Who care of today. Important is future. Devs say no worries, it will be surely fixed in the fut$arrr

Told you guys that FUDding against MW and LTC is going to reach spiritual levels. The darkside has already shown their disproval (check the price). They know that a successful proven privacy implementation means bitcoin gets it too. This is a huge battle that we must win. And we will.

I feel that this weakness of Mimblewimble's privacy was already known to all.

according to charlie lee this can be mostly solved by adding coinjoin inbetween.

All this was already known, it seems to me, but the article remains interesting anyway.

eh.. isn't the breakthrough with MW that it's not necessary to save all old TXs in order to verify the integrity of the system .. afaik neither privacy nor scaleability is "solved" by MW

Nothing really new here, this has been known and described before.

So what's the most secure scheme ? Once I put my shipping address in, which coins can preserve my anonymity ?

https://medium.com/grin-mimblewimble/factual-inaccuracies-of-breaking-mimblewimbles-privacy-model-8063371839b9

Read this response from Grin team

https://medium.com/grin-mimblewimble/factual-inaccuracies-of-breaking-mimblewimbles-privacy-model-8063371839b9

The research is flawed, though you can link transactions but you can never reveal address transacted to and the amount transacted because MW has no address.

So what was broken broken? ¯_(ツ)_/¯

https://medium.com/grin-mimblewimble/factual-inaccuracies-of-breaking-mimblewimbles-privacy-model-8063371839b9

bullish on monero

Lumos!

I don't know a lot about MimbleWimble or how it works, and if someone already posted this I apologize. It's very entertaining to me to try to peel the layers of the onion back to figure out WTF this thing is. It seems like it might have been trying to compete with privacy coins, but it also seems there is a fatal flaw in how it works according to the author of the article linked:

Using only $60/week of AWS spend, I was able to uncover the exact addresses of senders and recipients for 96% Grin transactions in real time.

The problem is inherent to Mimblewimble, and I don’t believe there’s a way to fix it.

This means it's working exactly how it's intended to, and I'm sure you'll find someone who will argue this until they're blue in the face too. Perfect!

Mimblewimble was invented in 2016 by a pseudonymous hacker known as Tom Elvis Jedusor, who dropped a text description of the protocol into an IRC chat and then disappeared.

Just like how all successful software projects start I assume. I should tell the development team who is working on our Avionics that this is how we're going to adopt things from now on. I'm sure I will receive thunderous applause.

I have to admit I really love the diagrams and explanations from the author here. This might be one the most approachable explanations to a complex topic like a cryptographic attack that I've ever seen, and the fact that they've compared it to other implementations is really nice. this is a topic that's way out of my wheel house, but I can get the gist of whats going on.

Easy way to get friends hooked, offer to settle small amounts owed in Bitcoin.

Snapshots:

1. Breaking Mimblewimble’s Privacy Mod... - archive.org, archive.today

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

How does the privacy of a coin like masari or nerva compare to mimblewimble?

Is this legit just a bullet to the brain for GRIN?

isnt' BEAM tied into Israeli intelligence?

silver to gold! - what a tragedy!

That big bitcoin donation to the devs last week that pumped the price now smells awfully fishy

u/nullc is a social engineer, NOT a computer science engineer.

​

He was/is good at getting attention for his nonsense but of course he can't follow through, the homeschool inbred idiot is the neckbeard version of Craig Wright.

Suddenly BCH seems cheaper and more useful in terms of scaling.

Bitcoin will scale with segwit and LN!.... No it didn't... Bitcoin will have the privacy of Monero through mimblewimble!.... No it didn't...

But who cares that everything that has been implemented during the last years in Bitcoin is absolute shite, is not holding up to the marketing and expectations, and makes Bitcoin a worse experience with every new soft fork... Price is high right? Moon hodl lambo garbage....

