dont really model for credit and that's the dominant form of monetary creation.

4

Internetguy9998 1 week ago

Are you being serious right now? Dude, seriously... Bernankes work was literally based on credit markets and their impact of financial crisis, this was why he extended credit to other central banks too.

1

fremeer 1 week ago

The dsge modelling commonly used by banks doesn't involve credit as an input. Hell the idea of indebted demand etc in a neoclassical model is something that only started to be talked post financial crisis. Bernanke never really worried about the accumulation of private debt at all. He worried about seizing up of credit markets.

1

Internetguy9998 1 week ago

There's not really much he can do about private debt, look at the huge public blowback he got from doing what he did. Rick perry was literally going around the country threatening him.

1

fremeer 1 week ago

Considering it was a major issue of the great depression, he was pretty silent on it when it came to his own research on it. Sure the fed was to blame for making it much worse then it needed to be. But everything i have read really paints the private debt as the fuel that needed the spark.

1

Internetguy9998 Yesterday

He literally says debt - deflation was one of the negative effects hence the need for a strong nominal anchor.

1

fremeer Yesterday

No debt Deflation is after the cows have left the barn. I'm talking pre crisis. The expansion of credit and increase private debt that comes with it.

1

lolomfgkthxbai 1 week ago

> The reason it was important was because they didn’t use one countries currency as the reserve. In practice it was a way to make the US dollar the reserve currency with an extra step since the US held most of the gold in the world.

3

johnturtle 1 week ago

This is good for bitcoin (tm)

During Brenton Woods, the dollar was pegged to gold, isn't this a good sign for bitcoin? This could lead to governments buying bitcoin and pegging their currency to bitcoin.

1

TheGreatMuffin 1 week ago

> During Brenton Woods, the dollar was pegged to gold I am not an expert at all, but I'm pretty sure the peg of USD to gold was far before that. Bretton Woods pegged other countries' currencies to USD though, from what I understand, as a way to ensure USD's status as a world reserve currency.

1

SatoshisVisionTM 1 week ago

Correct. And when Nixon in 1971 decided to move the dollar away from the fixed peg with gold, he basically shanked the entire world.

1

BigRocksFirst redditor for 6 weeks 1 week ago

There were gold standards before Bretton Woods. The US (and others) had gone off it. I can't remember if US was back on it before Bretton Woods, but I'm thinking no - the cost of the war was likely too high. As such, I'm thinking Bretton Woods was an attempt to get main world economies back on gold standard, but there was a problem. There wasn't enough gold for all countries to be on the gold standard, but there was enough gold for USD to be backed by gold. So, USD was backed by gold and all other nations in the agreement pegged their currency to USD. That allowed all countries to be "pegged to gold", even if indirectly. That fell apart when USD could also not be backed by gold anymore.

1

maxcoiner 1 week ago

Too early for that. Not until all governments already have stockpiles of Bitcoin (And the price would easily be above $10m per BTC then) would they ever consider it. Otherwise the limits on the money supply are way too constrictive. Gold's supply is too constrictive too for that matter. There's only $12 trillion or so worth of Gold in existence. There really isn't anything to back all of today's debt and currencies with.

1

Rusure111111 Bronze 1 week ago

nothing like a little fear mongering by the media to force 100mm new people into poverty, debt, and decreased value of their savings and only let them out when they agree to a new financial system based on carbon credits, continued expansion of fed balance sheets, and more debt.

These people definitely care about you.

1

quigleydude redditor for 3 weeks 1 week ago

I just finished watching a video by Simon Dixon on the subject. Give it a look.

1

ComedyTragedy01 1 week ago

Should make a tldr

0

Logical_Espresso redditor for 3 months 1 week ago

Someone call Ethan Hunt

1

stablecoin-org 1 week ago

I am encouraged by G20 discussions on a Common framework for Sovereign Debt Resolution as well as on our call for improving the architecture for sovereign debt resolution, including private sector participation.

Can someone translate this ?

5

EnricoDandoloThaDOV 1 week ago

In looking at that paragraph in full, I suspect the author is referencing Europe's recent experience with rising debt-servicing costs as a result of a sudden increase in public sector deficits. Unlike the US Treasury or the BOJ, whose debt servicing burden doesn't really increase in line with its outstanding obligations, European governments are vulnerable to perceptions of their repayment ability when they run deficits for some extended period of time. Good examples of this are cases like Ireland, where the government attempted to assume the debts of its heavily indebted financial sector only to default on its own external obligations. Really since 2010 European governments have struggled with the interaction between having a multi-national banking system where governments create debts a la carte, and financial markets assessing their credit risk on a case by case basis. What's being said there is that not everyone can simply issue new debts to support economic activity and that its good to see some discussion on how to better handle resolving heavily indebted sovereigns who end up caught between rising debt servicing costs and lackluster economic performance that doesn't generate the revenues to allow for repayment or borrowing on more agreeable terms.

1

ontrack 1 week ago

Not completely knowledgeable about this, but didn't Draghi make the problem of sovereign debt go away permanently with his guarantee that the ECB will do whatever it takes to keep nations solvent? Italy is borrowing at essentially zero percent these days; the market no longer matters.

1

EnricoDandoloThaDOV 1 week ago

The ECB's broad commitment more pushed embattled sovereigns like Italy and Spain back from the precipice, but the overarching concerns about how those Governments (*and really anyone not France or Germany*) will handle their debt servicing problems has persisted into the present financial crises developing in the wake of COVID.

1

BigRocksFirst 1 week ago

I may be way off base, but here is my thinking... First, necessary background... The data looks to me like much of the world is near the end of the long-term debt cycle. It's not the first time, but it happens infrequently enough that you have to study history instead of relying on experience from your own lifetime. When the end of the long-term debt cycle arrives, the debt level (whether public debt - which means sovereign/govt debt, or whether private debt - which means debt held/owed by individuals, businesses and non-govt institutions) becomes literally unsustainable. There are only 2 known ways to deal with such unsustainable debt levels. Default on the debt, or high enough inflation that the debt can become affordable to pay back with cheaper inflated dollars. A combination of the 2 can also be used. There can also be partial defaults, commonly called "debt restructuring", where things happen such as partial forgiveness of debt, lowering the interest rate, lengthening payback terms, etc. Restructuring tends to happen when the alternative would be nothing gets payed back and there is no asset to foreclose to cover the loan, so the lender would otherwise lose everything they had lended. There is also some ability to transfer private debt to public debt (the fed buys corporate bonds, mortgaged-backed securities, etc - the govt forgives student loans, etc). Defaulting on the debt causes economic destruction, lowering net worth, and also making it even harder for anyone to pay off remaining debt as the economy collapses. Inflating it away causes inflation, loss of buying power for those with meaningful networth, but makes it easier for remaining debt to payed off. Done "wrong" it is a very hard landing. Done perfectly it is a comparably "softer" landing, but nothing near pain-free. Done perfectly, it minimizes the pain to the working class that doesn't have much net-worth to inflate away, and results in inflation that hopefully causes an increase in working class wages that roughly matches increases in prices. Now for the translation. The IMF is acknowledging that the situation discussed in the "background" section above is now the reality. The acknowledgement includes: the problem exists at the sovereign (govt debt) level, that "resolution" is unavoidable (that means accepting their will be defaults if nothing is done, so let's start discussing sovereign "debt restructuring" and debt defaults and coordinated money-printing early while we still have a bit of time to think it through rather than only being able to react), and it implicitly acknowledges that a coordinated effort from many developed countries (the G20) has a profoundly higher chance of delivering a "softer" landing than an uncoordinated approach. In addition, it acknowledges that it might provide more national and world stability if "private sector" can participate in any "debt resolution". 2nd level translation: it might be a more dangerous time to lend any money or take any loan, unless you know what you are doing. The issues with debt resolution won't appear tomorrow. It will take longer. But if I needed to get a loan right now (e.g.,.a mortgage), I would definitely want the govt to be the lender, so that the opportunity to "restructure" it would be higher if economic destruction happens. And, if I had govt backed student loans and other loans, and was making extra payments, I would direct the extra payments to the non-govt loans, where the opportunity for debt restructuring or debt-forgiveness is lower. I would be leary of making any unsecured loans (buying govt bonds), or any loans not 100% collateralized (corporate bonds). If making a loan, I would want the collateral to be MORE than sufficient (e.g., owner-financing on sale of house), in case asset values drop, which is what would likely be happening if I had to foreclose due to default on the loan due to a global end-of-debt cycle issue.

16

senjutsuka 1 week ago

Jubilee is back in style! No but seriously, this had better be acted out with laser precision or we're going to see a french revolution like reaction. There is already so much inequality and worse its completely laid bare. Add in all the various global efforts at dis and mis information and you have a recipe for serious social trust damage.

1

BigRocksFirst 1 week ago

Agreed that it's a real possibility, and agree with your view about how difficult the current situation is. The rise of "nationalist platforms" across multiple countries is one of the key "canaries in the mine", that the level of debt and level of inequality is at a level it won't be tolerated. Our society is now showing key signs of that danger point. Statistics show that a change to form of govt often happens. The end of the long term debt level produces the maximum inequality. Opposition gets polarized because the problem is real and there is a lot at stake for both the haves and have-nots. Both polarized sides refuse to compromise, no action is taken, the problem gets worse, then upheaval happens (someone claims emergency powers, etc, and democracy is lost - worse, some changed regimes then use war to try to obtain resources to get out of the economic problem). There is much more research available, and what I wrote is oversimplified, but the historical data is not encouraging. The fact that the IMF is trying to get significant global cooperation now, though, I hope reduces that type of disruption. It's why the reference to Bretton Woods is relevant. Instead of a "call to arms", she's making a similar "call to cooperation" that helped provide more global economic stability since WW2 than existed before it, that presumably reduced war since WW2. I get that the standard way to fix the problem without regime change is to fix the problem with the same type of thinking that created the problem, and thus continue the cycle anew, but I still think that's better than becoming an authoritarian country. History shows that authoritarian regime is worse than economic destruction (such as a depression) followed by inflation. The authoritarian regime doesn't stop the economic problems, but it adds the loss of freedom problems. Not making any predictions, just being honest about what history shows. A lot depends on what type of person gets elected into positions of leadership, and whether those leaders can cooperate with leaders in other nations and within their own nation to more "softly" crash the plane. I don't want the plane crashed directly into democracy.

1

funke75 1 week ago

Wonderful breakdown of the situation. I would only contend that I believe things are going to happen at a much quicker pace than many would think. I am very interesting in seeing what the announcement will be on Monday morning

3

thisispoopoopeepee 1 week ago

there is a third option; paying it off over a few decades or more.

0

BigRocksFirst 1 week ago

Although that is an option for a single debt in general, once the amount of debt becomes unsustainable, that option won't work. If only the payback period is extended without a partial default on the principal or an implicit partial default by lowering the interest rate, then extending the payback period only works if the borrower has enough income to still actually afford the interest payment plus some reduced piece of the principal each payment (reduced because the payback term was extended). Once the total (even reduced) payment by itself exceeds the total ability to pay out of current cash flow, the situation reduces to just the other 2 situations. At a macro level, if my understanding of the current analysis is correct, the US will be at that point of no return no later than 2023, if not there already. And, the issue is not limited to the US. From my memory, the statistics are that only 1 time out of 50 has the above 2 options not happened once a nation's debt reached a certain "unsustainable" level, and we are already at that unsustainable level or forecasted to be there within 2 years tops. We were headed there without covid, but covid accelerated it. So, based on the past (and based on my memory to have not mixed up pieces of research), there is a 98% chance that we are facing those other 2 outcomes, and the IMF is acknowledging it is a global problem.

4

Not-your-dog303 1 week ago

Correct me if Im wrong, is this not the reason the gold bugs and the bitcoiners want to "Store value" in something that is not a national currency? I mean you could technically buy art or fine wine over sticking with currencies, that need to unwind a bunch of debt Most wealth in the west is stored in housing and stocks, so if the actual currencies lose value through inflationary measures AND you have no bank wanting to lend on homes that could decline in value during this period, you've got a real pickle there.

1

BigRocksFirst 1 week ago

I believe you are correct. That does seem to be the significant driver for current accumulation of gold and bitcoin. Gold as a "proven" store of value, and bitcoin as an "aspirational" store of value. From what I can gather, the unwinding of long term debt cycles has tended to have economic destruction first, then inflation second. My interpretation is that the Fed is committed to do whatever it takes to avoid the economic destruction phase this time through its monetary policy, but has basically said recently that it cannot achieve that goal without the government implementing coordinated fiscal policy. Nor is it clear that coordinated monetary and fiscal policy will actually be achieved (there are substantial "political will"/divisiveness issues in this country right now - the end of the long term debt cycle is also correlated to changes in form of govt (e.g., democracy becomes authoritarian) when the conflicting parties can't cooperate to solve a problem that by definition will have many losers - that's how several 1930s authoritarian leaders came to power - there is traditionally more political divisiveness near the end of the long term debt cycle). If cooperation IS achieved, it is not clear that the GOAL of that cooperation would actually be achieved. Because current monetary policy has already driven interest rates to basically zero and will stay there for quite a while, the entire 60/40 portfolio idea is out of the window for quite a while. People are all individually trying to figure out what to do in the face of possibly negative real rate of return for the next decade on interest bearing instruments - interest rate received actually below inflation. Because of that (the There Is No Alternative scenario), equities are currently already over inflating significantly to 2023/2025 levels, because there's not a good alternative place to put the money that people currently have. Real estate will presumably go up during the inflationary period if it happens. Presumably both real estate and most equities will go down during an economic destruction period, especially some rental real estate, and especially commercial real estate. Some equities would do well. The issue with lending is even worse than you mention. Banks don't want to lend on property that might go down in value (unless they believe the govt will bail them out), but as of this week, banks are tightening lending due to the risk of the borrower (rather than the risk of the securing asset). During an economic downturn, lots of people lose the ability to pay back loans. Yes, it is already a real pickle for anyone taking a forward looking view at portfolio asset allocation. More and more people are looking at alternative assets. Most people have neither the capital nor knowledge for fine art or wine investing. And those would do well in the inflationary period but my assumption is they would lose tremendous value during economic destruction period. Good luck and wisdom to everyone trying to navigate the next several years financially. I'm not claiming the sky is falling, just elaborating on all the backdrop of why someone at the IMF would be "encouraged" about 20 globally leading economies talking about "sovereign debt resolution, with opportunity for private participation." They are encouraged because they recognize the problem will not go away. The best they can do is have some influence on a controlled crash landing. Like you see in the movies when the landing gear won't come down from the airplane with 300 passengers on board. The plane is not going to survive the landing, but you try to save as many lives as possible.

7

BigRocksFirst 1 week ago

P.S. I am definitely NOT claiming to have it figured out. It is just something that I have been doing a deep dive on because it is clear to me that it is unsafe for me to presume previous asset allocations or sources of income would still be safe going forward. I am voraciously trying to figure out good decisions for myself in light of what appears to be the emerging macroeconomic situation. The best thinking out there seems to be that the closest corollary to our current situation is the US in the early/mid 1940s, on the heals of the 1930s. There seem to now be very thoughtful people sharing that perspective rather than it just being "sky is falling" folks like it was for the previous 30 years. Rather than feeling helpless, I decided I could deepen my education and try to reach better decisions based on that deeper education. Any thoughts I shared in this thread should be seen as a reflection of my current incomplete journey in getting that education. That's led me through a lot of history including long-term debt cycles, statistical analysis of them, what are the points of no return, rise of both left-wing and right-wing populous movements when the economy no longer works for substantial chunks of citizens near the end of the long term debt cycle, how those populous movements tend to end, Bretton Woods agreement to try to build a stable economic structure after world war II, all the alternative asset classes that often only make sense except near the end of the long-term debt cycle. And don't forget that history will never repeat, it only rhymes. It's a pickle.

3

no_crying 1 week ago

I spend sometime thinking this, since most large wealth holders are aware of the inflationary play governments around the world is doing, then they would leverage themselves or do something to get ahead further in the game. the longer the period to land the aircraft, the risky it is that aircraft will crash harder. still thinking if inflation is a zero sum gain and if game theory applies here.

1

thisispoopoopeepee 1 week ago

allow mild inflation (slightly above average) on top of paying it back... also.... stop using government funds for things that have low ROI.....might help.....

1

[deleted] 1 week ago

[deleted]

2

BigRocksFirst 1 week ago

I won't argue, and it is now the Fed's stated goal. To have higher than normal inflation for as long as it takes. They phrased it as being as long as it takes for the average inflation to get back to the target, which is a hand waving way of telling the public "don't be alarmed at this uncomfortable level of inflation, it's just to get the average back to a comfortable 2%!". They have also said that despite the economic costs of the money printing and inflation, now is absolutely not the time to worry about that because of the problem that will happen if it's not done. Their view seems to be that they would rather take that than the economic destruction of tons of people being out of work. They explicitly said they are willing for the stock market to inflate crazily if that's what it takes to protect from that economic destruction. The best metaphor I can come up with at this point, is that there may be no way to land this plane with the plane surviving, but they are trying to keep the passengers alive during the "softer" landing. Yes, if the plane survives that's a bonus. There are a few jobs I am glad I do not have right now, and they are being a school teacher, principal or superintendent, and being responsible for monetary or fiscal policy. Right now, if they do their job right, they piss off a lot of people and are misnderstood by almost everyone. There is no way I could land the plane without crashing it.

2

SteveFoerster 1 week ago

Thievery Corporation's song about the IMF: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B1FZwsGjVsg

The lyrics are fire:

When the bank man comes to your door
Better know you'll always be poor
Bank loans and policies
They can't make our people free

You live on the blood of my people
Everyone knows you've come to steal
You come like the thieves in the night
The whole world is ready to fight

If you go to Lagos, what you find, vampires
If you go to Kinshasa, what you find, vampires
If you go to Darfur, what you find, vampires
If you go to Malabo, what you find, vampires

Lies and theft
Guns and Debt
Life and Death
IMF

8

foreverwantrepreneur 1 week ago

There shouldn’t be an IMF.

3

TheMischievousBadger 1 week ago

Buy gold and silver right now

0

infernalr00t 1 week ago

Unless you are buying gold bullion you only own an IOU. Instead buy Bitcoin.

0

EMPERORTRUMPTER 1 week ago

and own nothing

6

TheMadPyro 1 week ago

Nothing like taking financial advice from unpaid internet strangers

2

BismuthMoon 1 week ago

Now you know why duuurrr cobid. The reset. You need a scamdemic

0

fresheneesz 1 week ago

> scamdemic You're a fucking moron with your head in the sand (or more likely far up trump's ass)

0

BismuthMoon 1 week ago

Another sad sufferer of TDS. Best of wishes.

0

hash_me_harder redditor for 3 weeks 1 week ago

henceforth, I hereby call for A Middle Finger Moment.

MFM, if you will.

4

bundleogrundle 1 week ago

This is a just a marketing release with buzz words to make the general public think this is good for them.

“ Our unprecedented action was only possible thanks to our members’ generous support. The doubling of the New Arrangements to Borrow and a new round of bilateral borrowing arrangements preserves this financial firepower. Members have also stepped up with essential contributions to our Catastrophe Containment – and Relief and Poverty Reduction and Growth—Trusts.

This has allowed us to support our low-income members with debt relief and to triple our concessional lending. We are engaging with members to further boost our concessional lending capacity adapt our lending toolkit and increase support for capacity development.”

What a load of bull shit. What low income group are they helping?

11

Ferdo306 1 week ago

It's bullshit. They are talking about sustainable finance and large growth like they are interconnected and not opposites

5

AmazingSuperPupils 1 week ago

The only Breton I want is Breton water crackers! I love snacks!

1

xboox 1 week ago

A shit ton of pretty words from our slave-drivers.
They'll do whatever it takes to remain in charge.

17

free-speech-1 1 week ago

This

2

oldskoolr 1 week ago

A video of the speech can be watched here

https://youtu.be/uTmfwklFM-M

1

SuspiciousSociety1 1 week ago

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=enmHW4gCkAY

live now

1

25 1 3

jaimewarlock 1 week ago

I got in a big argument with Brian over a business deal that went bad. While he was probably legally in the right, I told him that he was morally wrong.

He could have just totally ignored me after that, there really wasn't anything I could have done about the situation. However, later upon reflection, he agreed with me and gave me 10 bitcoins compensation.

Sure, I am just one person, but ever since that event, I will always consider him to have a very high level of integrity.