Would be really awesome for some of the funds to mobilize Opacity's mission of decentralized anonymous/private cloud storage. They're very focused and already have a platform which can be used for storage with encryption, and zero-knowledge. No credit card needed, and none of the ID details of any traditional storage platform (name/address/email).. They're in a bind for funds to take it to the next level. Very passionate team <3

Would be really great for some of the funds to mobilize Opacity's mission of decentralized anonymous/private cloud storage. They're very focused and already have a platform which can be used for storage with encryption, and zero-knowledge. They're in a bind for funds to take it to the next level. Very passionate team.

stop spamming bro, a guy already posted about it, -1 karma for the spamming for u

https://www.reddit.com/r/privacytoolsIO/comments/dwhc4f/unknown_fund_is_going_to_invest_and_donate_75/

Pressing X to doubt.

Where is this 75 mil actually coming from? It sure as hell wont be the govt, maby companies like EFF?

While on the face it's a great announcement, some thoughts to moderate enthusiasm with a bit of caution.

1. When first announced, the website talked about $100 million, not $75m. There are still tweets around showing that and asking what it's about. $25m is a big chunk to suddenly change your mind about after announcement, but ok.

2. People have asked for proof of funds. After being announced, the site is soliciting contact via email. To be sure it's not a phishing scam, let's see what proof of funds they can provide to the public.

3. It seems questionable at least to me, that a totally anonymous organization would use announce to use BTC as a vehicle to dole out money, without at least offering more private ways of receiving donations right from the start. BTC is probably the most scrutinized & analyzed chain. Blockchains more amenable to private transactions do exist. So why not use them? At best it's just maxi advertizing for BTC, at worst it's looking to gather more data on precisely those who aim to stop that - the privacy promoting orgs.

4. Awareness of reputational attacks through tainted funds. MIT Media Lab, Epstein. Enough said? Maybe not. Epstein didn't kill himself. But don't let these people kill projects by being careless about accepting funds. Due diligence. Anonymity is the real bugbear of the wanna-be authoritarians that fight Bitcoin through various dirty trick plays. They hate nothing more than strong anonymity, spend billions each year on deconstructing it in whichever ways they can. Spending a small amount of dirty money to associate anonymity and privacy with some filthy crimes (which does happen, there is no denying that some heinous criminals also seek privacy and anonymity) ... this would be a cheap win in the court of uninformed public opinion.

The anonymous organisation Unknown Fund has announced that it intends to invest and donate $75 million in bitcoin [core] to startups which directly or indirectly support the idea of anonymity. Preference will be given to the following niches: protection of personal data, tools for anonymity, cryptocurrency and blockchain

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

Isn't Engima trying to solve this for Etheruem. They are working with Intel.

The organizers of the fund are ordinary, anonymous people from different countries who met on the 4chan English-language imageboard.

Just a bunch of dudes who met on 4chan and are now dropping $75 million... sounds legit!

There's so many ways to hide your identity when dealing with crypto. You can use Monero, but it's not feasible for everyone to use I guess.
Next thing, you could argue that trading isn't anonymous - Depends if you're trading on a centralized exchange like Binance/Bittrex/Kraken, or a decentralized exchange like the Blocknet DEX, which basically doesn't need anyone to signup, share personal KYC documents etc.

Most DEX projects today, lacks volume big time, but we had the same problem with BTC back in 2009, no one took it serious, or accepted it as a means of payment

What's wrong with XMR?

This will end up being a scam of some kind.

POW will centralise and those big players will be able to work together through back channels and game the system

It reminds me of how Enron and the electric companies kept shutting down Californias electric to profit

bad people with the means do bad shit

ProgPow is not mentioned once in the blog post.

Ofc it's you spreading fud /u/sandakersmann.

Also they totally missed the point, ProgPow chief goal isn't making it impossible to develop ASICS targeting it as much as trying to reduce the vast and ever growing gulf in efficiency between GPUs and asics,lowering the barrier to entry and fostering a diverse(and more secure) mining ecosystem.

What if we skip ASICs and GPUs with a full POS? -WOW, ur such genius much pro Norisz!

This is surprisingly well written. Took away a lot of good insight from this.

The headline has nothing to do with the article. downvoted.

The article does not specifically mention ProgPoW, but states:

Algorithm changes to “brick ASICs” simply allow the massive general purpose computational resources of the entire world to mine, and potentially disrupt, a cryptocurrency at will. Coins that have implemented “ASIC-resistant” algorithms have been, empirically, very susceptible to 51% attacks for this very reason.

So I agree with OP, u/sandakersmann that Coinbase is generally against general purpose proof of work.

The title is editorialized, but accurate I'd say... CC u/blockchainunchained

They have not done the thing this post's title says they have.

The article doesnt mention ProgPoW once. Bad Title is bad.

ctrl-f ProgPoW

0 results

???

good. we don't need giant mining farms trying to sabotage proof of stake to help their bottom line. in case you don't know what im talking about core scientific (heavy ties with progpow) finally unveiled their new ETH mining facility last week https://cryptobit.media/en/news/mining/2724/ some of us sniffed this out from the beginning and got chastised for being pro-asic

The threat of a bullet is worth more than a warning shot.

If only PoS was here sooner...

The blog of Coinbase is clearly behind schedule and does not take into account the developments of Monero.

My response to the Monero part of the blog.

I'd like to respond to a few points:

ASIC-resistant algorithms are effective in making it more difficult to build an effective ASIC. The natural result of this is that it takes greater investment and expertise before a chip builder can produce an effective ASIC.

Thus, ASIC-resistance merely raises the barrier to entry into the ASIC market. This results in greater centralization of mining hardware manufacturing — the very situation that the selection of an ASIC-resistant algorithm is meant to avoid!

This only occurs if you allow ASICs on an algorithm that is meant to be ASIC resistant. An algorithm that envisions to be ASIC resistant is naturally sophisticated and complex. As such, there will be plenty of optimizations that can be utilized by ASIC manufacturers, which indeed results in centralization of mining hardware manufacturing. ZEC is a prime example.

If ASICs are going to be allowed on the network, an algorithm is required that is as simple and unsophisticated as possible in order to allow the least amount of optimizations. This ensures an egalitarian playing field for ASIC manufacturers. Monero's 'back-up plan' of switching to SHA-3 (or a similar ASIC friendly algorithm) in case of a RandomX failure is consistent with this notion.

in their strategy

That strategy is basically obsolete since March (when the PoW debate essentially came to a conclusion). The current strategy (i.e. rough consensus within the community) is for RandomX (which is set to go live with the scheduled protocol upgrade of November 30) to be a long-term PoW algorithm (without any tweaks). In case of a failure, a switch to an ASIC friendly algorithm (such as SHA-3) will be made.

Instead, they’ve decided to make tweaks to their proof of work algorithm on a 6 month schedule

To be clear, there won't be six month tweaks of RandomX.

This will force a small, tightly guarded group of Monero developers to attempt a high stakes, highly secretive game of cat and mouse to hide their algorithm plans, with huge financial incentive for any member of this group to violate this circle of trust and leak information to chip builders. The criticality of this group’s decisions and the extreme trust placed in them are not good characteristics for a permissionless world currency, and arguably creates a centralization risk more severe than the risk of miner centralization.

This is a valid criticism of the tweaking strategy, which is indeed inherently centralizing. However, (i) the tweaking strategy is outdated and (ii) RandomX was developed transparently on a public Github repository and subsequently audited by four independent audit teams.

Coins that implement ASIC-resistant mining algorithms, ironically, end up with greater miner centralization and control.