1

harrynyce 1 week ago

I'm not questioning his integrity in his personal life, I'm sure he's a decent guy (even though he screwed you, by your own admission) who thinks he makes moral choices, but money has a tendency to corrupt people... and being in [bed with JPMorgan](https://decrypt.co/29832/jp-morgans-ceo-held-secret-meetings-with-the-coinbase-ceo) tends to force a person's hand, especially when said person wants their business to attain banking services and attain a seat at the big boy table and not fear running afoul of regulatory agencies. If he'll bend you over for <six figures, imagine what he's capable of now that he's in Jamie Dimon's pocket and deals are worth 10 - 100x more. He sold you out, then bought you off, but i very much respect you sharing your perspective and have no reason to doubt your sincerity. Mind if i inquire how long was the length of time between when the deal went bad and when he attempted (or did) make things right with you? Somehow i doubt Mr. Armstrong woke up the next day and immediately went to correct his error, i have a sneaking suspicion by the time he did it, 10 BTC was rather insignificant to his bottom line. It's not like he dropped a briefcase of cash on your doorstep, it was barely an inconvenience to his world. But now I'm just speculating a ton. I'd love to be wrong, but i think we both know he's spineless. There's plenty of decent human beings without the capacity or courage to stand up to Wall Street or Uncle Sam (not that there's much of a difference). Heck, I'd sell out every user on Reddit for the ability to be the first crypto IPO in the USofA. Someone has to take those secret meetings, at least we always knew the Gemini twins were corporate whores, i held out hope and made excuses for Brian (and Cbase) because there were so few other options when trying to assist neophyte crypto users. Oh well, not the first time I've been a poor judge of character. Nor the last. Stupid hippie hopefulness always making me want to give folks the benefit of the doubt. Regardless of my unhinged rant, i do genuinely appreciate you taking the time to share this anecdotal tale. Please stay safe, sir.

1

jaimewarlock 1 week ago

>Mind if i inquire how long was the length of time between when the deal went bad and when he attempted (or did) make things right with you? A few months. And thinking back, I realize that one of his programmers probably had more to do with the situation than he did. He was involved in a lot of projects at the time. I prefer to think that once he had a clear picture of what transpired, he made things right for me.

1

harrynyce 3 days ago

Not sure if this might interest you, but was kind of related to our prior conversion: https://www.businessinsider.com/coinbase-brian-armstrong-bitcoin-cryptocurrency-profile-2020-10

1

Bitcoin_to_da_Moon 1 week ago

Read the Whitepaper. It´s political.

8

harrynyce 1 week ago

💯

2

soontobesilenced redditor for 3 months 1 week ago

the same can be said about any ceo, since you can't be a ceo without bowing to your govt masters.

what have you done for bitcoin? because coinbase has certainly done lots for bitcoin.

1

tk11811 1 week ago

Remember when Coinbase was against Bitcoin when they supported Segwit2x?

1

scotty321 1 week ago

Brian Armstrong is 100% correct, and we would live in a much better world if more CEOs had the courage to follow in his footsteps.

A corporation is not a campaign rally, and a corporation is certainly not a front for the terrorist Marxist organization known as Black Lives Matter, which is a fundraising initiative for the Democratic Socialist Communist Party. A corporation should never bow down to the mob.

Some educational material for you:

https://www.redstate.com/brandon_morse/2020/06/23/black-lives-matter-marxists/

https://fee.org/articles/is-black-lives-matter-marxist-no-and-yes/

https://www.bitchute.com/video/lRcEb3zwec4t/

0

jeremyisreal1 redditor for 3 months 1 week ago

Call him what you want, he's a huge reason why BTC is as popular as it is today. Every other website is impossible to use without intense study.

Coinbase is a necessary evil until a better company comes along, and I define better by convincing the largest portion of a group to use it.

3

BitcoinIsSimple 1 week ago

I didn't read the article but how else can you runs bitcoin exchnage. Are you supposed to do what arthur from bitmex supposedly did, and then get arrested or would you really rather there be no centralised exchanges at all

1

harrynyce 1 week ago

You can run an exchange without censoring the thoughts of your employees. DeFi would be great, but we're not there yet. We're still working on basic adoption for the masses while the technology (hopefully) scales.

2

W944 1 week ago

>without censoring the thoughts of your employees. Yet it's okay for employees to coerce their management to follow their political groupthink? The CEO guy is allowed to not give a fuck about blm. He's just the only one open about it. No corporation gives a fuck about blm. They all put out their cucky statements to appease the mob for a few weeks and you guys eat it all up and take the pitchforks to the next village. Get over it.

1

BitcoinIsSimple 1 week ago

I'm talking about centralised exchanges because that's what's here for the most part

1

BitcoinXio Moderator - Bitcoin is Freedom 1 week ago

Downvoted for the title. With that said, I can’t imagine the struggle it is to run a giant company that is a leader in the crypto space, but basically telling all staff they can’t talk about certain topics or get fired is really the wrong way to go about things. Especially since crypto is rooted in controversy and going against mainstream ideas and regulations, it just seems whacky to push this sort of agenda at a crypto company.

4

harrynyce 1 week ago

Thank you for the thoughtful (and correct) analysis on a very complex and nuanced topic. I should have considered my title more carefully, trying to convey a certain level of emphasis without being quite so vulgar.

0

5boros 1 week ago

Oh no, a major mainstream financial institution's CEO is complying with the government, and as a result excelling at earning his investors millions. What has this world come to?

10

somedaysitsdark 1 week ago

I didn't see anything outrageous in the article.

8

NilacTheGrim 1 week ago

Yeah I agree with you. TBH discussing politics at work can be very toxic and destructive. I can see why a company would have such a policy. It's like discussing religion at work too -- you're just going to end up taking a side and it will get in the way of productivity. Do it on your own time. I see nothing wrong with this at all. Corporations are totalitarian systems.. you should realize that going in to one. They are under no obligation to pay you to waste their time. If you want maximal freedom don't work for a corporation. I see nothing wrong with what they are doing.

16

dbvbtm 1 week ago

I still don't understand all the heat. Coinbase is a private company, it doesn't have to pay you to organize and participate in political events, that's not your job there. Armstrong was nice enough to offer severance pay to these workers.

This is a non-issue. People need to learn their place.

2

harrynyce 1 week ago

Yes, please shut up and sit down. Don't bother thinking for yourself, Daddy Armstrong will tell you exactly how to handle things. After all, he's nice.

0

dbvbtm 1 week ago

You are free to do what you want in your spare time. Don't disrupt the workplace with politics. When has this ever been okay?

3

smoothID redditor for 3 months 1 week ago

Damn, my manager is censoring my GTA5 gaming sessions at work. Saying it's a "distraction." WTF

1

AmazingSuperPupils 1 week ago

This guy makes authoritarian workplace bitcoiners cum their shorts everyone this gets brought up.

3

HauntingCorpse 1 week ago

F**k sjw morons

2

AmazingSuperPupils 1 week ago

Yeah fuck justice and social issues. Fuck anti fascists. Me and my homies love fascism.

0

HauntingCorpse 1 week ago

I absolutely love the brainwashed nerds who use the word ‘fascism’ every chance they get.

2

harrynyce 1 week ago

You mean, Fox News attempting to terrify their susceptible viewer base with constant cries of "Antifa is coming, antifa is coming!" You love licking boots, eh?

0

HauntingCorpse 1 week ago

Lol. Are you one of the antifa bois that wears fishnets under his skinny jeans?

1

xboox 1 week ago

WTF did I just read?
Report this low quality garbage

1

xboox 1 week ago

If someone's paying you to work -- shut your month & work dummy! :)
Simple.

1

tk11811 1 week ago

Kim jong un would love it if you worked for him.

1

AmazingSuperPupils 1 week ago

The way you value labor and time is so fucked

1

harrynyce 1 week ago

More like, _"Open your mouth & work dummy!"_ Now... on your knees! /s What, you don't do **everything** that is asked of you while at the workplace? Tsk tsk, you terrible worker drone, stop trying to think for yourself. Now get back in line.

0

tamerlane888 1 week ago

Business is business!

1

tk11811 1 week ago

Looks like some people love this guy more than Bitcoin.

1

harrynyce 1 week ago

Amazed the number of folk around here lining up to lick his boots. Color me surprised. Did I accidentally get stuck with the BCH fools, or something?

1

DJBunnies 1 week ago

Low effort garbage.

1

time_wasted504 1 week ago

OR: hes trying to run a business and really doesnt want to take a political side?

govt cuck v fence sitter? Which is which?

7

sammyb67 1 week ago

Exactly!! These pussys that say this stupid shit clearly have never run a business and by the way, try opposing Uncle Sam and see what happens to your business! Ask google, Apple, etc.

0

time_wasted504 1 week ago

The real money gives to both parties and keeps their mouth shut. Its a win/win for them

2

harrynyce 1 week ago

Except he got into the wrong business, crypto is inherently political. It directly challenges there most powerful institutions on the planet. I guess I forget just how many are just here for, __moon when? Lambo! __ and could give a shit about anything else. Different strokes for different folks, I guess.

0

time_wasted504 1 week ago

>crypto is inherently political. no, its not. Crypto is inherently maths. It is not left/right/up/down or any political persuasion

3

harrynyce 1 week ago

You're talking about specifically the technologies, while forgetting the use-cases -- it's political. You don't have to agree, it's not up for debate. Fact.

4

Phrygian1221 1 week ago

Maybe its political to you? That would explain it! I use bitcoin as a store of value and a means of payment/money transfer. Bitcoin isn't political to me.

0

harrynyce 1 week ago

You have chosen to ignore the political aspects and focus on your specific use-case, but i assure you, read the whitepaper: https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf It is definitely political. I suspect you (and your government) would almost certainly agree that it's political once you have triggered enough taxable events, but choosing to ignore it and treat crypto in the same way you might a precious metal, sure it's easy to avoid the politics... but don't try to exchange that for anything, that might become political. Again, you don't have to agree with me, but you're wrong. Also, if Cbase were to hand your information over to your government, i think that could become political pretty quickly: https://www.theblockcrypto.com/post/81458/coinbase-transparency-report-2020

1

sammyb67 1 week ago

Exactly

1

1nv1s1blek1d 1 week ago

It's like people have never worked at a corporation before. Financial services monitor almost everything you do. This is nothing new. I wouldn't be surprised if they monitored the conversations on Slack. If your employee's job could theoretically influence the market, you would want to know about it. You are working in their ecosystem under their terms. There is no trust when it comes to the money game. I am pretty sure BlackRock, Fidelity, and Goldman Sachs do the same thing.

2

newthrowawayfor2017 Gold | QC: CC 22 | VET 12 1 week ago

Money and politics shouldn't mix anyway.

3

rasaxar Redditor for 3 months. 1 week ago

Coinbase man bad.

4

Think-notlikedasheep Redditor for 2 months. 1 week ago

So if a company is totally NOT obsessed with politics, and actually wants to do what its business is about, that's eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeevil. /sarc

Whackjobs say this.

6

ManyArtichoke Gold | QC: CC 44, BTC 39 1 week ago

Did you read the article?

0

HauntingCorpse Redditor for 5 months. 1 week ago

Telling SJW idiots to piss off isn’t censorship, it’s the best course of action

20

ManyArtichoke Gold | QC: CC 44, BTC 39 1 week ago

It's a pretty clear example of censorship in the workplace. Just because you happen to agree with the motivation for censoring employees doesn't negate the fact that it's censorship.

0

HauntingCorpse Redditor for 5 months. 1 week ago

Not every business has to be in the business of putting up with psychos.

1

ManyArtichoke Gold | QC: CC 44, BTC 39 1 week ago

Coinbase has the *right* to censor their employees, but that doesn't mean it isn't censorship. Asking someone to delete political posts they previously made is just about the clearest example of censorship I can think of.

0

HauntingCorpse Redditor for 5 months. 1 week ago

Nutjobs trying to shut down businesses that don’t support Burn Loot Murder is a better example.

0

ManyArtichoke Gold | QC: CC 44, BTC 39 1 week ago

The US has a violent, militarized police force that is literally killing citizens in the street and you have the gall to defend them. You're either on the side of the people or the side of the violent police state. I know what side I'm on.

2

HauntingCorpse Redditor for 5 months. 1 week ago

Just go be a normal person and see who kills you first, a cop, or a gangbanger.

0

[deleted] 1 week ago

[deleted]

0

ManyArtichoke Gold | QC: CC 44, BTC 39 1 week ago

Coinbase has the *right* to censor their employees. I'm not arguing against that. However, it's still censorship. Asking someone to delete previous posts and comments they made is just about the clearest example of censorship I can think of.

1

[deleted] 1 week ago

[deleted]

0

ManyArtichoke Gold | QC: CC 44, BTC 39 1 week ago

Being given the choice to leave doesn't negate the fact that it's censorship. It's the equivalent of saying "If you don't want the goverment to censor you then you can leave the country." Censorship does not need to employ brute force, you just made that definition up.

1

[deleted] 1 week ago

[deleted]

0

ManyArtichoke Gold | QC: CC 44, BTC 39 1 week ago

You just made up another definition. Find me a single definition of censorship that specifies brute force or prior freedom of speech. I guess people in China can't be censored because they never had freedom of speech to begin with. The posts in question were on Slack, an internal messaging app. It doesn't affect their reputation in any way. Also since when are goverments required to uphold freedom of speech laws? That would be news to a lot of goverments around the world.

1

DetroitMotorShow Redditor for 2 months. 1 week ago

https://www.hrexaminer.com/is-there-free-speech-at-work/ You have rather weak understanding of what companies are. Private businesses are not street corners to stage protests where freedom of speech laws apply. You cant cry censorship over company's policy - its absurd and laughable. Employees are free to find a job that comes with free speech. > The posts in question were on Slack, an internal messaging app. It doesn't affect their reputation in any way. Certainly does. If the news gets out that CB employees are doing woke things using official business/company communication platform, it would hurt CB's reputation. > I guess people in China can't be censored because they never had freedom of speech to begin with. Again, false equivalence. Governments are meant to uphold free speech. The fact that CCP doesnt allow free speech doesnt take away the premise that freedom of speech is something that a government offers its citizens. Private companies dont offer employees freedom of speech - they arent a charity.

1

Thc420Vato Gold | QC: CC 38 1 week ago

I hate Coinbase, but i sure as hell love when SJW's get their asses handed to them.

7

ManyArtichoke Gold | QC: CC 44, BTC 39 1 week ago

You would prefer to work somewhere that censors private communicate channels and asks you to remove previous posts that you made?

2

Thc420Vato 1 week ago

I ain't woke enough to answer on your question.

1

1 3

4 12

Jon Matonis - @jonmatonis

RT @jerrybrito: 1/ Glad to see Coinbase publishing a transparency report, joining companies like Kraken. Hopefully this becomes an industry standard. https://t.co/vQNrBj4YEH

21 119

Nick Szabo⚡️ - @NickSzabo4

RT @coinbase: As part of our commitment to being the most trusted venue to interact with cryptocurrency, we are releasing our first Transparency Report. The report summarizes government requests that we received for customer account info during the first half of 2020. https://t.co/GCjueNlzZy

180 594

Ryan Selkis - @twobitidiot

RT @jerrybrito: 1/ Glad to see Coinbase publishing a transparency report, joining companies like Kraken. Hopefully this becomes an industry standard. https://t.co/vQNrBj4YEH

13 95

Erik Voorhees - @ErikVoorhees

This is a really good practice. Note that zero companies outside of the crypto industry do this. https://t.co/YUebBP01ym

2 29

Peter Van Valkenburgh - @valkenburgh

RT @jerrybrito: 1/ Glad to see Coinbase publishing a transparency report, joining companies like Kraken. Hopefully this becomes an industry standard. https://t.co/vQNrBj4YEH

2 14

Neeraj K. Agrawal - @NeerajKA

RT @jerrybrito: 1/ Glad to see Coinbase publishing a transparency report, joining companies like Kraken. Hopefully this becomes an industry standard. https://t.co/vQNrBj4YEH

1 9

Jerry Brito - @jerrybrito

1/ Glad to see Coinbase publishing a transparency report, joining companies like Kraken. Hopefully this becomes an industry standard. https://t.co/vQNrBj4YEH

1 9

Reuben Bramanathan - @bramanathan

RT @iampaulgrewal: I’m pleased to share news of Coinbase’s first transparency report. It’s critical that our community and the public at large understand the scope of government requests for information and our efforts to respond. https://t.co/TQ6LjfrU3x

5 23

Matt Odell - @matt_odell

RT @nobsbitcoin: Transparency at Coinbase > today we’re releasing a Transparency Report that shares insights into how we handle legitimate government requests for some customer data https://t.co/BWSFHYSQW7 archive: https://t.co/4NJLxMkxGy https://t.co/jswGw44Nfn

2 3

Andrea O'Sullivan - @anjiecast

RT @coinbase: As part of our commitment to being the most trusted venue to interact with cryptocurrency, we are releasing our first Transparency Report. The report summarizes government requests that we received for customer account info during the first half of 2020. https://t.co/GCjueNlzZy

92 279

Pierre Rochard - @pierre_rochard

RT @brian_armstrong: Hopefully this gives more transparency into the kind of data requests we get from government. We'll continue to push back where we see requests that are overly broad or inappropriate. https://t.co/4wpQdQxVyx

27 103

Brian Armstrong - @brian_armstrong

Hopefully this gives more transparency into the kind of data requests we get from government. We'll continue to push back where we see requests that are overly broad or inappropriate. https://t.co/4wpQdQxVyx

27 103

SocialSuicideSquad Gold | QC: CC 59 1 week ago

FDA whaaaaaaa

Also USPIS has way more than I would have expected.

IRS are the only ones that feel legitimate to me.

1

karoman25 Redditor for 2 months. 1 week ago

Was surprised that so many came from Germany 🇩🇪

1

tylersburden Hong Kong 1 week ago

Sorry, your submission has been manually removed by a human!

Your submission is better suited to another subreddit. This may be present in the flair text (top left of your submission title). If not, here are a few which may apply;

/r/AskUK for general questions Brits may be able to answer
/r/AskABrit for questions from tourists and others about the country, customs, norms, etc
/r/AskReddit for questions which are better answered by any Redditor
/r/UKPolitics for posts of a specifically political nature
/r/UKVisa for questions related to British visas
/r/UKPersonalFinance for posts related to finance in the UK
/r/LegalAdviceUK for legal queries
/r/HousingUK for issues with landlords, renting, buying, etc
/r/DWPHelp for assistance with the welfare system (Housing Benefit, DLA, PIP, JSA, UC, etc)
/r/DIYUK for discussion regarding home renovation, repair, etc.
/r/MentalHealthUK to discuss ones mental wellbeing
/r/UKJobs to seek advice on your employment
/r/UniUK for discussion related to universities, their courses, life experiences, etc

If you believe this message is posted in error, message the /r/uk team and include a link to this post. Please don't do this lightly, we're very busy and have likely acted correctly.

1

Oh_its_that_asshole Antrim 1 week ago

No shit? People weren't using Coinbase to buy their bitcoins for darknet drugs were they?

2

cprxrk 1 week ago

You’d be surprised lol

1

Internet-Fair 1 week ago

It doesn’t surprise me that bitcoin is used for drug purchases. It surprises me that the UK police dwarf all other countries.

2

Oh_its_that_asshole Antrim 1 week ago

UK is up there with China in terms of how much it routinely uses surveillance on its own citizens.

1

4 2

9 4

Think-notlikedasheep Redditor for 1 months. 1 week ago

"Not your keys, not your crypto" posted by someone in 8...7...6...

1

Cryptodragonnz 1 week ago

With ordinary banks you don't even need this. Withdraw 20% of deposited funds and the bank will have no available funds left.

0

sudospectral 1 week ago

They'll use their assets to borrow money from up the chain to the discount window in order to satisfy those withdrawals. That bank isn't even balance sheet insolvent and the FDIC doesn't need to get involved. They just won't be able to loan money unless they get more deposits. All you've done is discover liquid and illiquid assets.

2

dgerard 1 week ago

wow, that would really suck if banks weren't insured against this specific thing

6

Cryptodragonnz 1 week ago

They literally aren't. They only hold a small percentage in assets of the actual deposit balances. For example, in Cypress a banking crisis resulted in the banks having to slash the balances of account holders so they could remain open.

0

Suishou 1 week ago

People here aren’t willing to dig into the dirty details behind the FDIC “guarantees”...the data is all there that shows it won’t insure people for the stated 250k when there is a major event.

0

happyscrappy IT Specialist 1 week ago

The "Full Faith and Credit" of the US Government is behind the FDIC. It is explicitly stated. https://www.fdic.gov/regulations/laws/rules/4000-2660.html It essentially cannot fail. In the worst case the US would just print money to give to you. The existence of this backing basically means that they may never have to pay out because selling a bank to another bank at a discount requires less capital (up to and including none) than repaying lost money.