Only valid if the ASIC resistant algorithm does not hold.

participants have to ask themselves if the industry is going to be secured by hobbyists running old laptops in their homes

This statement presents a fundamental misunderstanding of the nature of mining. Mining adheres to a power law, which means that, regardless of the algorithm, a small group of miners will possess the majority of the hashrate (think 80/20 rule). Put differently, large and professional mining farms will exist, regardless of the algorithm. An ASIC-resistant algorithm, however, creates egalitarian mining and thus ensures hobby / small miners can still participate, which contributes to the strength and decentralization of the network.

Frankly, this blog is incredibly frustrating to read. The blog seems to be written eight months in the past without any regard for developments with respect to RandomX and change of strategy for the PoW algorithm.

Lastly, people never seem to mention that ASIC resistance is a mitigation against increased regulation (i.e. by utilizing a general purpose hardware such as a CPU, one can easily obtain some Monero), which is particularly relevant for Monero.

P.S. In case anyone is interested in information related to the PoW debate, see:

[1] https://github.com/monero-project/meta/issues/316

[2] https://github.com/monero-project/meta/issues/321

[3] https://repo.getmonero.org/monero-project/monero-site/blob/b87354501b6343f9146f331805ddadc45696f728/_posts/2019-03-24-logs-for-the-dev-meeting-held-on-2019-03-24.md

EDIT: Upon reflection, the blog provides a valid criticism of the tweaking strategy. I'd like to see it amended though to reflect the change of strategy (i.e. switch to an ASIC friendly algorithm in case of a failure of RandomX) and the creation (and soon introduction) of RandomX.

I thought it was an interesting read and made some good points

Garbage. Coinbase has turned into a shitcoin casino and it's unsurprising if that's the level of 'expert' they employ.

Kraken have far surpassed them as the number one exchange.

How much bullshit in a single article, this was the final step for me to close my coinbase account. Spreading such FUD is just not acceptable behaviour for a serious company, especially outdated stuff like they do after RandomX is already out.

With the monopoly which we see in Bitcoin mining hardware a single serious enough bug which would prevent Bitmain's Antminer to mine a block eg. with a higher block height than X would literally halt the whole network since probably like 90% of hashrate would be affected. Even after a fix being released, it would take days to patch all the devices in large mining operations. Impossible to have such a bug? Well, Bitmain already had a killswitch included...

As digital assets mature, participants have to ask themselves if the industry is going to be secured by hobbyists running old laptops in their homes, or if it will become, like nearly every other consequential endeavor in human history, pushed forward at scale by large, self-interested groups of people investing significant resources.

This logic always blows my mind. "See this new thing we made? This cryptocurrency we made to basically re-invent out entire monetary value system and revolutionize the power of money? Yeah, well, thats great. That can be new. But we'll let it just succumb to the forces of centralization and large self interested groups of people investing significant resources because it obviously worked so well that we needed to REINVENT MONEY!!!"

its because the large, self interested groups of people investing significant resources ALWAYS, without fail, will find ways to restrict access to the thing they are investing in, because that way they make more money. Thus, permissionless access is KEY. FUNDAMENTAL to anything that requires decentralization to have any value.

this blog post is disappointing. But then again, ethereum is still a thing and so is tezos or whatever the hell the one is with block producers.

Someone else made an article previously with the same image with hardware-specific and general-purpose coins. Can someone find it? I think it was written by the personal account of someone at Coinbase.

I love how the article completely overlooks reality of centralized hardware manufacturing. It's unlike Coinbase to publish this. They defend all sorts of "alternative" crap with Earn and then put out this nonsense.

> Claim one: It is a security feature for a particular coin’s mining operations to be the dominant application of the hardware used to mine that coin.

Hardware that can be regulated, banned from import by governments, monopolized by Bitmain which also requires KYC to buy it? Very funny. Is it a security feature that China government can just seize ASICs on their territory and 51% Bitcoin for breakfast?

> Claim two: Manufacturing and ownership diversity will be improved with ASIC-friendly algorithms.

Of course, this is exactly what we see in Bitcoin (no).