4

Cryptodragonnz 1 week ago

Why do people think I was only talking about US banks?

1

happyscrappy IT Specialist 1 week ago

I wasn't responding to you. I was responding to Suishou. And he said FDIC and impugned their guarantees. So my response was appropriate.

2

dgerard 1 week ago

>Cypress

13

devliegende 1 week ago

First prize for posting the most ignorant comment of the day.

7

azoundria2 1 week ago

It works just fine as it always has. You just need to wait for Roosevelt to increase the currency supply a bit.

1

aShittierShitTier4u 1 week ago

I just had to wonder, who will be the Terry Childs of the crypto world? Most would bet on Craig Wright, but I think he would crumble under pressure in a cell.

Childs sat in jail for years, refusing to divulge his password to a San Francisco government computer. He had related charges, but his refusal enhanced his sentence. I always thought I would gladly give the password up to get out of jail. Maybe Childs really took Henry Thoreau to heart.

1

james_pic 1 week ago

It's OK, the key holder has merely been arrested. I'm sure they'll get out eventually. It's not like they've died suddenly in India. It's a perfectly reasonable business continuity plan that if a single individual in your organisation is incapacitated, you just wait for them to return.

15

azoundria2 1 week ago

It might be OK, but is it OKEx?

1

0101111000101010 1 week ago

I mean it's not normal for people at banks to ever get arrested

4

meowmeow26 1 week ago

It's perfectly normal in Hong Kong for people to get arrested for no good reason. Not so normal elsewhere.

5

SnapshillBot 2 weeks ago

My business teacher laughed at me today for mentioning bitcoin :(

Snapshots:

this is perfectly normal, it happen... - archive.org, archive.today*

I am just a simple bot, not a moderator of this subreddit | bot subreddit | contact the maintainers

7

thchax Tin 2 weeks ago

Annndd this is the reason why no one should keep their crypto on exchanges.

1

SocialSuicideSquad 2 weeks ago

Ho boy.

1

nice2yz Bronze 2 weeks ago

Yup, this may get messy.

1

7 2

Think-notlikedasheep Redditor for 1 months. 2 weeks ago

Negative yielding debt always is more money for cronies.

1

walloon5 2 weeks ago

You sure you don't want to buy some negative yield debt?

They guarantee they won't go down in value as fast as other things

This is their new "number go down" strategy lol. Good "investment"!! /s

3

Kpenney 2 weeks ago

Oh yeah negative interest rate bonds are so sexy, I like to fill swimming pools up with them and dive in like scrooge mcduck and feel the paper cuts of the world debt all over my body as that's the only thing their really good for in any term./s

2

zaxbyc1A 2 weeks ago

that’s a picture...!

1

DetroitMotorShow Redditor for 2 months. 2 weeks ago

It has to be seen how long this manipulated cycle of negative rates can continue. The central banks have already destroyed most economies, and they have very perfectly goat a scapegoat in the form of COVID19 on which they will blame all their problems. The fact is most economies were in deep mess even before COVID19

3

Mark_Bear 2 weeks ago

To me, nothing shouts BROKEN FINANCIAL SYSTEM: ABANDON SHIP. ABANDON SHIP! more than negative interest rates.

9

whitslack 2 weeks ago

I can't understand why commodity money (gold, silver, bitcoin) hasn't mooned in the face of negative interest rates. I get that no one wants to sit on a pile of physical cash due to the logistics of that, but then why do they buy negative-yielding bonds and hold those when they could be buying and holding commodities that *aren't guaranteed* to lose value over time? The only thing I can figure is that they prefer a guaranteed loss that they can count on over a variable return that might be a gain or might be a loss.

3

Mark_Bear 1 week ago

Some institutional traders (retirement fund managers) are required to invest in bullshit. I mean, when the laws were created they made sense, but things have clearly changed. Also, some people believe that the negative rates will go even lower, driving the price of their bond up. If this is not mania, I don't know what is. Plus, what you said, known vs unknown loss.

2

whitslack 1 week ago

>Also, some people believe that the negative rates will go even lower, driving the price of their bond up. That's an interesting bet to make. Will the capital appreciation of your bonds outpace the interest you're paying on them? That bet gets harder and harder to win as interest rates go further and further negative, as winning the bet requires the prevailing interest rates on new bonds to continue falling at ever faster rates. I actually wonder whether the bond pricing mechanic even still works in a negative interest rate regime. Does the value of a bond that slowly loses you money go up when the only new bonds available for purchase would lose you money at a faster rate? I don't understand why a bond that loses you money has a positive price at all. Seems like you'd want to pay someone to take that garbage off your hands so you can stop bleeding out.

2

BigGaynk 2 weeks ago

i disagree, for them its working as intended, of course for us little people the consequences are very serious.

3

ArtigoQ 2 weeks ago

It was never intended to work in the long run. Either they never extrapolated out past the first decade or they knew EVENTUALLY, the debt would come due, but it would be someone else's problem by then.

4

Ovv_Topik 2 weeks ago

But what effect will significant (if not hyper) inflation of the US$ have on Bitcoins price?
I find it hard to get my head around this math.

0

UnorthodoxAlchemy Bronze 2 weeks ago

Take a look at the BTC charts in currencies that have already experienced hyper inflation like the Turkish lira. BTC is at an all time high vs the lira, so something like this on a smaller scale would be my guess.

1

kalashnikovkitty9420 Platinum | QC: BTC 112, CC 87 | BCH critic | ExchS 2 weeks ago

lol just means getting to 1million usd per bitcoins comes faster

1

Fxck Tin 2 weeks ago

They print more money, I buy more crypto

4

Robby16 Platinum | QC: CC 364, BTC 32 2 weeks ago

Btc* Crypto as in alts are gambling

0

AutoModerator 2 weeks ago

Bitcoin(BTC) Basic Info: Website - r/Bitcoin - Abstract - History - Exchanges - Wallets

Biases(Updated July, 2019): Arguments For & Arguments Against | CryptoWikis: Policy - Contribute

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

1

25 9

John Pfeffer - @jlppfeffer

RT @coinbase: Coinbase is beginning our search for at least two Bitcoin development grant recipients starting today. If you'd like to apply or nominate a Bitcoin core developer to be sponsored, read more here and fill out the form. https://t.co/2oGhfA9v6z

320 1489

Reuben Bramanathan - @bramanathan

RT @brian_armstrong: Excited to be supporting more Bitcoin protocol development. This is a great start, but hopefully we can expand this program over time. Thank you to @PeterMcCormack for the push on his podcast to get this over the line 🙏 https://t.co/T87b3bhEJn

35 416

Arjun Balaji - @arjunblj

RT @brian_armstrong: Excited to be supporting more Bitcoin protocol development. This is a great start, but hopefully we can expand this program over time. Thank you to @PeterMcCormack for the push on his podcast to get this over the line 🙏 https://t.co/T87b3bhEJn

19 234

Brian Armstrong - @brian_armstrong

Excited to be supporting more Bitcoin protocol development. This is a great start, but hopefully we can expand this program over time. Thank you to @PeterMcCormack for the push on his podcast to get this over the line 🙏 https://t.co/T87b3bhEJn

22 241

Eric Scrivner - @etscrivner

RT @coinbase: Coinbase is beginning our search for at least two Bitcoin development grant recipients starting today. If you'd like to apply or nominate a Bitcoin core developer to be sponsored, read more here and fill out the form. https://t.co/2oGhfA9v6z

163 791

Pierre Rochard - @pierre_rochard

RT @coinbase: Coinbase is beginning our search for at least two Bitcoin development grant recipients starting today. If you'd like to apply or nominate a Bitcoin core developer to be sponsored, read more here and fill out the form. https://t.co/2oGhfA9v6z

7 102

Steve Lee - @moneyball

RT @jack: This is great https://t.co/pYZFFGCI7a

0 7

Eric Meltzer - @wheatpond

Nice https://t.co/XAbUbsxklS

0 4

nic carter - @nic__carter

RT @coinbase: Coinbase is beginning our search for at least two Bitcoin development grant recipients starting today. If you'd like to apply or nominate a Bitcoin core developer to be sponsored, read more here and fill out the form. https://t.co/2oGhfA9v6z

45 234

brianddk 1 week ago

Bad

Bad people doing good things doesn't make those good thing bad.

This is great news. Free software is expensive to make, even if everyone volunteers. VPS instances for MAT testing. Web hosting for documentation. Certificate purchases for OS install binaries. Apple hardware to legally test or produce anything on that platform.

Would be great if an r/Electrum sponsorship would happen. I know lots of people would like to have an official release of the iPhone KIVY port. I'd imagine the Apple developer's license and need for Apple hardware are two limiting factors. Though they may just dislike Apple as well.

1

rustyBootstraps 1 week ago

no2x delete coinbase

1

sylsau 1 week ago

This is a good initiative on the part of Coinbase.

It's a little late, but as they say: better late than never.

0

Bitcoin_to_da_Moon 2 weeks ago

i pick LukeDashjr, that would be hilarious.

2

Lancer37 Gold | QC: DOGE 86 2 weeks ago

Funny how the best performing crypto had no ICO funding- though i suppose early mining helped raise funds for any devs that participated.

I hope coinbase is at least somewhat unbias... kinda doubtful but their support shouldn't be negative.

1

RonTurkey 2 weeks ago

Bout fucking time

0

bell2366 2 weeks ago

Although I recognise that core developers need an income stream, I'm very uncomfortable with the likes of Andreessen wielding influence with them via salaries/grants whatever they call it.

1

Cab000se 2 weeks ago

FIRST?!?

LOLOLOL

2

randbtcacct 2 weeks ago

https://blog.coinbase.com/what-happened-at-the-satoshi-roundtable-6c11a10d8cdf#.qaggpgms9

Few years ago they were quite content replacing all the bitcoin core devs

13

zv099 redditor for 4 weeks 2 weeks ago

I don't think the people picking on Coinbase realize just how large the group is/was that wanted to slightly raise the block size. I was one of them. I'm still not convinced the direction that happened was correct. I don't think super large blocks are correct either but with government crackdowns and all the attempts to suppress speech going on including ip bans, etc. perhaps it was best to keep blocks smaller. I don't know. I'd like to see more on this sub promoting Lightning and helping vendors set up Lightning.

All this to say, perhaps, like a lot of us, Coinbase is starting to come around and this is an admission/olive branch of sorts.

It is possible to glue a community back together so perhaps it should be viewed that way. Coinbase absolutely needs to start offering something with Lightning. That would be huge. There's nothing wrong with being wrong, even stubbornly wrong but you shouldn't try to take the legs off your opponent when it comes to things like this. Give Lightning a fair chance.

As far as surveillance/irs stuff goes, there isn't a single American bitcoin company that isn't doing it. You can't be connected to a US bank and not be forced to do what they tell you to do.

The only reason that these companies haven't been shut down is because the central bankers are criminals and they too need an escape plan when fiat collapses.

0

Supersecretsauceboss 2 weeks ago

Hate on coin base all you want but they’ve paved a road.

0

ZPM1 2 weeks ago

Might be good news, just as likely if the programmers all become captured, i.e. salaried employees, the projects might be more like, "well we only have funds to employ you one more year but just as a hypothetical see about how we could add a small value added tax to each transaction on the blockchain. We can use this 0.2% tax to fund all of your salaries and the tax rate will never ever change, really." Or, "I want you to look for ways to 'harmonize' BTC with Fedcoin and all the other Central bank coins. It is terribly important we program in a way to tie Bitcoins value directly to Fedcoin, at least until we have fully transitioned away from the outdated BTC."

4

cryptening 2 weeks ago

they can pay people to code whatever they want. It doesn't mean it will ever get merged.

2

mbrochh 2 weeks ago

Oh boy.. now we need to codereview twice as hard when these implants submit patches...

Fuck Armstrong.

3

MrRGnome 2 weeks ago

About time. This is the first step in a long journey to repair the relationship Coinbase has with the bitcoin community. Don't let it be the last.

5

B_ILL 2 weeks ago

Until they stop working with the IRS to track Bitcoins fuck them. https://www.coindesk.com/irs-enlists-coinbase-in-latest-crypto-tracing-deal

0

Lemons81 2 weeks ago

Reminds me of Microsoft funding SuSe Linux, now looks like crap and memory hogging distro.

5

cointastical 2 weeks ago

#DELETECOINBASE

Are you using a U2F device on your coinbase account?

No? Hmm... did you know you that starting right this very moment, and completed before you are done reading this comment reply, a hacker could do a SIM porting attack, and steal all your funds from Coinbase (yes, even your USD ... by buying bitcoin with it and withdrawing the BTC)?

https://blog.coinbase.com/safeguarding-against-phone-porting-9ac102d3a455

You would only know about it because the next time you go to use your phone you'll notice it has stopped working.

Yes, ... it's that easy for the thieves.

And that's not the only risk for your BTC even if Coinbase is an honest, competent exchange.

7

cointastical 2 weeks ago

Coinbase is not a friend to bitcoin:

https://twitter.com/TheStalwart/status/1261779484203720706

10

ManyArtichoke 2 weeks ago

Definitely a PR move. Reminder that Coinbase is developing blockchain surveillance tools for the IRS and DEA

14

IVIurkyVVaters 2 weeks ago

Wait, I thought they were not going to take any political stances? Bitcoin at its core is political.

(HALF JOKE)

1

Satoshiman256 2 weeks ago

Right, in theory their development decisions could be influenced

1

onetimeonly1zwo3 Gold | QC: XRP 36, CC 31 1 week ago

Or even worse the team could actually make significant progress.

1

Satoshiman256 1 week ago

Relax

1

onetimeonly1zwo3 Gold | QC: XRP 36, CC 31 1 week ago

?

1

Satoshiman256 1 week ago

I'm just replying to his comment. I think its a good thing. Just saying that if they invest a lot of money into it they might want things done "their way"

1

onetimeonly1zwo3 Gold | QC: XRP 36, CC 31 1 week ago

But even when it is 'their way' it is 'more way' than 'no way' , amiright?

1

Satoshiman256 1 week ago

Haha, I suppose.

1

MoreTransliteration Tin 2 weeks ago

Excellent

2

elendir1 2 weeks ago

Not a good news. Newcomers don't know that Coinbase is the arch enemy of bitcoin. Remember the drama of 2017.

10

monoslim 2 weeks ago

Why are they the arch enemy?

2

cryptening 2 weeks ago

it's a shit coin casino and their business model is based on making people think they need to buy the new new shitcoin of the month, every month. people hodling bitcoin does not make them fees.

1

cointastical 2 weeks ago

Coinbase is not a friend to bitcoin: - https://twitter.com/TheStalwart/status/1261779484203720706

8

monoslim 2 weeks ago

I see. Well they are an exchange after so they only make money on trades/transfers like all the rest.

2

ManyArtichoke 2 weeks ago

They're developing blockchain surveillance tools for the IRS and DEA.

8

monoslim 2 weeks ago

Isn't it auditable by design? These are probably tools that anyone can build for that purpose as well.

2

TacticalWolves 2 weeks ago

Isn’t this a good thing for Bitcoin future. If there is such a surveillance system then they cannot blame that Bitcoin is only used for illegal transactions etc etc

3

Jps300 2 weeks ago

Bitcoin will always be used for illegal transactions, just as the USD is and always has been.

3

NinjaDK 2 weeks ago

Coinbase hating Bitcoin maximalists right now
Jokes aside, really good news, and great to see Bitcoin developers being incentiviced to make significant contributions, unlike BCH which hardforks again because they aren't getting any funding, lol.

5

CollinEnstad Platinum | QC: BCH 177 | TraderSubs 12 2 weeks ago

Yeah that's just ABC that's leaving BCH cause they want money

1

uikhgfzdd 2 weeks ago

Great. So the what bitcoin did Podcast was a success!

15

warrchaser 2 weeks ago

I saw that episode! It was awesome

5

renepickhardt Lightning Network Expert 2 weeks ago

This a great step. Let's see when they will do lightning grants

27

Bitcoin_to_da_Moon 2 weeks ago

> Let's see when they will do lightning grants in 11 years?

2

Fxck Tin 2 weeks ago

This is really exciting!

2

5 5 7

Ash Egan - @AshAEgan

+https://t.co/Ee74rwWS9X ++https://t.co/Xc2OLkZEWS +https://t.co/WfWPEoxBtN +https://t.co/ubDdOlXvef +https://t.co/Zgtg8NqaVi

0 1

Vitalik "Not giving away ETH" Buterin - @VitalikButerin

RT @juanbenet: 🚀 Huge milestone for the thousands of people who built @Filecoin together - thank you! ❤️ I am extremely proud of the Filecoin community, the many teams of builders, miners, and users across the globe, persevering in their vision for a better internet. #FilecoinLiftoff https://t.co/RTJSUib5Ez

76 478

Chris Burniske - @cburniske

RT @juanbenet: 🚀 Huge milestone for the thousands of people who built @Filecoin together - thank you! ❤️ I am extremely proud of the Filecoin community, the many teams of builders, miners, and users across the globe, persevering in their vision for a better internet. #FilecoinLiftoff https://t.co/RTJSUib5Ez

44 247

Wong Joon Ian - @joonian

RT @juanbenet: 🚀 Huge milestone for the thousands of people who built @Filecoin together - thank you! ❤️ I am extremely proud of the Filecoin community, the many teams of builders, miners, and users across the globe, persevering in their vision for a better internet. #FilecoinLiftoff https://t.co/RTJSUib5Ez

40 186

Hunter Horsley - @HHorsley

RT @Filecoin: The Filecoin Network has passed epoch 148,888 🎉 — the rocket has lifted off 🚀 So far, the network is stable and community members are reporting successful operations #FilecoinLiftoff https://t.co/zxzc28D8ia

57 193

Laura Shin - @laurashin

RT @Filecoin: The Filecoin Network has passed epoch 148,888 🎉 — the rocket has lifted off 🚀 So far, the network is stable and community members are reporting successful operations #FilecoinLiftoff https://t.co/zxzc28D8ia

36 115

Tyler Winklevoss - @tylerwinklevoss

RT @Filecoin: The Filecoin Network has passed epoch 148,888 🎉 — the rocket has lifted off 🚀 So far, the network is stable and community members are reporting successful operations #FilecoinLiftoff https://t.co/zxzc28D8ia

35 115

vlmutolo - @vlmutolo 2 weeks ago

I think this is pretty cool. The basic idea is that Filecoin builds on top of the existing IPFS storage layer to add an incentive to provide storage to the global network.

If you're someone who follows cryptocurrencies, the first question you're probably asking is "what's their consensus algorithm?". The answer is "proof of storage". Assuming they've figured out the technical details (I haven't read their paper thoroughly yet), this seems like a decent idea. It avoids the massive power requirements of proof of work, and there's lots of unused storage out there in the world for people to offer for a price, and they can offer it at a very low power usage. Persistent storage doesn't actively require power.

As a back-of-the-envelope calculation, if you total up the storage capacity of every iPhone in the world, you'll probably reach something like 64000 petabytes [1] [2]. Backblaze, a fairly large cloud storage provider, has a total network size of around 500 petabytes [3]. Maybe S3 is a hundred times larger? Maybe? Still, it's good that the combined storage capacity of all the iPhones in the world alone can compete with the big storage providers. That gives me hope that there's at least the theoretical potential for actual decentralization, as opposed to with proof of work, which tends to favor a minority of people with large compute rigs. Normal people don't want to max out the chips in their phones and laptops 24/7, but maybe they wouldn't mind using some passive storage.

I'm not sure about how consistently people in Filecoin need to be connected to the network, but that could prove to be an issue.

Another thing to look at would be whether there's any way for a third party to see what data you're holding. This is an issue because you probably don't want to let random other people store whatever they want on your machine. Lots of that content could be illegal, and (IANAL) I'll bet the law can hold you accountable just for storing it.

[1]: https://kommandotech.com/statistics/how-many-iphones-have-be...

[2]: https://www.counterpointresearch.com/average-storage-capacit...

[3]: https://www.backblaze.com/blog/500-petabytes-and-counting/

CharlesDodgson - @CharlesDodgson 2 weeks ago

oh look, an unnecessarily complex and inefficient way to store data :(

coolspot - @coolspot 2 weeks ago

Has anyone calculated approximate annual storage price per GB?

RichardHeart - @RichardHeart 2 weeks ago

As blockchains are slow and inefficient databases, it's only reasonable to employ them where censorship resistance is required. If no one is trying to censor what you are doing, avoid blockchains. I believe torrents have shown their censorship resistance.

So if it's not for discovery or censorship resistance, what could it be for? Efficiency? Vertical integration of hard drives into the highest density 4u space is already open source. For instance 60 drives in 4u: https://www.backblaze.com/blog/open-source-data-storage-serv...

Backblaze and others also use vertical integration to get better prices from all vendors for the drives, connectivity, and they even use fancy parity systems to get redundancy across machines with minimal overhead. Distributed (horizontal) scaling loses to vertical integration.

So what are you left with? Yet another token, with a proof of storage instead of proof of hashing or proof of memory hard hashing, or proof of time locking (caveat, I founded a cryptocurrency based on that last one, for inflation only, consensus is still vanilla POW.) At least one or two "usuable" things came out of the billions wasted of 2017 ICO money... I guess.

teslaberry - @teslaberry 2 weeks ago

filecoin will be a useful protcol for independent warehouses of data, all in an effort to consolidate in a pool against the biggest players. it will NOT be for the 'masses' of people, except to the extent they enjoy donating a few dollars of their electricity every month to someone's file storeage for shits and giggles.

Show all comments on Hackernews

25 6

cryptolipto Redditor for 5 months. 2 weeks ago

Bitcoin has its use. And it’s gonna be gobbled up by companies as a hedge against inflation. Ethereum is what will lead to true industry disruption. Buy and hold both

1

JeremyLinForever stack sats, not debt 2 weeks ago

Bitcoin has basically solidified itself as a long term store of value that’s not going away any time soon. It’ll be the base layer of cryptocurrency, and ETH bending backwards to make wrapped BTC in time lock contracts proves just that.

As for Ethereum, it’s an open protocol that is used to make all types of altcoins. You just have to think of Bitcoin as money itself, and Ethereum is the equivalent of an exchange that lets people create other digital currencies on their protocol (stocks).

So you’re essentially at odds when you debate one over the other. On one hand, Bitcoin is hard capped at 21 million, and will never produce more. On the other hand, Ethereum doesn’t have a hard supply cap and will continually keep increasing as altcoins full the eco space. Do you choose to put your money on growing tech and hope that the supply increase of ETH will catch up with the demand? Or will people rather store their money in BTC that is deflationary and believe that it will only cause more scarcity and demand like other hard assets such as fine art, prime real estate, and the like?

2

frank__costello Platinum | QC: CC 109, ETH 16 2 weeks ago

> Ethereum doesn’t have a hard supply cap and will continually keep increasing as altcoins full the eco space Many Ethereans (myself included) think ETH will become more scarce than Bitcoin once EIP-1559 is implemented. Ethereum could potentially reach negative issuance. Of course, this is a big _if_. As of today, Bitcoin certainly has a stronger monetary policy.

0

JeremyLinForever stack sats, not debt 2 weeks ago

How does it reach negative issuance? Who will burn their tokens? I do think there is a place for Ethereum in the future. However, I do believe that the token is intended to be cheap so that it can run the vast networks of alts that use Ethereum as the base layer.

1

frank__costello Platinum | QC: CC 109, ETH 16 2 weeks ago

> How does it reach negative issuance? Who will burn their tokens? Transaction fees will be burned instead of paid to miners https://insights.deribit.com/market-research/analysis-of-eip-1559/ Filecoin (which launched today) has already implemented EIP-1559, so it will be an interesting case study.

0

haroldfonda Tin 2 weeks ago

He is right. Eth is btc on speed.

0

treemull93 Redditor for 4 months. 2 weeks ago

As much as ethereum has done for the space, I am ready for blockchain 3.0 (Polkadot/Cardano/etc). Upon these releases we will really see the crypto world propel forward.

1

The90sWereRad Bronze 2 weeks ago

I wonder when people will stop comparing these two juggernauts. They both serve different purposes.

2

robis87 2 weeks ago

welcome to the new reality old timer!

0

sentokoo Silver | QC: CC 27 2 weeks ago

Aww yiss the instant messaging of crypto

1

hottogo Gold | QC: CC 62 2 weeks ago

Very cool, imagine seeing this in 2015? The chairman of the CFTC is a fan of Ethereum!

1

Zerpling Bronze 2 weeks ago

Wait till he hears about BitConnect

3

SwapzoneIO Gold | QC: BTC 46, CC 19 2 weeks ago

He says, "If Bitcoin is Email then Ethereum is Internet!" He seems to be an ETH fan boy 👦

3

Skfandtfan1 Platinum | QC: CC 169 2 weeks ago

Yet all the articles and new are that institutions main bet is on btc.

Stack 1 BTC and 32 ETH and hope they both do another 100X.

3

monkeyhold99 Platinum | QC: BTC 150, CC 23 | TraderSubs 99 2 weeks ago

Lmao people are missing the point. Email is still around today. Everyone uses email. Bitcoin has already succeeded and will continue to be used. It’s found it’s niche, whereas Ethereum still has a LOT to prove

7

BoyScout22 Gold | QC: ETH 21 | TraderSubs 15 2 weeks ago

>Lmao people are missing the point. Email is still around today. Everyone uses email. Bitcoin has already succeeded and will continue to be used. but ethereum is already starting to swallow bitcoin. once eth 2.0 is battled-tested and secure, there is no reason for the bitcoin blockchain to exist due to its enormous power consumption and environmental impact.

0

monkeyhold99 Platinum | QC: BTC 150, CC 23 | TraderSubs 99 2 weeks ago

Lol so funny seeing people worry about “environmental impact” all of a sudden when literally everything you use in life has an environmental impact. When will people understand that energy these days is cheap and efficient? 😆

1

-TimeAndTide- Redditor for 2 months. 2 weeks ago

Bitcoin or ethereum, it will only matter if mass adoption by people occur.

1

sfultong Gold | QC: BTC 34, CC 29 | TraderSubs 34 2 weeks ago

How has Bitcoin succeeded?

0

mikkeller Gold | QC: ETH 60 | TraderSubs 53 2 weeks ago

A lot to prove, means a lot of room for growth, more than Bitcoin.

1

monkeyhold99 Platinum | QC: BTC 150, CC 23 | TraderSubs 99 2 weeks ago

That makes no sense at all

1

Skfandtfan1 Platinum | QC: CC 169 2 weeks ago

This non answer makes no fucking sense. I own both but Eth doesn't even have a hard cap yet and eth 2.0 when?

2

frank__costello Platinum | QC: CC 109, ETH 16 2 weeks ago

ETH has no hard cap because it prioritizes security. We'll see how Bitcoin does as it's security subsidies dry up. And gold has no hard cap either, hasn't stopped it from being valuable.

5

hyperedge Platinum | QC: BTC 114, CC 65 | ETH critic | Trade 2 weeks ago

>ETH has no hard cap because it prioritizes security. WAT?

1

Skfandtfan1 Platinum | QC: CC 169 2 weeks ago

All these posts smell like I'm super fucking bitter I missed out on bitcoin, Eth is still affordable I hope it goes 10k. I love the honesty even if I have to read between the lines. I want eth to do another 100X as well but at least lets be honest we are here for the money not the tech.

1

ethrevolution Platinum | QC: ETH 256, CC 120 | TraderSubs 241 2 weeks ago

Add to this that there's a very real possibility that the net issuance of ETH goes negative in the not-too-distant future and we have a perfect storm brewing. Curious to see what the 'no fixed supply' people will say when it does (go net negative)!

3

onlyonecoin 2 weeks ago

Could you explain the difference between the FED and ETH? One certainty, both can change the supply at will. The FED is at least honest about what they are doing.

3

frank__costello Platinum | QC: CC 109, ETH 16 2 weeks ago

FED: prints money whenever the chairman want ETH & BTC: prints money according to a socially-agreed-upon monetary policy BTC social contract: Issuance will decrease to 0 ETH social contract: Issuance will never increase

1

hyperedge Platinum | QC: BTC 114, CC 65 | ETH critic | Trade 2 weeks ago

Do you have any idea how many times the max amount of ETH has changed over the years? Bitcoins monetary policy has been set in stone since inception. Ethereum "monetary policy" if you can even call it that has been all over the board constantly changing.

2

ethrevolution Platinum | QC: ETH 256, CC 120 | TraderSubs 241 2 weeks ago

BTC miners could “change the supply at will” just as much as Ethereum miners can. Stop spreading misinformation please. Having a different monetary policy (minimal viable issuance vs. hard cap and diminishing block subsidy) isn’t a white/black comparison, it’s just ... different.

1

hodlmax 2 weeks ago

The miners could try. The rules are not respected here: [https://np.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/cbxekm/bitmain\_lost\_150000\_due\_to\_invalid\_block/](https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/cbxekm/bitmain_lost_150000_due_to_invalid_block/) You are decentralized, or you are not. When you are decentralized the miners have no say. The is the difference between BTC and ETH. BTC is decentralized. ETH is not, e.g.: EIP-1559, the leader decides and they follow.

3

ethrevolution Platinum | QC: ETH 256, CC 120 | TraderSubs 241 2 weeks ago

You’re so wrong it hurts. The rules are dictated by majority hashpower, so if most miners agree to a rule change, it *will* pass. This is the same for Ethereum but because the majority believes in the progress set forth by the devs, it is “voted in”. Once PoS goes live, it’s even more interesting: a failed attempt of takeover will slash your stake, this is akin to the miner hardware burning down, thus being unable to try again. In Bitcoin, a failed attempt costs “only” the missed miner income and a malicious actor can keep trying.

3

hyperedge Platinum | QC: BTC 114, CC 65 | ETH critic | Trade 2 weeks ago

>You’re so wrong it hurts. The rules are dictated by majority hashpower, so if most miners agree to a rule change, it > >will pass. I've explained this to you already in another post but you refuse to educate yourself. Nodes control Bitcoin not miners. Yes miners and hashpower have the vote but they don't have all the control. If miners want to make a change that the nodes don't want they can simply ignore any blocks from those miners and not propagate them. By doing this the miners could lose out on their block rewards. This is what happened in 2017 when the miners tried to take over the network. Nodes threatened to blacklist miners and they gave up.

5

hodlmax 2 weeks ago

You never took the time to look at the past. You should try to understand how the incentives of the Bitcoin white paper operate. This is real decentralization, the miners have no say. The full nodes verify and discard invalid blocks: [https://twitter.com/pierre\_rochard/status/952585351775875073](https://twitter.com/pierre_rochard/status/952585351775875073) >Until your altcoin successfully defeats a coordinated attack like NYA/S2X, with 90% of the hashrate and major businesses trying to force a hard fork, its immutability is untested and its monetary policy is suspect. > >Bitcoin has earned its keep, its immutability is beyond question  This was tested with the DAO on Ethereum, we all know how it ends. PoS is incompatible with decentralization: [https://download.wpsoftware.net/bitcoin/pos.pdf](https://download.wpsoftware.net/bitcoin/pos.pdf)

3

Buttoshi Gold | QC: BTC 75, CC 41 | r/Buttcoin 6 2 weeks ago

If bitcoin is internet, ethereum is aol.

5

ebaley Platinum | QC: BTC 774 | BCH critic 2 weeks ago

Jackass.

1

lomosaur Platinum | QC: CC 73, XLM 37 2 weeks ago

that'd be some slow email

5

Cryptoguruboss Gold | QC: BTC 357 | BCH critic 2 weeks ago

The only problem is bitcoin is the internet of blockchain..

0

Jake123194 Platinum | QC: CC 216, XRP 117, ETH 60 | TraderSub 2 weeks ago

Using a dial up connection.

0

Cryptoguruboss Gold | QC: BTC 357 | BCH critic 2 weeks ago

Yes till it transitions to fibreoptic in 30 years same as internet

5

ethrevolution Platinum | QC: ETH 256, CC 120 | TraderSubs 241 2 weeks ago

internet has always been a work-in-progress, whereas Bitcoin has somehow stalled innovation and just remains at the status quo.

0

Cryptoguruboss Gold | QC: BTC 357 | BCH critic 2 weeks ago

Lol. Still no 1. Fundamentals are bitches my friend. Hit me up when someone flippens it and I will eat my words. Year 27171735181816 may be

4

FluffyGlass Tin 2 weeks ago

..another clueless Rube Goldberg machines’ connoisseur.

0

Odbdb 2 weeks ago

Hellooo! The reason CFTC likes ether is because it had a single point of control. Gas prices.

0

cryptening 2 weeks ago

it also has people in charge for easy coercion.

4

drunkshihtzu2 2 weeks ago

Eth is growing. Bitcoin is not keeping up

7

ebaley Platinum | QC: BTC 774 | BCH critic 2 weeks ago

The gas fees are certainly up.

0

ethrevolution Platinum | QC: ETH 256, CC 120 | TraderSubs 241 2 weeks ago

Would you still think this is a negative after a few more halving, when the block subsidy runs *really* thin and Bitcoin's security will be dependant on Tx fees? I prefer a network that's working towards security being independent of the fees paid, way less things that can go wrong. But you do you!

0

Jake123194 Platinum | QC: CC 216, XRP 117, ETH 60 | TraderSub 2 weeks ago

At least developers are actively working on fixing that.

3

ebaley Platinum | QC: BTC 774 | BCH critic 2 weeks ago

By scrapping Ethereum as it is.

3

Jake123194 Platinum | QC: CC 216, XRP 117, ETH 60 | TraderSub 2 weeks ago

Its called improvements, stagnating is not the way forward otherwise we'd all still use horses and carts to get around.

2

ebaley Platinum | QC: BTC 774 | BCH critic 2 weeks ago

It's 5 years old. It can't be obsolete already. TCP/IP is decades old.

3

Jake123194 Platinum | QC: CC 216, XRP 117, ETH 60 | TraderSub 2 weeks ago

So innovation has to move at a set pace? Who defines what the pace should be? If we look back at technological advancement you can see that it has sped up.

1

ebaley Platinum | QC: BTC 774 | BCH critic 2 weeks ago

This is money. There has to be some stability. You can't keep screwing around with the protocol.

3

Jake123194 Platinum | QC: CC 216, XRP 117, ETH 60 | TraderSub 2 weeks ago

So you just stick with your first attempt then? Guess we should have stuck with bartering.

2

ebaley Platinum | QC: BTC 774 | BCH critic 2 weeks ago

Obviously they fucked up with the first Ethereum.

1

wmagicstream 2 weeks ago

1,000,000 developers merging whatever they want on the base layer. This sound great!

5

BankBailout Tin 2 weeks ago

Welcome to the future baby, you joined fashionably late, but early enough.

7

taquitoxz86 Bronze 2 weeks ago

bitcoin is dead and will get smashed by powerful eth, all in eth now!!

0

ebaley Platinum | QC: BTC 774 | BCH critic 2 weeks ago

Prepare to get rekt.

10

salil19 Tin 2 weeks ago

"If bitcoin is email ethereum is telephonic service"

0

Chyeadeed Gold 2 weeks ago

People are finally figuring it out.

27

d_goddard XMR & XRP 2 weeks ago

Two guesses, would be pleased to be proved wrong:

He hasn't seen how poorly it scales
He's never written a "Hello, World" contract in Solidity

0

Chyeadeed Gold 2 weeks ago

1. Multiple layer 2 implementations are scaling. 2. Why would someone have to know how to program to be impressed by something? That is a pointless criticism.

6

TheGreatCryptopo H0DL 4 LYFE 2 weeks ago

This guy gets it, he goes top of the enthusiasm class.

2

Taykeshi Gold | QC: CC 87 | BCH critic 2 weeks ago

you mean ethtusiasm?

2

3 3

7 3

PM_BITCOIN_AND_BOOBS 1 year ago

Sounds like Ripple for China.

1

mnbuckeye87 Redditor for more than 1 year 1 year ago

How would the technicals work on this if vechain is being used in any way? They stated that this is a centralized, private blockhain, I just can't see them trusting their national currency with anyone but themselves.

7

Mellowde Redditor for more than 1 year 1 year ago

This will not be on VeChain, VeChain will almost certainly be integrated in some way though. VET is key infrastructure which will tie into the DCEP.

12

cryptofest 1 year ago

Important warning from the article: “Mere hours after DCEP has been announced, various (potentially scam) Chinese exchanges have listed IOUs or knock-offs clones of DCEP. It’s important to know that DCEP is currently only distributed to banks working with the PBoC and will not be available for the public. If you want to find out what are reputable exchanges, check out our top cryptocurrency exchanges guide. It is strongly recommended NOT to trade DCEP until it is officially released as there is no guarantee exchanges have access to the digital currency.”

Be vigilant!

2

combatdev 1 year ago

Not trusting this.

2

gubertinus Redditor for more than 1 year 1 year ago

Holy.... the next big thing for Vechain is a stable or settlement coin. If the rumors are true, fasten your seatbelts..

2

burn__the__witch Redditor for more than 1 year 1 year ago

Genuinely interested in where you’ve seen this rumor? Can’t find it anywhere.

3

gubertinus Redditor for more than 1 year 1 year ago

Ok just saw it now but the people already answered. Thanks everyone for the quick response.

3

Smocking_Gun Redditor for more than 1 year 1 year ago

It was stated in the live ama. It's over 6 hours of video so I don't feel like parsing through it to send you an exact timestamp. People reacted to it on twitter as well. Here is such an example: https://twitter.com/bsc44_x/status/1145266498891472896?lang=en

10

FantasticFourSkin Redditor for more than 1 year 1 year ago

I forget if it was a tweet or at a live event, but Sunny stated this

3

JkUncovered Redditor for more than 1 year 1 year ago

[Settlement coin will be the next big thing for VeChain.](https://medium.com/@vechainofficial/top-10-most-asked-topics-during-the-vechain-ama-marathon-45a4bc9c2a46)

13

burn__the__witch Redditor for more than 1 year 1 year ago

There it is!

4

Casartelli Redditor for more than 1 year 1 year ago

Wait. Where is Vechain ;)

13

sevletor Redditor for more than 1 year 1 year ago

Powering DCEP. Where did u think it was? 😉

2

rBitcoinMod 1 year ago

Your submission has been flagged for removal because it is considered off topic for the Bitcoin subreddit.

^^I ^^am ^^a ^^bot ^^and ^^cannot ^^respond. ^^Please ^^contact ^^/r/Bitcoin ^^moderators ^^directly ^^via ^^mod ^^mail ^^if ^^you ^^have ^^questions.

1

3 3

17 6

sos755 Platinum | QC: BTC 493, BCH 185, CC 116 | MiningSu 2 weeks ago

What many people don't realize is that over the last several years, there are people that have been generating billions of private keys from movies, literature, music, and quotations, etc. so that if anyone ever happens to use one of them, these people can immediately take the funds.

1

thearmthearm 2 weeks ago

This article is really sneaky. It doesn't fully explain what a brain wallet is and so it seems as if they are talking about cracking the 12 or 24 seed words plus your passphrase which you took from your favourite book.

2

_o__0_ Platinum | QC: CC 982 | VET 5 2 weeks ago

What a great experiment!
Thanks for posting.
It reminds of the guy whos key was posted accidentally in some files, and a tx happened seconds after the upload.
Imo, its evidence of some bad shit on the adoption-horizon. Gonna be a bumpy road with bots this nasty patrolling.

2

Tidus17 Tin 2 weeks ago

It's not an issue unique to crypto: there are a lot of people using very easily hackable passwords. Not to even mention social engineering...

0

BankBailout Tin 2 weeks ago

There are tons of bots continually doing this. Even if you use a brain-wallet with the hash of one recent block it WILL get swept away.

2

AutoModerator 2 weeks ago

Bitcoin(BTC) Basic Info: Website - r/Bitcoin - Abstract - History - Exchanges - Wallets

Biases(Updated July, 2019): Arguments For & Arguments Against | CryptoWikis: Policy - Contribute

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

1

smoothID redditor for 3 months 2 weeks ago

I had a few brainwallets that held ridiculous amounts at today's price level. Nothing was taken. But I also didn't create them using dumb methods. Brainwallets still work fine. Though I wouldn't recommend it for most users.

6

zappadoing 2 weeks ago

I created a bunch of brainwallet honeypots for science-fun and most of them are still not taken yet. none of the keys are taken out of books or existing text, but the keys are hidden in plain sight. one got taken after 3 years - the key was published in plain text as html-title of a webage - an other was plain text in the bitcoin-blockchain. took also 2years to be taken.

1

KalEll66 2 weeks ago

This article is deceiving. 12 random seed words are enough. A passphrase added is significantly more.

3

never_safe_for_life 2 weeks ago

a more secure way of storing coins could be to email yourself an encrypted backup of your private key

So where do you store the key to this encryption? Encypt it and email it to yourself?

I suppose at this level you could use a "brainwallet" e.g. easily memorized seed phrase. To serve as the encryption key for your totally random wallet address.

4

zomgitsduke 2 weeks ago

Write a script that checks the wallet for funds every second. Sweep keys once amount > 0.