The whole article reeks of ASIC propaganda.

This thread suddenly reminds me r/bitcoin.

Agree with coinbase, looking forward to Aeon with its sound ASIC friendly PoW. Verification performance also matters, the randomX is also slow af relatively to ASIC friendly algos. It means that pools must spend a lot of money on verification and bump share difficulty. Monero algos was always a disaster.

That dumb chase of "decentralization" is a least problem of monero which must focus on getting listed on major exchanges like coinbase. The regulatory is the biggest risk of XMR existence and fucking with PoW is just a wrong direction.

Every at-scale, professional industry utilizes specialized equipment — it is naive to think that cryptocurrency mining will or should be any different

Not every at-scale, professional industry needs decentralization as bad as cryptocurrencies do.

But monero is ASIC friendly....
Here's our RandomX ASIC, and it even has the same COLOUR AS MONERO's Logo ..... suspiciously.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Monero/comments/du79gb/behold_moneros_randomx_asic_with_matching_colours/

Ok, boomer

How is this not more highly publized

Good news, indeed. The EFF is amazing, and this reminded me it was time to donate to them. :)

Do yourself a huge favor and by a cheap burner when traveling. Buy 1 month of service. I dont even get smart phones when i travel just the $10 flips.

What are you talk about? We are having to win rights back that were already afforded to us by the Constitution. It is a TRAVESTY that it has taking this long for the courts to reaffirm over 4th Amendment.

Do not be satisfied with scraps of freedom!

Even with suspicion. Get a warrant. Most phones have a passcode which is a lock technically

Something tells me they will still do this because most people won't know about the ruling. And anyone asserting their rights will be deemed 'suspicious'.

woah what? this isn't the America I've seen unfold since 9/11

Travelers entering US no longer subject to government fishing expeditions. Border officers must now demonstrate individualized suspicion of illegal contraband before they can search a traveler’s device.

[Meta] Sticky Comment

Rule 2 does not apply when replying to this stickied comment.

Rule 2 does apply throughout the rest of this thread.

What this means: Please keep any "meta" discussion directed at specific users, mods, or /r/conspiracy in general in this comment chain 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.

Non-American here. Does this only apply for US citizens, or is it foreign visitors as well?

thank fucking god! a breath of sanity in an insane world

If there was any benefit to the previous policy it was that people on terrorism-related watchlists coming into the US could have their devices seized and checked more easily.

It was just a privacy nightmare for the other 99% of people.

It's hard to protect a nation as complex as the US without becoming China.

Unfortunately, I think this is likely to get reversed on appeal.

The fact the term 'Suspicionless search' is being used and there is a FUCKING DEBATE ABOUT IT at all is fucking embarrassing.

This is a big deal. The ruling isn't limited to "advanced searches" of phones with forensic devices. The court is saying that at least at Logan Airport, CBP can no longer do cursory searches of phones of arriving travelers which they do pretty often when people are in secondary inspection.

"You say you're not planning to marry your American girlfriend/work at your uncle's restaurant if we let you in? OK, let me see your phone and read your recent messages."

That's a very common tactic they use to sniff out travelers who are entering with impermissible immigrant intent or intent to work illegally. No longer allowed, at least not in Boston.

Oops. Now the Republicans will have to come up with some other plan to violate our rights.

Still legal in the UK (even for UK citizens) on entry into the UK, and you can be convicted of terrorism charges for refusing to hand over passwords.

Well, for TSA/customs, everbody leaving or entering the US is suspicious. If they have nothing to hide, why are they crossing borders in the first place? They are probably running away for something...

If you want to appear like a paranoid banana republic, please keep checking visitors phones and laptops on entry. If not, stop.

Now if only Australia could follow the USA in this id be so happy.

So what is the result of this ruling? Will this end up in the supreme court? Can the TSA/CBP/ICE just ignore it?

About god damned time....