Honestly, could be a pretty low powered device just sitting there trying to check wallet balances over and over again. Could probably run that script on a desktop fr 2010 and just leave it plugged in forever haha.

1

pegg7 redditor for 3 months 2 weeks ago

works better on a modern device, when you got a large list

1

chepas_moi redditor for 4 weeks 2 weeks ago

The size of the list doesn't matter when you're using the right data structures. Lists are are your friends for set inclusion operations ;)

0

fresheneesz 2 weeks ago

Brain wallets are well known to be a badg idea for many many many reasons including that it encourages non random pass phrases and human memories suck. Unless you're trying to get passed Kim Jong Un's blood riders, you probably don't need to even consider using a brain wallet. Get a hardware wallet and securely store your backup seed in a safe. More info

3

operationco redditor for 2 weeks 2 weeks ago

> Brain wallets are well known to be a bag idea For all the bagholders?

1

Bitcoin_to_da_Moon 2 weeks ago

The network is robust in its unstructured simplicity

this is poetry

5

pegg7 redditor for 3 months 2 weeks ago

I love it!
When is the next round of this game? Larger amounts please.
EDIT: if someone has a good list of phrases - PM me for some brainstorming. Got the bot already.

2

nyaaaa 2 weeks ago

Next? Its running.. > Around a year ago, I conducted a similar experiment, where funds were sent to addresses generated by a reasonably obvious pattern deep inside some of the world’s best selling novels. These funds are still sitting in the blockchain today and have not been stolen.

3

pegg7 redditor for 3 months 2 weeks ago

Not in my list :( That's why I need to collaborate with someone on the list.

2

xboox 2 weeks ago

Where to convert text to private key?
For testing...

1

operationco redditor for 2 weeks 2 weeks ago

https://bitaddress.org was (one of) the first and most trusted, I think. Save it and run it offline, of course.

1

fijiMath 2 weeks ago

[https://brainwalletx.github.io/](https://brainwalletx.github.io/)  [https://brainwallet.io/](https://brainwallet.io/)

3

Thrgd456 2 weeks ago

Any way to gauge how profitable a sweeping operation would be?

4

badasimo 2 weeks ago

I may be missing something, but it may be possible to pre-generate a list of common phrases and then just monitor the blockchain for their hashes. That's how the 0.67 seconds one probably worked. So not very expensive, just have to run a node and send each address to a script which will check the list.

8

satoshi_yoshi 2 weeks ago

>That's how the 0.67 seconds one probably worked. That's how they all worked. It's not like they could look at a Bitcoin address and then try to work backwards from there. It's just that there are many people out there doing this, some move faster than others to sweep the funds, and they all have different prepared lists of public addresses that they have the ability to spend.

1

[deleted] 2 weeks ago

[deleted]

2

pegg7 redditor for 3 months 2 weeks ago

Right, coding the bot (got this done) + amassing the list (tbd).

1

ProbablyFullOfShit 2 weeks ago

I think the most expensive part would be that your node needs to be faster than everyone else that's doing the same thing.

4

igadjeed 2 weeks ago

The literature quotes are all first words from novels. The Satoshi quote is from the conclusion chapter of the white paper, near the end, which is why it took longer to snipe

21

100xer 2 weeks ago

That's the wrong method. Pick any phrase for a password, add a salt (another unrelated word), and hash it one trillion times.

21

MarkPapermaster 2 weeks ago

Just use normal trusted Bitcoin software to generate (on a offline computer) a 12 word seed. Copy paste some of the addresses to a thumb drive and then memorize the 12 words. (Now wipe the offline PC) Not using enough entropy for a bitcoin privkey (by coming up with something yourself) means the funds will eventually get lost no matter how clever you think you are. This method is the only safe way of getting a brainwallet.

5

tituspus redditor for 1 week 2 weeks ago

Better than using "trusted" bitcoin software to generate the seed is to rely solely on general random number generator, you can write your own seed generator on top of general RNG (which everything including https, ssl, ssh depends on) in an hour and don't need to trust some rando software. That is, using an existing general RNG, but it's better to write the glue code to make a valid seed is yourself - it's less time consuming than auditing existing implementations. And yeah do all this on an offline computer, you want probably an older one without wife and run linux/*bsd to be safe.

1

satoshi_yoshi 2 weeks ago

Why would anybody do all this versus just rolling some dice a bunch of times to generate a 12 word seed phrase? There are so many hassles and so many different things that can go wrong.

3

tituspus redditor for 1 week 2 weeks ago

It's not as much hassle as it sounds, take an old laptop boot live linux and run one script (to generate valid seed phrase on top of RNG is few lines of code).

1

MarkPapermaster 2 weeks ago

Diceware wordlist and HD wallet wordlist are not the same. If you create 12 diceward words your HD wallet won't accept it when you import it.

1

operationco redditor for 2 weeks 2 weeks ago

> you want probably an older one without wife Without wife I'd probably want a younger one.

3

spe59436-bcaoo 2 weeks ago

> Pick any phrase for a password, add a salt Use the seed phrase, remember it using memory palace, and let the wallet deal with salt

2

fresheneesz 2 weeks ago

Security by obscurity dude. Just don't use a brain wallet. Non random seeds are incredibly insecure.

9

exab 2 weeks ago

That's not security by obscurity. Hashing a password a lot of times is effectively a Password Based Key Derivation Function (PBKDF) and should be secure if the hash function is secure. Admittedly, a well vetted dedicated PBKDF would be more secure, but that solution should work, too.

1

fresheneesz 2 weeks ago

> Hashing a password a lot of times is effectively a Password Based Key Derivation Function (PBKDF) Yes indeed. But a KDF doesn't make a non-random password secure. What is security by obscurity about it is that the KDF would be non-standard. If it is standard, then it can only make a secure password more secure. If the funds were stolen in 0.67 seconds, they might last a few minutes instead.

1

100xer 2 weeks ago

A brain wallet is not for everyday bitcoin storage.

3

fresheneesz 2 weeks ago

I agree. It can be useful if you need to access bitcoin after going through draconian searches by authoritarian governments. Trying to keep it in memory for any length of time tho is so risky its probably not worth it for anyone.

2

IKnowWhoYouAreGuy 2 weeks ago

Anagram a phrase and swap out letters for numbers or special characters, then reverse it and add capitalization to indicate your favorite prime in binary * IknowWhoYouAreGuy * IKWYAG * 1kwY46 * 64Ykw1 ... * ^4ykW1! but, you know, with more words in the phrase

0

Youwinredditand redditor for 2 weeks 2 weeks ago

The thing to remember about these approaches is the method becomes a part of your password. And while using tricks like this may seem clever, they're less secure and more difficult to remember than other methods. Generally speaking a hardware wallet is going to be the most secure approach. But if you insist on using a brain wallet keep the following in mind: 1. Hashes are your friend and you don't necessarily need to keep the hashing count a secret. With a high enough rehash count you'll slow down attempts to brute force your password. 2. Some aspect of your password should be information you've never shared and not inspired by anything you've seen in the world. It doesn't have to be substantial but you can't ever share this information or enter it into a compromised system. 3. Combined with the concepts above you can add in phrases or information that someone might guess. This information should be substantial but also easy to remember. Again, using a seed you come up with is generally a bad idea but you're less likely to forget it or get it stolen if you keep the above rules in mind.

1

dealbuddy 2 weeks ago

I was going to use “this is a test of the emergency broadcast system” until I read this a few years ago

42

7 2

bitking74 2 weeks ago

> Let’s take a look at how DeFi works on Aztec 2.0:

A user sends a portion of their Dai balance to swap for ETH on Uniswap

The rollup bundles 100's of these transactions together into one trade

The Aztec contract receives ETH on behalf of these users

Have those guys not heard about slippage, you can't scale uniswap by bundling transactions

2

BismuthMoon 2 weeks ago

So that's why were pumping

4

Kopsthoot 2 weeks ago

Whole market’s pumping

6

BismuthMoon 2 weeks ago

Yes please

1

nishinoran Gold | QC: CC 59 | NANO 6 2 weeks ago

Privacy by default + high TPS throughput + low latency transactions + low(no) fees is all I want in a crypto.

Supporting smart contracts is of course also really nice.

2

greenearplugs 2 weeks ago

haven't heard anything about confidential transactions on mainnet in a while

When will these be live? Would love to transfer coins and have amount transfered be hidden.

4

elliottmatt 2 weeks ago

The amounts transferred into the pool won't be hidden. They will just be inside a pool. If you transfer a huge amount or a low liquidity pool it'll be obvious (or very likely) that any subsequent actions are yours (including withdrawal)

5

FaceDeer 2 weeks ago

Maybe next time some black hat hacks a hundred million dollar dapp he'll park his ill-gotten gains in a pool, and slowly drain it back out over the years as other people also jump on and out of it. Everybody wins! Wait, no, I think someone still loses in that scenario. But hey, as long as someone has smashed a whole bunch of eggs anyway, might as well have an omelette.

1

vvpan 2 weeks ago

Social-key recovery baked in

faints

12

GoldenRain99 2 weeks ago

More and more projects on layer 2 are going to bolster to crypto space

2

pale_blue_dots Platinum | QC: CC 225, XLM 41 | IOTA 5 | r/Politic 2 weeks ago

Yeah, looking forward to seeing more people use it. Not sure why more aren't using it already.

1

Jey_s_TeArS 2 weeks ago

When can we use it on mainnet ?!!

13

decibels42 2 weeks ago

Article says November. This is huge. If only this would pop up in something like a haiku one of these days...

5

twigwam 2 weeks ago

Couple wooks.

15

Oxygenjacket 2 weeks ago

So technically, it isn't here it's over there.

22

3

8 3

Thetapejustis 1 week ago

it does not mean anything accept they are changing to new type of entity. ECC is simply changing the enity type. In the United States a Corporation is treated as a person. ZEC's goal is to create a safe way for P2P payments. When you create something that is for the people with the main goal being privacy, your not making that much money yet. Switching to a non profit will free up of cash flow for ZEC to continue to provide the security that comes with the coin. Time, Development, Security cost money for users safety (NOT ZEC's). Yes they may save some money on taxes, but it does not affect the currency itself. Unless people get scared to dump the coin due to ignorance. ZEC's is not forking on top of that I would imagine with a new Entity the rules around corporate vesting are going to change. If they decide the old companies employee's can sell coins that have yet to vest under ECC(old) then ya that's not gonna be pretty. However, if they are just moving the Entity and Make sure employee's and founders and MAJOR Investors are contractually not allowed to sell for a set period then one would assume it is business as usual- This just my opinion r/zec

1

elena_ECC 2 weeks ago

This is what Josh S. said in the Telegram thread, "under this model, the only owner will be Bootstrap - a 501c3. No early founders. No investors. It's a completely clean cap table and honors the wishes of the community. All ZEC received goes to further Zcash...It's not about 'evading taxes.' Employees pay income tax, even on ZEC received."

From the blog, "This hybrid “company / non-profit” structure is intended to provide the best of both worlds, allowing the ECC team to continue performing like a startup in terms of commercial activities, customer orientation, and a relentless focus on scaling up, while at the same time providing governance appropriate to a mission-oriented, public-serving organization."

Hope this answers y'alls questions!

1

t0bz Tin 2 weeks ago

Monero is looking strong these days

6

supershaj 2 weeks ago

Evading tax because there going to be huge pump?

2

salil19 Tin 2 weeks ago

So is it good or bad for Zcash?

1

SamsungGalaxyPlayer Karma CC: 3278 XMR: 9323 2 weeks ago

Too little info to know. In typical ECC fashion, they announce this enormous change without any important details. https://forum.zcashcommunity.com/t/eccs-owners-to-donate-ecc-to-the-community/37568/2

4

tempMonero123 Platinum | QC: XMR 1076, CC 1033, CM 25 | TraderSu 2 weeks ago

Probably bad. I think they think that they can't make money off of it any more. Development will likely slow to a crawl. Zcash is a product of a company, a company that intended to make money. It was never a community-driven project.

6

Zerpling Bronze 2 weeks ago

As we can see by so many real life examples. Any products made by a company are bound to fail. Only communism prevails !!!

1

ModernRefrigerator Gold | QC: XMR 17 | NANO 5 | MiningSubs 13 2 weeks ago

100% Zcash was bound to fail.

1

jthawks 2 weeks ago

They are just moving the ECC from it's current owners to be owned by a non-profit, likely because the benefits of being owned by a non-profit will help in the long-term. Sounds like everything else will remain the same, including the company structure and employees.

3

monkeyhold99 2 weeks ago

I'm very skeptical...essentially ownership of Zcash changes yet again. Now to this non-profit Bootstrap. Sounds like they're just doing this to evade taxes.

2

starseed-pl 2 weeks ago

well, taxation is Theft.

1

mishax1 2 weeks ago

Whatever, just pump it.

1

supershaj 2 weeks ago

What does mean exactly?

Is it good or bad?

2

24 12 5

SluurmWuurm 1 week ago

I didn't even need to read it after all. Peter fucking Dutton's name all over it. Ex cop, self confessed racist, self-indulgent fascist arse.

2

blue_skies_above Classical Liberal 2 weeks ago

Backdoors render encryption untrustworthy. Full stop.

Cryptography as a concept, theory, etc. is not new and there is no preventing it and it's march forward to new, better, and more secure solutions. It is NOT the responsibility of application creators to weaken their systems and potentially compromise user data for the state.

Will it hinder potential investigations? Sure will, in the same way the 4th amendment does. In the same way allowing people to remain silent and demand a lawyer and respecting that action does.

Also... how does this collide with HIPAA and things like that? If I implement encryption standards for a product that I market as HIPAA compliant, but the scheme used allows for government access. And then that access is exploited (BECAUSE OF COURSE IT WILL) am I now on the hook for that HIPAA violation or is the government... hahaha just kidding it will be me.

If you are worried about this stuff for your own personal communications (business dealings, legal matters, etc.) I highly encourage you to use PGP. It's a a bit cumbersome to get set up as a non-tech person but as long as your private key is secure, risk is extremely low.

6

nemo_sum Lifelong Independent 2 weeks ago

[Football meme format] Had me in the first paragraph, not gonna lie. [/meme]

But then they immediately belie everything in the second paragraph onwards. Not only is it hypocritical and an overreach, it violates the Second Amendment!

Encryption has long been considered a tool of war -the US gov't has blocked the export of crypto algos in the past for exactly this reason- and thus legally mandated backdoors are an infringement. Personal firearms may not be as effective as they once were against a tyrannical government, but encryption damn well is.

5

C137-Morty Left Visitor 2 weeks ago

That is quite the unique argument, which I will unquestionably support.

4

Ubergopher Centre-right 2 weeks ago

Encryption is an existential anchor of trust in the digital world and we do not support counter-productive and dangerous approaches that would materially weaken or limit security systems.

I like this sentiment. It's a shame that the rest of this doesn't match. Also, I am skeptical about how much weakening encryption like they want to do would actually help reduce childhood sexual exploitation, and isn't just the thin end of the wedge in making it palatable to most people.

14

minimum_ Right Visitor 2 weeks ago

(puts on tin foil hat) This isn’t about the children. This is about restoring the ability to tap phone lines. Once upon a time the phreaks showed us how the feds tapped your lines. Check out AT&T’s operation greenstar. Now the feds want to tap our instant messages just like in the good old days. Can’t abide people having conversations without carnivore analysis. (removes tin foil hat) Protecting children is the most noble of causes. I can’t imagine how horrific it is to be on a task force catching predators like that. Takes a carnivore to catch a predator I suppose.

10

nemo_sum Lifelong Independent 2 weeks ago

That's not even foil hat territory. They note explicitly that that's what it's for.

6

alejandro712 Centre-right 2 weeks ago

Embed the safety of the public in system designs, thereby enabling companies to act against illegal content and activity effectively with no reduction to safety

This is pretty close to as newspeak as you can get. You can only get a "backdoor" in end to end encryption by making such encryption less safe for the public. Say goodbye to secure online banking, credit card transactions, private communication, etc. All of those will be much, much easier to break into- and we will be the ones suffering the consequences.

27

pavlik_enemy Classical Liberal 2 weeks ago

FTFY Public Unsafety

1

The_seph_i_am Centrist Republican 2 weeks ago

Oh absolutely

1

AutoModerator Literally McCarthy 2 weeks ago

Just a friendly reminder to read our rules and FAQ before posting!
Rule 1: No Low Quality Posts/Comments
Rule 2: Tuesday Is A Center Right Sub
Rule 3: Flairs Are Mandatory. If you are new, please read up on our Flairs.
Rule 4: Tuesday Is A Policy Subreddit
Additional Rules apply if the thread is flaired as "High Quality Only"

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

1

aboardthegravyboat Conservative 2 weeks ago

I really don't know why this issue is coming up suddenly. It was no r/tech today too.

I remember when people, conservatives included, were uncomfortable with the fact that companies were constantly logging and ultimately able to read your private conversations, whether they be emails or instant messages on some website with direct message capabilities. This was something we sort of accepted was a thing, but people generally weren't happy about it.

Now these platforms are able to provide messaging that even they can't read, and there are a few conservatives here complaining about that. They're even ironically crowing about "Big Tech". I thought the issue with Big Tech was that they can so easily cooperate with government without you knowing. And now we're complaining about "big tech" not reading your data?

The right should be universally against anything that bans encryption. Ultimately you're banning math. It's useless to try to ban math.

1

Beinanei 2 weeks ago

I like it how attacks against privacy are no longer considered as security issues, and now even police backdoored encryption is already considered by some as "not secure" only insofar as somebody else could use the backdoor.

Wake up guys, Google and the FBI are not your friends either, and it's not good either that they have access to all your data.

2

bugleweed 2 weeks ago

Call your representatives to stop the EARN IT act before it breaks encryption. https://act.eff.org/action/stop-the-earn-it-bill-before-it-breaks-encryption-a7904e20-2083-4d5e-88ae-44ee5fef7a5d

3

Reed-EQ-Luss Law & Order 2 weeks ago

This is bad on so many levels. It discards the most basic concepts of rights to privacy and security in favor of a "you should have nothing to hide" principle.

This is no different than arguing that the police need a copy of your house key so they can come by whenever they want and make sure you have not built a rape dungeon in your basement.

1

Pharisaeus 2 weeks ago

I would really like to ask each and every one of those people how they want to prevent criminals from using custom-made tools. I mean seriously, DH or RSA are literally a couple of lines of python. Any software developer can make an encrypted messenger app over the weekend with little effort.

The real goal is to spy on general population, not prevent any crimes.

1

gertninja But China Though! 2 weeks ago

Its almost like these idiots have no idea how these things actually work, or any grasp of recent internet history. How are they going to uninvent something?

6

PoachTWC 2 weeks ago

I love it.

Paragraph 1: "Encryption is a vital security feature that should not be weakened."

Paragraph 2: "Encryption must be weakened to allow the Good Guys^TM to defeat it when they deem it necessary."

Literal doublethink in action.

14

MoHabi6 2 weeks ago

If Priti Patel really “cared about the children” (TM) she would probably ask Prince Andrew to cooperate with the ongoing child abuse allegations that he is hiding from. And in return the US might extradite the woman who killed teenager Harry Dunn... 2 groups of teenagers/children she can protect immediately. Instead she has some vague goals which will be used to spy on everybody for no reason. (See the “patriot act” in the US)

1

TrikStari Anti-communist 2 weeks ago

Privacy is security. Back doors to encryption will never be secure. I have an associates degree in network security and let me tell you, it cannot ever work the way they claim to want it to work.

If you build a backdoor, someone will find and exploit it.

6

aboardthegravyboat Conservative 2 weeks ago

If the government has the backdoor then so do Russia and China. Just assume that from the get go.

2

nuw Conservative 2 weeks ago

Hear me out. I used to be in the camp of "encrypt everything". I understand the need for encryption, but does Facebook really NEED to have end-to-end encryption??? That would shut off any monitoring that Facebook does. Why is that a good thing? If your some whistleblower, for god sakes don't use Facebook. I'm in the camp that any social media site that children use should have good monitoring.

Some sort of law needs to be in place to force social media sites to monitor it effectively AND ALSO the law does not interfere with legitimate secure messaging apps like Signal, etc.

Edit: The best way to handle this is for social media tech companies to not flex their "encryption skills" as a marketing point. That would make it so there's no need for the government to forcefully intervene.

0

aboardthegravyboat Conservative 2 weeks ago

> does Facebook really NEED to have end-to-end encryption Messenger is currently the defacto universal IM tool. It's the instant messenger most of your friend, your parents, and probably your grandparents have. So, yes, securing it is a good idea.

1

nuw Conservative 2 weeks ago

I agree that securing communications is important. You can still keep it secure if Facebook is the only entity that is able to unlock and decrypt communications. With end-to-end encryption, Facebook can't even decrypt it, and only the end-users can see the conversation.