...except now they're going to pull up any and everything they can to prove suspicion and search your shit anyway. Stand by to find out just how far down the rabbit hole goes.

It's news, but this certainly isn't non-US news.

Hey guys, I forget which decade this is. Does not wanting police to arbitrarily violate my privacy make me a communist, a nazi, a jew, a terrorist, or a liberal?

To which the TSA responded, "the Consti-whatnow?"

Weird flex but ok.

Even Republicans & other right-wingers tend to be on the legalization/decriminalization train (at least with weed) these days. Biden's always been HORRIBLE about drugs though. Google the Rave Act & you'll cringe hard. He made bottled water & cool-down areas illegal at raves, which pretty much ensures people will overheat & die. Now those laws also apply to [opioid overdose prevention sites] (https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2019/05/23/joe-biden-2020-drug-war-policies-opioid-crisis-226933) & crack houses in ways that are killing many others.

Old person is old.

Sad truth right here. Not sure why they continue to shove unelectable candidates in our path.

Like anyone needed anymore reasons to not vote for him?

Oooops. Buh-bye Joe!

Well, not his best moment....

And hes had some bad ones.

Ok boomer

Why’s this clown even running?

Good grief, Joe! FOOD is a gateway drug too.

Fuck Biden then

I used to smoke weed all the time when I was younger and had no issues. It wasn't till I was much older and was prescribed pain killers for an injury and by the end I was shooting dope. It irritates me when people talk down on marijuana. I dont smoke anymore but I see no problem with it. Pills are the gateway drug imo

Can you hear it...

It's the sudden fall of bidens poll numbers

However it is believed that he does occasionally vape his Metamucil.

Wait until he learns about vaping and CBD.

Biden sucks. Please don't vote for him... It's not just the cannabis... he's not a very good candidate overall. He's too conservative, we need somebody who's looking forward not to the middle or the back

Well, he's not wrong. I know a lot of people who started smoking cigarettes after becoming a regular pothead.

Milk is a gateway drug.

The Drug Enforcement Agency can reclassify marijuana at any time. The DEA is a branch of the Department of Justice. The DoJ answers to the President.

Biden is not going to make the cut. He is a distraction, not a candidate.

Shut the fuck up Joe.

Woooow... as if there weren't already enough reasons to dislike him. Lol, this is an area where Trump > Biden. Trump would at least leave it up to the states and legalize it federally.

It's going to be hard to legalize anything if you're going to prison soon!

Out of touch, Joe. Don't let me catch you consuming alcohol. Ever.

But he'll commit bribery

OK, Boomer.

He clarified today that he would allow states to legalize recreational mj, and would federally legalize medical mj. And that nobody should ever go to jail for MJ.

What if someone were to give out fake information about them, and sell it to companies?

We do make money off our data, we use free services and they use our data

The payment for using any given free platform is your data. If you don't want companies to have your data (yes, even Reddit), then stop using their platforms.

He is like the reverse of adjit pai.

Good, we get bombarded by piracy bullshit for using their data without paying, why not have it the other way round for a change.

Hi Orangutan. Thank you for participating in /r/Politics. However, your submission has been removed for the following reason:

• Already Submitted: This article has been submitted to /r/politics within the last three days:

https://redd.it/dwg92s

I'm a bot and sometimes I make mistakes. If you have any questions about this removal, please feel free to [message the moderators.](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/politics&subject=Question regarding the removal of this submission by /u/Orangutan&message=I have a question regarding the removal of this submission.)

As a reminder, this subreddit is for civil discussion.

In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any advocating or wishing death/physical harm, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban.

If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.

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

Bruh, by the time Yang gets elected, I'll have so much NEET bux promised to me that I won't know what to do with it. Monthly stipend, paid for data, my God he's a madlad!

This is a very bad idea. The poor will be tempted to make ends meet by selling their privacy.

Hell yeah, let’s do it.