1

aboardthegravyboat Conservative 2 weeks ago

> With end-to-end encryption, Facebook can't even decrypt it, and only the end-users can see the conversation. Exactly, and I support this 100%.

1

nuw Conservative 2 weeks ago

I totally get where you're coming from. How would you handle an anonymous encrypted channel of communication to children? I'm not asking rhetorically. I'm genuinely curious of other ways to handle this. Do we just let this fall on the parents to educate, monitor, or forbid their children to use social media? I'm all for that, but we can't expect everyone to do that. To me it seems like a no-brainer for Facebook to just monitor it and help law enforcement.

1

aboardthegravyboat Conservative 2 weeks ago

Nope. I'm am 100% against any sort of ban on encryption or requirement that Facebook have backdoors. There's a whole lot of bullshit you can try to justify with this "think of the children" crap. Remember when we, as conservatives, would rightly complain that Big Tech was making it easy for government to spy? Remember when we were creeped out that Google scans your email, even if just to target ads? Kind of astounding to flip on this.

2

nuw Conservative 2 weeks ago

I definitely remember all the encryption arguments over the years. Me and many others all thought that encrypting everything was the way to go. We can't let the government get it's hands on the data, etc, etc... I'm not advocating backdoors or the government creeping on our emails. I just want reasonable monitoring from the company to keep it safe, and for companies to comply with lawful requests from law enforcement. Privacy specific apps need not do this because privacy is their purpose. I did flip on this recently. This solution seemed like a nice middle ground... I could change my position. But for right now, that's where I'm at. Cheers.

1

ziksy9 Constitutionalist 2 weeks ago

The only legal way then would be to retrieve info from an endpoint, and neither FB or internet provider (including 3 letter agencies) would see it. Get a fucking warrant and stop being gestapo.

3

nuw Conservative 2 weeks ago

In the statement they mention end-to-end encryption impacts public safety in two ways, and one of them is: >By precluding the ability of law enforcement agencies to access content in limited circumstances where necessary and proportionate to investigate serious crimes and protect national security, where there is lawful authority to do so. Right there they mention "lawful authority to do so". They aren't looking for a fire hose of data where they can poke around whenever they want. Facebook can securely store transcripts, and when law enforcement has a reason to request a transcript, they would request a warrant. Thanks to our rights, warrants aren't given willy nilly.

1

lux_acc 2 weeks ago

Seems that Barr goes for the encryption back-doors

2

hyperlobster 2 weeks ago

This statement is a literal denial of the mathematical reality of encryption.

It might as well state that the earth is flat.

16

SlightExtreme1 2 weeks ago

the ability of law enforcement agencies to access content in limited circumstances where necessary and proportionate to investigate serious crimes and protect national security, where there is lawful authority to do so

"Hello, sir. This is an issue of national security, and this is my do-whatever I-want-and-get-away-with-it badge. I don't like the way you look, so I have lawful authority to use the backdoor into your digital life."

Yeah, sure, this will work.

8

cameltoe66 2 weeks ago

Sad but true, just look at government overreach in every single possible area from requesting smart speaker data to using bulk data capture in public places. Once they can access your messages they will for whatever the hell they feel like with zero accountability and zero oversight.

2

alexmbrennan 2 weeks ago

You are about 20 years too late. The government doesn't need to pass any new laws - they can just ask you for the password, and lock you up if you do not provide them with evidence that will lead to your conviction.

Unfortunately no one gave a damn about privacy until they needed an excuse to hate Theresa May.

1

DefiantDelay 2 weeks ago

I agree that forcing one person at a time to remove their encryption or face arrest is terrible. But at least the focus of the government's attention would know he is being targetted. This proposed law would force apple / google to remove everybody's encryption and the government will just go on massive fishing expeditions to find as many "criminals" as they want.

1

INFPguy_uk 2 weeks ago

Theresa May's proposals were more or less Tony Blair's proposals from when his Labour regime were in power. They even have the exact same words in the title, just arranged differently.

4

CostcoSamplesLikeAMF 2 weeks ago

Sad. At least they were forthright in asking for a backdoor. Usually they try to "Patriot Act" shit like this.

6

Michael5Collins 2 weeks ago

They might have, it's possible they are playing this on 2 fronts.

1

MoHabi6 2 weeks ago

Priti Patel signs this - along with the trump administration they want to remove all encryption?

As we saw in the Jamal Khashoggi case - this will be first used to torture and kill dissidents in the middle east.

hastagforthechildren /s

12

AnythingAnthingAnthi 2 weeks ago

I am sorry but I do not understand you. Are you saying that the document wishes to ban encryption?

0

Aperso 2 weeks ago

Not OP but reading the article, it makes it pretty clear they want a backdoor into any end-to-end encryption for what the governments call improved public safety. Issue is hackers find that backdoor and then the fun begins.

9

MoHabi6 2 weeks ago

And remember - according to Edward Snowden - there are some unnamed governments who pay millions to hackers to find these backdoors so they can chop up political opponents with bonesaws.

1

hyperlobster 2 weeks ago

The really bad people will have any backdoor within days (if not sooner) of its implementation, because they're really fucking good at their jobs.

5

carrotcypher 2 weeks ago

We, the undersigned, support hard rocks, which play a crucial role in building heavy buildings and protecting things due to the fact that they are hard.

Particular implementations of rocks, however, pose significant challenges to public safety by being hard as rock. We propose to make them soft so that they aren’t hard. This compromise is critical to save the children. We have not considered how this proposal would negatively affect buildings or uses of rocks due to not being able to read anything we write.

15

Erqureevat 2 weeks ago

"with no reduction to safety"

and;

"Enable law enforcement access to content in a readable and usable format where an authorisation is lawfully issued"

Pick one, can't have both.

30

1_OVERDRIVE 2 weeks ago

also > We, the undersigned, support strong encryption, which plays a crucial role in protecting personal data, privacy, intellectual property, trade secrets and cyber security. Backdoored isn't strong or secure

17

seibelj - @seibelj 2 weeks ago

"We recognize that strong encryption is vital to the functioning of society. That said, we demand access to all encrypted communication because - Just Think of The Children."

jlgaddis - @jlgaddis 2 weeks ago

From the Cypherpunks FAQ (1994-09-10) [0]:

  8.3.4. "How will privacy and anonymity be attacked?"

  ...

  - like so many other "computer hacker" items, as a tool for
    the "Four Horsemen": drug-dealers, money-launderers,
    terrorists, and pedophiles.

  ...

See also "Four Horsemen of the Infocalypse" [1], "Crypto Wars" [2].

--

[0]: http://groups.csail.mit.edu/mac/classes/6.805/articles/crypt...

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_Horsemen_of_the_Infocalyp...

[2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crypto_Wars

hprotagonist - @hprotagonist 2 weeks ago

as was flagged to death earlier this week: DOJ is 100% capable of embedding humans deep within criminal enterprises that pose genuine security risks to the federal government. Combine that with regular old-fashioned things like those novel legal devices called "search warrants", and FBI does just fine at getting inside secure comms without fundamentally lying about the nature of mathematics at the same time.

trunnell - @trunnell 2 weeks ago

Maybe we need to advocate for changes to US law such that citizens maintain their expectation of privacy when sending messages through third parties. Then it would be like it used to be when law enforcement needed a warrant to obtain an individual’s communications, which is then served to that individual rather than to a third party communications provider.

Also, it seems like it’s time to remind everyone that only totalitarian governments want to read everyone’s mail all the time to look for crimes. Our bill of rights expressly forbids this. I really don’t understand why the DOJ would write a letter like this that to me, a layman, reads like it is plainly in violation of the 4th amendment.

asdfasgasdgasdg - @asdfasgasdgasdg 2 weeks ago

How do they envision this working and yet protecting communication in oppressive regimes? Facebook can't very well offer the US the ability to pierce the encryption veil then beg innocence to the Kremlin when it wants access.

Of course, decentralized open source solutions in this space will always dominate. The oppressive governments can attack big tech economically. The Kremlin can shut facebook down in Russia if they won't give a back door. Whereas volunteer devs with no expectation of profit are immune to that kind of attack. Even better if there is no defined server to block.

I say this as someone who is not generally super enthusiastic about open source, not decentralized tech, nor is anti- big tech. This just seems like an area where big tech cos cannot compete efficiently.

Maybe they just think that Facebook should not be operating in countries with lots of corruption or oppression? And maybe they have a point. Maybe it is not possible to run an ethical communication business in a place that criminalizes what we value as protected speech.

Anyway, I doubt they will be able to accomplish this goal by asking nicely. They will need to pass a law and then there will need to be a fight about whether the law is constitutional.

bradknowles - @bradknowles 2 weeks ago

I call bullshit.

The US DoJ might say they want end-to-end encryption, but only so long as it doesn’t interfere in any way, shape, or form of whatever they want to do to people in their prosecutions and persecutions.

kirillzubovsky - @kirillzubovsky 2 weeks ago

I don't understand it. Their conclusion says "we challenge the assertion that safety cannot be protected without compromise," which the way I read it means something along the lines of "we believe it is possible to protect public safety without compromising privacy." But the rest of the letter seems to imply they want to find a way to in fact compromise that privacy.

play2computers - @play2computers 2 weeks ago

I wonder if there would be a way to make an argument that would appeal to the public just the same: We can't add backdoors to encryption because it would endanger our children!

adam791 - @adam791 2 weeks ago

Check out Sam Harris’s podcast “The Worst Epidemic”. It’s hard to listen to, but gives another perspective about this issue. Also it has some ideas about where encryption is perhaps more benign (e.g. WhatsApp) and where its introduction would increase exploitation of children (e.g. Facebook Messenger).

stevespang - @stevespang 2 weeks ago

Yep, they are gonna use "child porn" as their trojan horse excuse to pass legislation to put back doors in all encryption or face arrest. You can bet the trusted apps will move offshore, doubt Telegram who is already offshore will ever concede to this. Also, an attempt to gain access to cryptos as well.

Kednicma - @Kednicma 2 weeks ago

It's too bad none of these fascists are elected; we can't simply vote them out of office.

Edit: Use your words; your downvotes just tell me that you support nepotism and corruption in bureaucracies.

ios14 - @ios14 2 weeks ago

What are the odds that big tech and big brother are in bed creating a huge dog and pony show to counter the post-Snowden “going dark” reality?

Given: The public knows about mass surveillance. Big tech deploys supposedly unbreakable end to end encryption. The public feels more safe and protected from Big Brother yet again.

Theory: Meanwhile, behind the scenes, government and big tech have, in secret, the ability to recover such encrypted comms. The DOJ initiative would then be part of an elaborate psyop to further deceive people into believing that FB “has their back”.

I’m going to guess that third parties have extensively reverse engineered apps such as fb messenger to ensure that it is essentially impossible for the above to be the case, since E2EE occurs at the endpoints.

Can an encryption expert weigh in here?

Edit: this also raises general concerns I have about trusting an App Store to install what is supposed to be installed, and not a backdoor’ed version of an app. Something like: Let the reverse engineers have an unmodified app, while distributing alternate versions to other unsuspecting users.

Show all comments on Hackernews

2 2

4 2

19 2

howelzy 2 weeks ago

*Lightning Notwork

1

infernalr00t 3 weeks ago

It's a vulnerability on a client, not in the protocol.

6

johndoeisback 3 weeks ago

The bug is in an old version.

3

playfulexistence 3 weeks ago

How old? 18 months?

0

johndoeisback 3 weeks ago

The first version without the vulnerability was released on Aug 20 2020.

4

brianddk Platinum | QC: BTC 1181, Coinbase 149, CC 135 | Ex 3 weeks ago

Vulnerability ~~Discovered~~ [Claimed] In The Lightning Network

Could be a hoax for all we know. The poster / group is giving two weeks for users to upgrade before anything is disclosed. It might be a big nothing burger.

2

scotty321 3 weeks ago

Give it 18 months. /s

1

alive_consequence Redditor for 6 months. 3 weeks ago

A bunch of FUDers declaring the death of the Lighting Network when:

There's already an available patched version.
There are no reports of the vulnerability being exploited.
The Lighting Network is still experimental, so finding bugs and vulnerabilities is expected and the actual point of having beta releases.

You look like all the people declaring the death of Bitcoin over the last decade.

2

salil19 Tin 3 weeks ago

Vulnerabilities can be solved over the time thats how typical software works even we can see in our normal applications there are always bugs which later fixed on updates so what special here.. the main thing is developers still trying and they will succed one day

0

WarrenMuppet007 Redditor for 2 months. 3 weeks ago

So basically they found a bug in a piece of software and they have already released an update for it.

Ok. Seems it's the end of Bitcoin /s

4

ArmChairFaggot Bronze 3 weeks ago

Bugs in software? The horror!

2

Robby16 Platinum | QC: CC 364, BTC 32 3 weeks ago

It’s in beta. It’s normal

6

Christmas_Taco Bronze 3 weeks ago

I mean, are we seriously declaring the death of LN because of a bug? Every piece of software ever written deals with bugs, especially when you're building something brand new. You fix them and move on.

6

CatatonicMan 3 weeks ago

Meh. It's already fixed.

9

Set1Less Redditor for 2 months. 3 weeks ago

Lightning has been beat already. All that money down the drain. Wrapped Bitcoin on Ethereum already has more BTC locked than lightning will ever do. And that just WBTC and there are several other protocols like True BTC , RenBTC etc

While maximalists were peddling lies and narratives again ETH, devs were busy at work developing products which can successfully wrap and port BTC to the ethereum layer. With more promising l2 layers coming to fruiting on ethereum, including stuff like optimistic ethereum which can transact freely and instantly, it’s going to take bulk of the layer 2 demand from lightning network.

BTC maximalism peddlers must be ashamed of themselves.

0

monkeyhold99 Platinum | QC: BTC 150, CC 23 | TraderSubs 99 3 weeks ago

If you think Ethereum is going to magically upgrade to layer 2 without any vulnerabilities then you really have no idea how development works. All development, including the Lightning Network, is a work in progress. Bugs and vulnerabilities are found constantly, in fact, developers openly encourage people to look for them. Lightning network works *now.* I have used it. So I wouldn't say it's been "beat", at all. It's just too complicated for your grandma to use. This changes over time. What scaling does Ethereum have that works now? Nothing.  I hold both ETH and BTC. They work with each other, not against each other.

3

Set1Less Redditor for 2 months. 3 weeks ago

> What scaling does Ethereum have that works now? Nothing Huh? OMG, Loop ring, zk-snarks, optimistic ethereum, xDai, MATIC, Raiden etc.. All of these work NOW.

0

WarrenMuppet007 Redditor for 2 months. 3 weeks ago

Then why fees on ETH are so high ?

0

Set1Less Redditor for 2 months. 3 weeks ago

Almost 3 times much transactions on ETH than on BTC. Sending ether is very cheap, sending tokens is considerably cheap too. Fees go up for complex contract transactions involving significant processing.

0

WarrenMuppet007 Redditor for 2 months. 3 weeks ago

You mean to say, once people start using a protocol it becomes expensive. Hmmmm.

0

mrtest001 3 weeks ago

meh - if its a bug in software, it can be fixed. If its a systemic issue with LN - that is a different story.

18

Spartan3123 2 weeks ago

/u/sh_res

1

mrtest001 2 weeks ago

Please let me know my shill level once the report is compiled. Take 2 fucking seconds and look at my comment history.

1

Spartan3123 2 weeks ago

i dont think u are a shill, i was just playing with this new tool randomly. I think people are stupid and will generally mark a dissenting opinion as a shill

1

sh_res Redditor for less than 60 days 2 weeks ago

Account [/u\/mrtest001](/user/mrtest001) is not yet marked as a specimen.  Your report has been sent to the Shill Researcher and will be reviewed at a later date. ^^  ---- ^^Player ^^rank ^^of ^^Spartan3123: ^^Common ^^Rookie. ^^Level: ^^3. ^^EXP: ^^100. ^^EXP ^^to ^^next ^^level: ^^150. ^^To ^^play ^^the ^^game, ^^reply ^^to ^^a ^^user ^^with ^^`/u/sh_res`. ^^You ^^too ^^can ^^take ^^part ^^in ^^the ^^gamified ^^shill ^^research!

1

bitmegalomaniac 3 weeks ago

Just to be clear (we don't want to spread misinformation do we?) it is a vulnerability in the LND node software.

Not the lightning network itself.

20

pro_dm007 Gold | QC: CC 21 3 weeks ago

It's OVER for LN!

0

lomosaur Platinum | QC: CC 73, XLM 37 3 weeks ago

Not surprisingly there's no mention of this in r/bitcoin

0

imaducksfan 3 weeks ago

Right, let’s get this to our front page!

0

BitcoinXio Moderator - Bitcoin is Freedom 3 weeks ago

Lightning Network is a joke and complete waste of time.

37

jr0sco 3 weeks ago

0.021 is the joke and complete waste of energy.

0

Ant-n 2 weeks ago

> 0.021 is the joke and complete waste of energy. We are trying to continue bitcoin as it was intended, a currency not a Ponzi scheme.

0

shill_researcher 3 weeks ago

/u/sh_res

4

sh_res Redditor for less than 60 days 3 weeks ago

Specimen genotype and observation data found in the shill database. User [/u\/jr0sco](/user/jr0sco) is a **Elusive Core Shill** (*Shillus Absconsus*) specimen. ---- ^**📋 Scientific** ^**classification**: ^Kingdom | ^Phylum | ^Class | ^Order :--|:--|:--|:-- ^Animalia | ^Chordata | ^Reptilia | ^Shillia ^**📋 Genetic** ^**family**: ^Family ^Name | ^Scientific ^Name | ^Description :--|:--|:-- ^Elusive | ^Absconsus | ^Sleeper ^Shills ^[*Shillus* ^*Absconsus*] ^sometimes ^put ^themselves ^in ^deep ^hibernation ^in ^order ^to ^avoid ^detection ^by ^shill ^hunters ^and ^researchers. ^Because ^of ^that, ^it ^is ^capable ^of ^performing ^more ^damaging ^attacks ^than ^other ^representatives ^of ^its ^species. ^**📋 Pack:** ^Pack ^Name | ^Description :--|:-- ^Core | ^Oldest, ^most ^known ^shill ^pack. ^Centered ^in ^national ^Corestone ^tard ^park, ^hence ^the ^name. ---- Shills (*Shillus*) are vicious, poisonous [creatures](https://i.imgur.com/CrytF6G.jpg) that camouflage themselves as Humans (*Homo* *Sapiens* *Sapiens*) in order to attack and infect the brain of unsuspecting human adults into Zombie-like brainwashed states of rejecting actual cryptocurrency and using fiat currency or shitcoins instead. Shills' natural habitat is large pools full of fermenting animal feces and other decompositing organic matter. Shill threat level: **High**. Caution advised, specimen capable of dealing high amount of damage to unsuspecting Homo Sapiens Sapiens.     To increase your resistance to shill attacks, always use [**R**eddit **E**nhancement **S**uite](https://redditenhancementsuite.com/) and [DYOR](https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=DYOR).^^  ---- ^^Your ^^rank: ^^Golden ^^Amateur. ^^Level: ^^10. ^^EXP: ^^2800. ^^EXP ^^to ^^next ^^level: ^^3200. ^^Tag ^^a ^^user ^^with ^^`/u/sh_res` ^^to ^^take ^^part ^^in ^^the ^^gamified ^^shill ^^research.

4

Spartan3123 2 weeks ago

Bcash

2

Spartan3123 2 weeks ago

/u/sh_res

1

sh_res Redditor for less than 60 days 2 weeks ago

Specimen genotype and observation data found in the shill database. User [/u\/spartan3123](/user/spartan3123) is a **Common CSW Shill** (*Shillus Vulgatus*) specimen. ---- ^**📋 Scientific** ^**classification**: ^Kingdom | ^Phylum | ^Class | ^Order :--|:--|:--|:-- ^Animalia | ^Chordata | ^Reptilia | ^Shillia ^**📋 Genetic** ^**family**: ^Family ^Name | ^Scientific ^Name | ^Description :--|:--|:-- ^Common | ^Vulgatus | ^Common ^Shills ^[*Shillus* ^*Vulgatus*] ^are ^the ^most ^common ^encountered ^class ^of ^Shills. ^Average ^and ^when ^it ^comes ^to ^most ^important ^statictics, ^usually ^do ^not ^posess ^any ^special ^traits. ^**📋 Pack:** ^Pack ^Name | ^Description :--|:-- ^CSW | ^Pack ^named ^after ^its ^original ^alpha ^male, ^"CSW". ^Mainly ^occupying ^Hot ^Bullshit ^Springs ^area. ^Currently ^considered ^nearly ^dormant ^by ^the ^Shill ^Research ^scientific ^community. ---- Shills (*Shillus*) are vicious, poisonous [creatures](https://i.imgur.com/CrytF6G.jpg) that camouflage themselves as Humans (*Homo* *Sapiens* *Sapiens*) in order to attack and infect the brain of unsuspecting human adults into Zombie-like brainwashed states of rejecting actual cryptocurrency and using fiat currency or shitcoins instead. Shills' natural habitat is large pools full of fermenting animal feces and other decompositing organic matter.   To increase your resistance to shill attacks, always use [**R**eddit **E**nhancement **S**uite](https://redditenhancementsuite.com/) and [DYOR](https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=DYOR).^^  ---- ^^Player ^^rank ^^of ^^Spartan3123: ^^Common ^^Rookie. ^^Level: ^^3. ^^EXP: ^^100. ^^EXP ^^to ^^next ^^level: ^^150. ^^To ^^play ^^the ^^game, ^^reply ^^to ^^a ^^user ^^with ^^`/u/sh_res`. ^^You ^^too ^^can ^^take ^^part ^^in ^^the ^^gamified ^^shill ^^research!

1

Spartan3123 2 weeks ago

Only level 3 lol and no threat level

2

1MightBeAPenguin 3 weeks ago

The price of Bitcoin Cash is out of peoples' control. The Lightning Network software not working on a fundamental level isn't.

21

N0tMyRealAcct 3 weeks ago

Can it be made to work? I’d argue that it has problems but that there are ways to improve and solve those issues. I feel that people are very quick to throw out that Lightning isn’t working with a very black and white view of it. But it is already functioning to some extent. Enough that it can self fund improvement over time.

0

pyalot 3 weeks ago

No it cannot be made to work. Even if you solved all of LNs myriad of bugs, security issues, inefficiencies, etc. at the core concept of it is best/most efficiently working when there's a big centralized hub that everybody has to go trough. This in itself would be a failure, but it is compounded by the fact that it also has to go trough BTCs chain which is crippled, so some of the exploits cannot be fixed unless BTC is fixed. Incidentally the fix was released 3 years ago, it's called BCH. You just haven't installed the patch.

15

N0tMyRealAcct 2 weeks ago

Oh, and on the limited throughput of BTC, for one the block size can increase. It is a misconception that it never can change. Secondly, channels can be opened with up to 96% compression using Taproot and Channel factories. That means that channels can be created as if BTC blocks were 52.5MB (2.1 MB * (1/0.96)). That in turn means that about 2.8M channels can be opened per day. Or we can instead think of it this way. It takes about 10 bytes to open a Lightning channel. So the BTC block chain is not as limited as you may think.

0

1MightBeAPenguin 2 weeks ago

>Oh, and on the limited throughput of BTC, for one the block size can increase. False. It's almost guaranteed to stay 1 MB (base) for as long as possible to delay adoption. Until people realize that the blocksize being limited is so that adoption can be delayed for as long as possible, it will NEVER change. The rejection of SegWit 2X was proof of that, which is why Bitcoin Cash is as big as it is today. If SegWit 2X did happen, Bitcoin Cash wouldn't exist. >Secondly, channels can be opened with up to 96% compression using Taproot and Channel factories. It doesn't really matter either way. The network being congested will mean high fees regardless. In reality, how many of transactions on-chain will use taproot and channel factories? >So the BTC block chain is not as limited as you may think. Maybe not, but BTC's user experience is being compromised to halt adoption. It isn't a matter of "technical disagreement". The argument about people having to run their own full nodes, and blocksize increases resulting in only data-centers being able to run a node is a red-herring to justify changing the economic model of Bitcoin.

2

N0tMyRealAcct 2 weeks ago

> False. It's almost guaranteed No, but maybe yes, you say? I think you are saying that the block size could increase just not any time soon. I agree. That is exactly my viewpoint as well. > but BTC's user experience is being compromised to halt adoption This is conjecture. I disagree with your conclusion that this is done to purposefully stunt BTC. I think we disagree on the timeline. For me increasing the block size will solve the throughput quickly but compromise the security of the chain forever. Conversely, keeping it small is painful now but it’ll keep the chain small and decentralized for millennia. Or differently put, I feel that big blocks are short sighted. It’s nice and warm now but long term it isn’t a great idea. But I will agree with you on one thing, I would have preferred a double the block size rather than the BCH fork. I think the fork has been really detrimental to the community. Much more so than the block size limitation actually. I don’t agree with SegWit2X though in particular as I believe it would have supported [covert asic boost](https://cointelegraph.com/news/bitcoin-scaling-jeff-garzik-asicboost-comments-lead-to-frustration) by sneakily adding that feature back in. > “So to be clear about what you've written between the lines: you have decided that impeding covert asicboost would be a violation of the "SegWit2x charter" and so you will assure that covert asicboost continues to function in your modified version of segwit and HF as people have been alleging you would do? This will require further departure and incompatibility with the segwit proposal.” - Greg Maxwell SegWit2X might have had a better chance if Jeff Garzik hadn’t, rather disengeniously, tried to sneak that feature back in. Would you have wanted covert asicboost?

0

Ant-n 2 weeks ago

> I think we disagree on the timeline. For me increasing the block size will solve the throughput quickly but compromise the security of the chain forever. Conversely, keeping it small is painful now but it’ll keep the chain small and decentralized for millennia. Lol small blockchain doesn’t guarantee decentralization... Who are those people that cannot afford disk space but can afford using BTC with high fees? Plus high fees result in strong mining centralisation.. I would argue BTC is strongly centralized already. You have been bait into a Ponzi scheme.

1

1MightBeAPenguin 2 weeks ago

>No, but maybe yes, you say? I'm 99.9% sure a blocksize increase isn't going to happen anytime soon or ever. >This is conjecture. I disagree with your conclusion that this is done to purposefully stunt BTC. You can think what you want but the facts speak for themselves. The small blocksize limit has cause big merchants like steam to stop taking Bitcoin as a payment option. >I think we disagree on the timeline. For me increasing the block size will solve the throughput quickly but compromise the security of the chain forever. No, it won't compromise the security of the chain. The opposite is true. With a larger blocksize limit, more people can transact on the network, allowing miners to rely on fees as a bigger part of the block reward as the network grows. >Conversely, keeping it small is painful now but it’ll keep the chain small and decentralized for millennia. No, it wont. You're wrong on this too. If Bitcoin's blockchain is going to be a settlement layer, that means it is relying on low frequency, but high value transactions (that are willing to pay an arm and a leg to transact on a useless blockchain) to pay for fees. Less people transacting on the network means that miners have to rely on a smaller set of rich people and hope that they secure the network. This not only leads to an easier failure of the system, but it also leads to volatility in block rewards which means security is compromised and could easily cause a permanent chain death, especially given BTC's extremely slow DAA. This means people with a lot of money who miners are depending on to secure the chain can easily attack it without spending any resources, which goes against the fundamental nature of how Bitcoin was and is designed to work. >Or differently put, I feel that big blocks are short sighted. It’s nice and warm now but long term it isn’t a great idea. Small blocks are short-sighted because they lead to centralization pressures that are far worse than those of bigger blocks as discussed above. It won't be sustainable, and Bitcoin is relying on its price to increase (which it might because of tether) rather than transaction fees. It's not doing a great job at subsidizing block rewards with transaction fees as well. If you look at the volatility of fees as a percentage of block reward, it's too high to be sustainable long term. For Bitcoin's security to work as designed, hashrate should be steady rather than volatile. Random bursts and fee markets leads to unreliability in how secure a given confirmation on its blockchain is. >But I will agree with you on one thing, I would have preferred a double the block size rather than the BCH fork. I think the fork has been really detrimental to the community. Much more so than the block size limitation actually. 2X would've been too small and inadequate. It would've been much better to just remove the limit entirely, but miners don't want to do that right now. >I don’t agree with SegWit2X though in particular as I believe it would have supported covert asic boost by sneakily adding that feature back in. How would doubling the blocksize suddenly allow ASICboost to work? SegWit 2X would've only be changing 1 parameter.

1

N0tMyRealAcct 2 weeks ago

We are simply just never going to agree on the cost or benefit of big blocks. Maybe history will tell. > How would doubling the blocksize suddenly allow ASICboost to work? SegWit 2X would've only be changing 1 parameter. One would think so but that is a deception. SegWit2X is a Trojan horse. [SegWit](https://blog.bitmex.com/an-overview-of-the-covert-asicboost-allegation-2/) fixed the covert AsicBoost problem. If you read my previous link you’ll see that Jeff Garzik would have, for no good reasons, added covert AsicBoost back in even though that was more work than just changing one variable. (As a side note, that makes one wonder about the motivations of Jeff Garzik and him saying that CSW is Satoshi.) I think this shows that SegWit2X has elements of miner corruption as its driving force. So that’s why I said I oppose SegWit2X but I would have preferred a block doubling over the BCH fork by changing this one parameter. I think a block doubling would have had a much better chance of succeeding if SegWit2X hadn’t been coupled with re-enabling covert AsicBoost. it is important to remember that SegWit2X probably was an attempt for miners to get back the toy they lost and that it didn’t really have the interest of big blockers first and foremost. It was objectively straight up good that the SegWit2X Trojan horse failed.

2

N0tMyRealAcct 3 weeks ago

This supposed hub is made from commoditized software using a standardized protocol and can easily be replaced if it doesn’t behave. It is a position that can’t be abused if it even materializes. Lightning has other issues at the protocol level but I personally don’t believe in the “one hub problem”.

0

SecDef 2 weeks ago

Easily? Suppose it takes off and has 100,000 open channels and lightning working quickly, smoothly, happily for 100,00 users. First, how much has the hub invested...not worried about this one but to stand up a second one to easily replace it Second, how long would it take for users to close and open new channels. Technically easy doesn’t mean easy unless you ignore the system and context.

1

N0tMyRealAcct 2 weeks ago

If we have a node A and B that connect through this hub, and the hub misbehaves they can just bypass it and connect to each other directly. The investment that the hub made is now less valuable. So the hub has an incentive to not misbehave to bad because then it gets replaced. And also we’ll have a chaos structure between big hubs so we’ll likely never get this huge hub. So at the very least we’ll have competing hubs with no single point of failure.

0

N0tMyRealAcct 3 weeks ago

This supposed hub is made from commoditized software using a standardized protocol and can easily be replaced if it doesn’t behave. It is a position that can’t be abused if it even materializes. Lightning has other issues at the protocol level but I personally don’t believe in the “one hub problem”.

1

SecDef 2 weeks ago

Easily? Suppose it takes off and has 100,000 open channels and lightning working quickly, smoothly, happily for 100,00 users. First, how much has the hub invested...not worried about this one but to stand up a second one to easily replace it Second, how long would it take for users to close and open new channels. Technically easy doesn’t mean easy unless you ignore the system and context.

1

N0tMyRealAcct 2 weeks ago

If we have a node A and B that connect through this hub, and the hub misbehaves they can just bypass it and connect to each other directly. The investment that the hub made is now less valuable. So the hub has an incentive to not misbehave to bad because then it gets replaced. And also we’ll have a chaos structure between big hubs so we’ll likely never get this huge hub. So at the very least we’ll have competing hubs with no single point of failure.

0

jr0sco 3 weeks ago

Software gets bugs deal with it. Price of BCH dropping is becasue less ppl are buying and more ppl to selling 🤪

0

Respect38 3 weeks ago

Almost like there's a reason to wanting to stick to the proven stable first layer instead of being forced to move to unproven buggy lower layers.

8

1MightBeAPenguin 3 weeks ago

>Software gets bugs deal with it. But it's completely in developers' control and a mistake on their part. It shows a lack of technical competence. >Price of BCH dropping is becasue less ppl are buying and more ppl to selling 🤪 Again, price is out of our control. Technical incompetence isn't.

8

bitmegalomaniac 3 weeks ago

> But it's completely in developers' control and a mistake on their part. It shows a lack of technical competence. Are you sure you want to argue down that path? To me it sounds like you are saying that if somone makes a mistake in building node software it is the entire network that is at fault. While I strongly dissagree with what he is saying about price etc, can you clarify your point about bugs in software being somhow the fault of the network?

0

[deleted] 3 weeks ago

[deleted]

1

sh_res Redditor for less than 60 days 3 weeks ago

Specimen genotype and observation data found in the shill database. User [/u\/bitmegalomaniac](/user/bitmegalomaniac) is a **Professional Ancient Common Core Troll** (*Trollus Magnus Anticus Vulgatus*) specimen. ---- ^**📋 Scientific** ^**classification**: ^Kingdom | ^Phylum | ^Class | ^Order :--|:--|:--|:-- ^Animalia | ^Chordata | ^Reptilia | ^Shillia ^**📋 Additional** ^**traits:** ^Trait ^Name | ^Scientific ^Name | ^Description :--|:--|:-- ^Professional | ^Magnus | ^Master ^Shills ^[*Shillus* ^*Magnus*] ^are ^experienced ^and ^sophisticated ^specimen ^who ^are ^capable ^of ^producing ^prolonged ^and ^effective ^attacks ^against ^humans. ^They ^outshine ^the ^rest ^of ^the ^pack ^and ^are ^able ^to ^direct ^for ^short ^periods ^of ^time. ^Ancient | ^Anticus | ^An ^elderly ^shill ^specimen ^[*Shillus* ^*Anticus*]. ^**📋 Genetic** ^**family**: ^Family ^Name | ^Scientific ^Name | ^Description :--|:--|:-- ^Common | ^Vulgatus | ^Common ^Shills ^[*Shillus* ^*Vulgatus*] ^are ^the ^most ^common ^encountered ^class ^of ^Shills. ^Average ^and ^when ^it ^comes ^to ^most ^important ^statictics, ^usually ^do ^not ^posess ^any ^special ^traits. ^**📋 Pack:** ^Pack ^Name | ^Description :--|:-- ^Core | ^Oldest, ^most ^known ^shill ^pack. ^Centered ^in ^national ^Corestone ^tard ^park, ^hence ^the ^name. ---- Trolls (*Trollus*): Less dangerous subspecies of Shill family that mainly aims at annoying at angering human beings. It's natural habitat is muddy waters under bridges and sewer pipe exits. Shill threat level: **High**. Caution advised, specimen capable of dealing high amount of damage to unsuspecting Homo Sapiens Sapiens.     To increase your resistance to shill attacks, always use [**R**eddit **E**nhancement **S**uite](https://redditenhancementsuite.com/) and [DYOR](https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=DYOR).^^  ---- ^^Your ^^rank: ^^Golden ^^Amateur. ^^Level: ^^10. ^^EXP: ^^2900. ^^EXP ^^to ^^next ^^level: ^^3100. ^^Tag ^^a ^^user ^^with ^^`/u/sh_res` ^^to ^^take ^^part ^^in ^^the ^^gamified ^^shill ^^research.

2

1MightBeAPenguin 3 weeks ago

>Are you sure you want to argue down that path? Yes I am. I know what kind of discussion this is going to bring up. You're the type of person who knows what someone means to say but then raises their finger to make a "well ackchually" comment. >To me it sounds like you are saying that if somone makes a mistake in building node software it is the entire network that is at fault. No. I'm not asserting that at all. I'm just saying that the software in this case having a vulnerability is technical incompetence on the developers' part of the application. Lightning Network has other security issues not discussed in this article. >While I strongly dissagree with what he is saying about price etc, can you clarify your point about bugs in software being somhow the fault of the network? It's not the fault of the network. It's the fault of the developer who didn't debug their own code properly.

0

bitmegalomaniac 2 weeks ago

> No. I'm not asserting that at all. All good, that is all that I was asking. > It's the fault of the developer who didn't debug their own code properly. Yeah, that happens, developers are people too. However, that is not what this thread is about, you know that right? It is deliberate misinformation by the mods to fire up people who dont know better like yourself. How do you feel about that?

0

BardCookie Gold | QC: CC 45 3 weeks ago

I thought this was supposed to fix BTC!

1

[deleted] 3 weeks ago

[deleted]

0

BardCookie Gold | QC: CC 45 3 weeks ago

I wish they can keep up with newer blockchain technology but its understable why its slow and every new line of code for btc needs to be audited properly

3

halebass Tin 3 weeks ago

The only thing that’s gunna fix it at this point is a new sun, and a nuke on the CCP.

0

cinnapear Silver | QC: CC 843, BCH 240, BTC 54 | NANO 246 | 3 weeks ago

Good thing it's a ghost town.

0

Cryptoguruboss Gold | QC: BTC 357 | BCH critic 3 weeks ago

Yawn

0

9 2 2

BrianJCH_ Redditor for 6 months. 3 weeks ago

Man, if they had endorsed a presidential candidate, 50% would leave lmfao.. good handling to minimize it to 5%

1

AutoModerator 3 weeks ago

Welcome to r/patient_hackernews! Remember that in this subreddit, commenting requires a special process:

Declare your intention of commenting by posting a pre-comment containing only the single letter R. (This pre-comment will not be visible to others.)
Wait 24 hours or more (you will receive a reminder).
You can then post a new comment with your actual reply in the same location.

Comments that don't abide by the 24h delay will be automatically removed.

NOTE: since step 3 is not mandatory, pre-comments can also be left as a way to set up a reminder to check up on the discussion in 24h.

More information on how this forum works.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

1

qznc_bot2 3 weeks ago

There is a discussion on Hacker News, but feel free to comment here as well.

1

Tigeris 3 weeks ago

Honestly, I think Armstrong handled this well. It's okay to want a company to remain apolitical. It's also okay, however, to want your company to use it's resources to try to make the world better.

By offering such a generous severance, he's cementing the apolitical stance while not giving the finger to the people who wanted to emulate Scientific American, Twitter, or Reddit

2

ethereumflow Redditor for 5 months. 3 weeks ago

All of these comments tell me how much corporate capitalism has influenced crypto and the markets as a whole.

“Fuck the people that believe in fighting for equality! Work for the corporates and work more for the man!”

Fuck Coinbase and fuck the current broken system. I got into crypto because of the crazy bullshit going on in the world today. I will take the downvotes. Fuck coinbase. Fuck Brian Armstrong. Fuck corporate greed and fuck corporate capitalism. Fuck racism and fuck every single one of you that disagrees with putting an end to systemic racism. Fuck inequality, be it racial or the economic inequality when you look at the wealth gap of the people and the corporations.

Crypto exists because of the broken financial system. Crypto itself is activism. Coinbase is muzzling.If you are against activism and against changing the system then sell your crypto and go back to fiat and stocks.

Satoshi probably wouldn’t approve of this.

0

HauntingCorpse Redditor for 4 months. 3 weeks ago

I hold it crypto to make $$, not enable mentally ill misfit sjw’s

1

basturdsXIII 3 weeks ago

>I hold crypto because I'm based

1

ethereumflow Redditor for 5 months. 3 weeks ago

If you don’t want to enable the mentally ill get out of crypto. None of us are considered sane to these people controlling the system. We are the degens, the misfits and the anarchists. Just ask them. Maybe you just enjoy being a slave to a system that doesn’t care about the people. Edit: I realize now that I just fed the troll.

0

Ant112990 3 weeks ago

Meanwhile 20,000 job aplications in the queue

5

Suishou Gold | QC: ADA 24, BTC 20, CC 18 | r/WallStreetBet 3 weeks ago

So myopic considering how desperate more than 40 million people are right now to have ANY work at all.

3

Ragnarruss 3 weeks ago

The Liberal "woke" parade are so authoritarian. It's their way or else. I think they forget that their place of work is for working - not pushing their shitty political agenda.

2

sammyb67 Platinum | QC: BTC 198 | BCH critic 3 weeks ago

Good, fuck em!!! Be woke somewhere else!

7

terrya1964 3 weeks ago

Agree 100%.

3

Ovv_Topik 3 weeks ago

Get woke, go...away.

0

18 1 4

bitcointwitter 2 weeks ago

coinbase is just facebook crypto branch to irs. prove me wrong? lol

Shit is called "Conbase" if ask me.

1

cactilesensation 2 weeks ago

shitlibs are a lawsuit waiting to happen. paying subhuman garbage like that to leave is expensive, but like they say about divorce, it's expensive because it's worth it.

1

alexd281 2 weeks ago

Coinbase? More like Coinbased.

2

michaelb1 3 weeks ago

Mods: why is this post here?

0

AmazingSuperPupils 3 weeks ago

Your post title's view on how much freedom a sovereign individual should be entitled to expect while under an agreement to perform a job in exchange for compensation is fucked and has a hard on for authoritarianism.

What happened at Coinbase is fine. That they all came to an agreement is great. Deal done. Move on.

"talk about social issues on company time? NOPE!" whip cracks

Jesus christ dude. I hope you are nowhere near any kind of leadership position in whatever the fuck you do in your life.

3

smoothID redditor for 3 months 2 weeks ago

You must have been punished often as a child and see rules as authoritarianism. Whip crack? Jeez. Victim mentality. I will definitely not hire you, don't worry.

1

AmazingSuperPupils 2 weeks ago

Your giddiness about the whole issue is the disturbing point. I’m not for hire, atm.

1

smoothID redditor for 3 months 2 weeks ago

Man all this is for lolz. This entire sub. Yeah the title is meant to be.. engaging. You don't care about coinbase or any of the affected people any more than I do. Sure, they are people and in a predicament, and it sucks for them, and we can empathize. But they made their choice and collected their checks, nobody got hurt.

1

AmazingSuperPupils 2 weeks ago

Tbh were probably both roleplaying stereotypical redditors in the way we’re replying to each other as I don’t even talk to people irl the way I do online when I assume this alter ego persona. I’m usually pretty stoned when I use this acct, to be fair, so take that however you want :-*

1

smoothID redditor for 3 months 2 weeks ago

Well your name makes sense now lol

2

nomoredamnusernames 3 weeks ago

These same fools would likely go to work at Coinbase and spend their days talking about how “taxation is theft” and think they should be immune from this policy. Anyone who uses the term “social justice warrior” is just revealing themselves for that white privileged bitch that they are.

2

AmazingSuperPupils 3 weeks ago

Your privilege to dismiss social issues is fucked.

1

HitMePat 3 weeks ago

What is this bullshit post? Fuck you OP.

1

smoothID redditor for 3 months 3 weeks ago

Hello sensitive snowflake. Please kindly close the browser tab.

3

MrRGnome 3 weeks ago

I wouldn't want to work for a company fighting against my interests. Good for them.

As for you OP, when someone thinks people putting their livelihood on the line are somehow sensitive snowflakes I think it shows a real inability to appreciate the risks involved in putting what you believe in before your income.

Coinbase is many things, including anti-bitcoin. I'll applaud anyone who quits.

3

smoothID redditor for 3 months 2 weeks ago

The issue that started it all is about race which is red hot today. Would you be defending people putting their livelihoods at risk (as you put it) standing up for what they believe, if they stood up for another controversial issue, like papering their cube walls with images of aborted fetuses? Or printing out nazi swastikas. Or demanding their four 15 minute breaks and a special area so they can pray to entity their tradition demands, with foot washing tub or whatever? It gets dicey very quickly. There are employee protections but everyone cannot be accommodated, especially when those employees press the CEO to take a particular stance that they like. "Hey Brian - say you're pro life or we are walking out and protesting outside!" I titled this post this way because in my previous life I was an employee, a good one. And I had and have strongly held beliefs. But I didn't advertise them on company time. I was busy, you know, working. And I sure as hell didn't ask what the CEO thought about politics or race or religion and whatever else. You can have your beliefs and exercise your various rights outside of work. I didn't feel the need to stump for my pet causes and then act indignant when others weren't into them.

0

MrRGnome 2 weeks ago

It doesn't get dicey. There's nothing analogous about your analogs and everything presumptuous about why people choose to leave. I don't give a hoot what specific policy of coinbase's has each individual leaving, I care that they leave because coinbase is a cancer. The identity politics you want to engage in are absurd.

1

smoothID redditor for 3 months 2 weeks ago

I don't want to engage in any politics. That's the point. These employees wanted to, but that's not what they were getting paid for. I draw a distinction where a cause you like means they stood up for that they believe, and if it's a cause you don't like means they were insubordinate. BLM is in the spotlight and a cause a lot of people like. So the employees are seen as victims of big bad corporation.

0

MrRGnome 2 weeks ago

>I draw a distinction where a cause you like means they stood up for that they believe, and if it's a cause you don't like means they were insubordinate Exactly, that is you and the conversation you want to have and nothing to do with what I've spoken about. I certainly made no statement reflecting anything of the sort, you're all on your own drawing conclusions. I have already explicitly told you I don't care what specifically it is they believe that they are standing up for, I care that people are leaving Conbase. You want to paint the issue as something entirely about identity politics in the workplace where you project the explicit reasons why these 60 employees collectively left. You want to talk about idiotic politics despite claiming you don't because you keep asserting them as being relevant - all while I keep asserting the only thing relevant since we cannot presume why each individual left is that they left. Screw Coinbase.

1

smoothID redditor for 3 months 2 weeks ago

I gotchu

1

SHITBLASTER6900 3 weeks ago

HR at Coinbase must feel relieved they have 60 fewer headcases.

0

brianddk 3 weeks ago

They weren't snowflakes, they were principled individuals that took a stand for their beliefs.

The Coinbase CEO was also a principled individual that took a stand for his beliefs as the chief executive of the company.

It was settled without strike protest or destruction of property. This is exactly how differences in views or opinions ARE supposed to be handled.

Hats off to all parties involved for showing the rest of the world how its done.

48

nullc 3 weeks ago

I think this is the right take. Some of the people that left might have had views you would consider dumb, but some might have had views that were basically the same as yours... we don't know. Many people here have faulted some coinbase staff for walking out for outside-of-work things but not standing up against things like the hacking team acquisition, the company's servility to absurd privacy invading rights oppressing regulators and law enforcement making demands outside of their remit, the company's conspicuous actions against the Bitcoin community, or their adoption of scammy ICOs. For all we know these were major factors for some of the people who left... I doubt it was a single reason for most people. It's okay for people to disagree. It's okay for people to have different priorities. It makes me feel hopeful for humanity when people can sort out their disagreements in a civil and mutually respectful way. The same thing that makes it okay for coinbase to ask employees to keep advocacy and politics out of the work place is what makes it okay for people to choose to not work there in response. Even when we don't agree with someone's views we should respect them for standing up for them-- particularly when its their skin on the line and not ours. That applies both to the employees who are departing and the coinbase leadership here.

16

Secret_Operative redditor for 3 months 3 weeks ago

\> walking out for outside-of-work things How do you not get that this is a work thing? The people speaking up don't have the option giving Brian a severance package because they disagree with him. These people talk about all kinds of politics all day at work, they're subject to it as part of their job. To draw the line at race is how Brian flexes white privilege.

0

nullc 3 weeks ago

Quitting is also firing your boss: When you work you are paying your management by allowing them to share in the benefits of your labour. The power dynamics don't make it as equivalent as it would be otherwise, but things like severance can reduce the gap. I don't have any visibility inside coinbase so there could be things going on that I'm not aware of but I haven't seen anything that indicate their policy is particular to race (and I've heard some comments that left/right US politics were creating a lot of tension ongoing). Given my understanding of the history here I could agree that they started drawing lines when employees walked off the job-- but that seems like a place where response was necessary because it actively endangered the business.

11

[deleted] 3 weeks ago

[deleted]

0

brianddk 3 weeks ago

I respect the fact that they choose to leave the company instead of trying to force the rest of the company and world to their views. > Just because you feel strongly about something doesn't mean everyone else has to too Exactly... I'm just glad to see these 60 employees realizing that.

6

shanita200 3 weeks ago

There is nothing courageous about being a screechy leftist .

0

brianddk 3 weeks ago

I don't give a damn what their views are. I'm just delighted to find someone willing to express an opinion in 2020 that doesn't involve molotov cocktails or petitioning twitter to revoke everyone's account.

3

shanita200 3 weeks ago

Isn't that exactly what those cowardly snowflakes were about?

0

ArbitraryUsernameHEH redditor for 2 weeks 3 weeks ago

Crypto is the cure to woke-capitalism. Cancel culture will have no power when BTC becomes sufficiently mainstream.

0

Thanatos_1 3 weeks ago

They were cool with Coinbase cooperating with chain-gestapo-companies. Fucking hypocrites.

1

coinblaster-up 3 weeks ago

What a courageous decision by coinbase. I am a firm believer in not mixing business with politics. In fact it was only a few years ago this was one of the two things you were never supposed to do. The other being mixing religion and business. I can't believe I'm saying this but I wish coinbase all the luck and hope they hold strong. I'm also not making any judgement on the merits of anyone's beliefs. Right, left, good or bad. What you want to do or think on your time is none of my business and quite frankly I couldn't care less, have at it. Just don't shove it in my face and get me to act/think/believe in whatever when I'm trying to give you my money or my attention. I find this very rude. You do you, let me do me and we can all be friends ok.

Also this is why I love BTC. TRUSTLESS without all the emotional baggage.

4

sonicode 3 weeks ago

>The other being mixing religion and business. Politics is the new religion.

4

MrObviousTalks 3 weeks ago

This improves the credibility of Coinbase a good amount.

7

QnAversions 3 weeks ago

Beautiful. Sounds like a wise decision.

5

Chuyito 3 weeks ago

Honestly, this is great to hear.

Sites like gofundme are completely toxic, if you "think wrong", they ban you and remove your funding page.

Bitcoin, and coinbase being a major Fiat onramp, doesn't need social justice warriors brining in "wrong think bans" to anyone they don't agree with.

5

ecafyelims 3 weeks ago

More likely 60 employees who were already considering a new job found that Coinbase would pay them to leave. Nice.

36

cake_aholic 3 weeks ago

this is hilariously probably what happened. A certain group of people get to feel like 60 people were "owned"...and 60 people get paid for leaving a place they thought sucked.

10

smoothID redditor for 3 months 3 weeks ago

Oh yes that's definitely a possibility. But consider this - who's gonna want to hire them now?

0

Current-Location 3 weeks ago

Not you apparently, but who cares what you think?

0

smoothID redditor for 3 months 2 weeks ago

Witty, informative, engaging. A bit on the "notice me! notice me!" side, but otherwise well researched comment. You get a star.

0

Current-Location 2 weeks ago

No really, who fucking cares what you think

0

smoothID redditor for 3 months 2 weeks ago

I'm going to take the star away from you if you don't settle down.

0

Current-Location 2 weeks ago

You are a real piece of work, you know that? Not in a good way, either. Sad that you have nothing better to do than troll a political opponent.

0

sreaka 3 weeks ago

If they’re developers, literally everyone.

22

JanPB 3 weeks ago

Well, not so fast. I've been in this business since 1991 and it's a bit more complicated.

0

MisterFor 3 weeks ago

Someone with “coinbase” on its resume it’s probable going to do fine.

1

smoothID redditor for 3 months 3 weeks ago

?? You want a whiney developer who is going to demand everyone say black lives matter at every lunch? Hell no. Developers are a dime a dozen.

0

sreaka 2 weeks ago

I don’t want anything, I’m not hiring developers, but yes, there are hundreds of companies that will hire developers with political opinions.

1

MisterFor 3 weeks ago

You want a developer saying the opposite? Because let’s be honest here, you are not trying to be apolitical, you are trying to sell your (right) ideas too.

0

smoothID redditor for 3 months 2 weeks ago

I want a developer writing code while on the clock, not pretending like them Liking some post on facebook counts as actual activism. They can do actual activism on their own time outside of work if they choose. The *oh so controversial idea* I'm selling (as you put it) is do the work you're getting paid to do. Clearly the downvoters are virtue signaling employees who like special treatment, and never were employers who like (gasp) productive and engaged workforce. What is "the opposite?" Literally saying black lives don't matter? That's pretty clear cut violation of your standard HR norms. Wouldn't fly.

1

MisterFor 2 weeks ago

You know exactly what is it

1

goblintruther 3 weeks ago

You write shit like that on your resume? No wonder you are unemployed.

1

maafuka 3 weeks ago

They would be welcomed with open arms. https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2020/jul/11/tech-companies-black-lives-matter-activism-facebook-google

7

smoothID redditor for 3 months 3 weeks ago

Yeah the big ones have no choice or they will get sued. It must be easy to wax poetic when it's not you money. When you hire someone and pay them while they push non-work agenda let me know how you like it.

0

maafuka 3 weeks ago

If it's at lunch, like you said, then there's no issue. Do you expect people to only talk about work during their lunch breaks?

4

ecafyelims 3 weeks ago

I'd have a new job before putting in my notice. The new employer wouldn't even know about the severance package.

6

smoothID redditor for 3 months 3 weeks ago

Would had to be some lucky timing. They were given a week to decide.

3

ecafyelims 3 weeks ago

Oh wow. I didn't know that it was only one week. That doesn't seem like a fair period for a life changing decision.

4

goblintruther 3 weeks ago

Software engineers change jobs a lot. This isn't life changing at all. Depending on the size of the severance package I'm sure a lot of people just took advantage of it and coinbase only did this to downsize.

2

smoothID redditor for 3 months 3 weeks ago

Yeah it's abrupt. But more than fair. Could have just said if you don't like it - quit.

1

ecafyelims 3 weeks ago

Point taken

3

segovius 3 weeks ago

Lol, wannabe edgelord finds themselves defending Coinbase and thinking it has traction - doh

10

zv099 redditor for 2 weeks 3 weeks ago

You're an edgelord now if you just think work should be about work. Man that's dropping the bar. Still though, overwhelming consensus in the comments is Coinbase did the right thing by letting them go, so you're objectively wrong.

0

Aaront23 3 weeks ago

Objectively lol, ever notice how certain words are almost entirely used incorrectly?

1

zv099 redditor for 2 weeks 3 weeks ago

> finds themselves defending Coinbase and thinking it has traction At the time of my post, well over half of the other posts agreed with op. That's about as objective as you can get unless you think math itself is not objective.

2

Aaront23 3 weeks ago

Hahahahahahahaha over half of people disagreed with you so you are "objectively wrong" hahaha FYI - https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/objectively

0

zv099 redditor for 2 weeks 3 weeks ago

You're struggling understanding what has been stated and why it was objectively wrong. The assertion was: >finds themselves defending Coinbase and thinking it has traction The implication is that ops defense of Coinbase did not have traction. The objective proof it did have traction is well over half of the posts were supporting op. Take a breather and try to keep up with what you're arguing. Maybe come back when you're not so emotional.

1

Aaront23 3 weeks ago

A few people agreeing in reddit comments is not objective proof of traction. It's just funny similar to how people use the word "literally". Ever notice how whenever people use that word they invariably do not actually mean literally? Similar with objectively, it's like an exaggeration, but I just think it's funny that words like this are almost never used without being an exaggeration. Funny example: it's literally been proven that this comment defending coinbase has traction

1

zv099 redditor for 2 weeks 3 weeks ago

Over half agreed here in the context op was referring to. That's a ton of traction. You embarrassed yourself here. Don't feel too bad though. You just got over emotional. You'll do better next time.

2

Aaront23 3 weeks ago

Lol agree to disagree. Perhaps our disagreement on whether this thread constitutes OPs defense of coinbase gaining traction is evidence that it is in fact subjective whether it gained traction or not. Am I being pedantic? Sure Will I keep pointing out when 12 year olds use words incorrectly like saying they literally died or saying things are objective when they are clearly subjective? Probably If you said "objectively over half of comments in this thread agree with OP" would that actually be an objective fact? Sure would

0

zv099 redditor for 2 weeks 3 weeks ago

You're not being pedantic. You're whining because you lost an argument. By any measure, whether in this thread or not, support for coinbase has gained a ton of traction objectively. Perhaps you should go to coinmarketcap.com, check out bitcoin markets and look at the volume coinbase pro alone does. Even your complaint that reddit comments don't count isn't good enough. Good luck dealing with your loss here.

1

will85319 3 weeks ago

r/antiwork is an unironic sub, civilization is dying.

3

nullc 3 weeks ago

You should keep an open mind, often when you think people are being profoundly dumb there is a miscommunication. Without even clicking I went to go link you to https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/bob-black-the-abolition-of-work ... but now that I look, I see that this is linked in the sidebar there, which confirms my guess about what that subreddit is about. (Several other items in the sidebar there are articles that I've linked people to in the past, including the Graeber and the Russell). There is a perspective against the modern construction of "work" that all too often involves devoting most of our waking hours as a wage slave doing pointless jobs to enrich people that don't care about you, where your participation is "voluntarily" but in name only due to the coercive structure of our economy. Especially with automation taking over such an enormous portion of essential labour, it isn't absurd to think that work in our civilization could instead be structured in a way that treated people with a lot more respect, granted more freedom, and that we could be happier and even more productive as a result. It's an out-there position for sure, but I think that it's one worth thinking about.

12

romjpn 2 weeks ago

You've been a beacon of light in this subreddit lately. Thanks for taking the time to calmly explain a lot of things around here.

1

qualitycannabisnw 3 weeks ago

People are so indoctrinated they just scoff at rational ideas instead of thinking about them critically. I agree with you 100% and can absolutely get behind building similar societal frameworks. The other key takeaway is that the coercive nature of economies was designed and built by the ruling class. The same uncaring people wage slavery enriches almost beyond comprehension. It is this fact which makes substantive changes so much more difficult to achieve. The owners of the society collectively want to keep the majority of humanity toiling for their benefit while they own and control the macro features of the society. And currently this is where we’re at. Maybe we’ll collectively evolve out of it but it doesn’t seem likely. Awareness is a start.

2

zv099 redditor for 2 weeks 3 weeks ago

Well there's some truth to it. Extreme AI is going to be here before 2030 in my opinion but this terroristic, "you must believe as I do or else" mentality is far, far worse than simply wanting to end work. It is objectively true that about 6% of the population (black males) are responsible for around 50% of the violent crimes in the US. Those are straight FBI facts. Video after video shows the vast majority of negative police encounters are because of lack of compliance and simply wanting to be above the law. The media also hypes up these events and highlights the hell out of them. Schools teach that whites are evil and blacks are oppressed to this day by all whites. These are the real problems. The only thing that matters to me is truth. Start there and then figure out what the solutions are--humanely.

0

MisterFor 3 weeks ago

And then cops keep killing unarmed black people that cooperate too.

2

zv099 redditor for 2 weeks 3 weeks ago

The rate for that is lower than that for whites. It's statistical noise with extreme media hype and propaganda.

1

MisterFor 3 weeks ago

Or you want to be blind about it.

0

zv099 redditor for 2 weeks 3 weeks ago

If I show you the actual statistics on it, will you accept that and no longer claim that cops are disproportionately killing unarmed black people at a greater rate than they kill unarmed white people?

1

MisterFor 3 weeks ago

Of course, and leave mentally ill people out of the statistic and people resisting or not. Just calm or obeying people doing nothing and getting shot or killed.

0

zv099 redditor for 2 weeks 2 weeks ago

I don't think anyone keeps statistics on whether someone was mentally ill or not. I'm not sure. Regardless, of the 10 million arrests each year, a very, very, very small number of unarmed people are killed. >As of the June 22 update, the Washington Post’s database of fatal police shootings showed 14 unarmed Black victims and 25 unarmed white victims in 2019. Now clearly one can counter that black people are only 13% of the population. Still, a counter can be made against this that they are by far more violent and that is backed up by statistics (check the article). Black communities themselves ask for more law enforcement. This article lays out the truth of what's happening: https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2020/07/03/police-black-killings-homicide-rates-race-injustice-column/3235072001/ Still, I'm with your side. I say we get rid of all police. I believe things will get sorted out rather quickly once that happens.

2

AnotherBoomer 3 weeks ago

I call bullshit.

0

MisterFor 3 weeks ago

There a hundred of cases. One I can remember right now when they shot the doctor of an schyzophrenic kid. A guy on his knees with the hands on the back of his head. Bang. At least he survived. Why did he shoot? “I don’t know”

1

torgidy 3 weeks ago

bitcoin, as a freedom technology, is fundamentally opposed to thought policing of the type these people practice.

That said, I'm surprised as company as large as coinbase can resist the rising tide of the sjw reich.

5

Anaklu 3 weeks ago

Not sure if it's ironic or just sad that you're using a nazi term to denigrate the only group that is actively fighting against the neo-nazi movement, instead of calling them to arms on national television. Edit: I do agree with coinbase's move, just frustrated to see people marking this as a conservative victory when the whole point was to stifle the damage this 'red vs blue' bullshit can inflict on a company.

0

ArtigoQ 3 weeks ago

Its impressive actually. This will never be a problem with the likes of Binance so CB is staying competitive.

1

smoothID redditor for 3 months 3 weeks ago

When on the clock paid to do X you should not be doing Y. It's probably in the employee handbook somewhere.

11

MisterFor 3 weeks ago

That’s right, that’s why you should close Reddit during your working hours. And stop checking bitcoins prices or doing personal calls on the phone.

1

Stay up to date on all things crypto and blockchain

© 2020 Token Daily

Stay up to date on all things crypto and blockchain

© 2020 Token Daily

🙌 Login to Token Daily