But then you should stop accepting services for free. Such as, Reddit

IP is the key economic driver going forward. Frankly, this is simply necessary.

Why isn’t this policy being adopted by other candidates?

Why would this be a bad idea?

Wow, this is the best idea I’ve seen. There’s been a lot of “take them all down” but how do you realistically do that? It’s not like the old days where you could literally split up a steel company and not much of an economic impact (at the time). This is the second wave of GDPR and i think is the best way. These companies thrive off of our data. The mass amount of company data lakes that help then grow is their bread and butter.

Yang > Bernie

We need him as Secretary of Technology

makes total sense to me

"Le le le, these big corporations take my data and give me NOTHING in return!!1!"

Except free TV.

Free version of Microsoft Word.

Free version of Microsoft Excel.

Free version of Microsoft Powerpoint.

Free email that works literally perfectly for 10+ years and blocks all spam.

Free GPS.

Free communications with anyone in the world.

Free social network.

and of course, free internet search engine. The only one that works, and generally works perfectly.

Of course you should be getting paid for your data. You already are!

It is your property. You just clicked all those Terms and Conditions without reading and contracted away your property.

My man.

Just an FYI your data on its own is worth next to fucking nothing. It’s the aggregation of tens of thousands of users that mean money. Stop spreading the lie that personal data is worth money. I’m not saying it should be private, but placing monetary value on singular data is going to make it worse.

isn't that what the Brave browser does?

Hmm. He wants to turn it into our own property? Subject then, I’d assume, to valuation and then taxation. It’s what government does.

Been saying this for years

There’s just no way to feasibly do this, especially because different industries value data differently. It would create chaos in everyday exchanges such as inputting your email address to make an online purchase. Are they supposed to pay you to receive a confirmation email?

SS: Fed Ex says NYT is full of shit, and has challenged them to a public debate. NYT had previously accused them of tax evasion.

Can someone please shine some light on this for me?

My impression was the NYT piece showed that Fedex got a 1.5 billion dollar tax cut and it's financials show that the lion's share of the savings did not get directly invested back into the economy. I really haven't been following this, but what is this debate about?

Is the argument that the findings are flat out incorrect or that the increased future investment by shareholders with greater capital eventually leads to greater economic investment?

Please be civil. I am not trying to fight anyone. I'm really disappointing that the NYT declined. It doesn't make me confident about their conclusions.

Also in 2018 the New York Times cut their capital investments nearly in half to $57 million, which equates to a rounding error when compared to the $6 billion of capital that FedEx invested in the U.S. economy during that same year.

Lmao NYT getting absolutely clowned by this guy

Is this a DEX vs STR match?

Thanks for reminding me that you didn't pay any taxes.

Someone please point out the factual inaccuracies for those of us who don't see them

*calls out former newspaper NYT

I would love to see this play out. I doubt it will :(

I wonder if Fedex employees will ever figure out that if the NYT is lying about their company it's probably lying about everything else too.

Literally and irrevocably blown the fuck out

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

This is stupid. The NY Times, as a business, wasn't a subject of the article. It's not a competition between a media company and a shipping company. It's a piece of journalism.

Either that journalism is accurate or it isn't. If it's wrong they should issue a correction, or review how it could be misleading or slanted and offer an alternate perspective. If it's correct they should stand by it.

In no event does the writing of a journalist, edited by an editor, have anything to do with the NY Times company as a business institution.

To claim otherwise is to buy into a frame that makes literally no sense here. I see why Fedex is doing it, it's apparently effective, even with the analytically sophisticated HN crowd. But this response is nonsense, it's almost a complete non-sequitur.

If I were the writer or editor of the story I'd tell Fedex to get bent. And if I were the publisher I'd patiently explain, yet again, the concept of independent journalism.

Good.

NYT won’t respond because their readers already drank the koolaid. The retractions on their articles are a joke because they know that almost nobody read the article. All media is now is just title click baiters with little to no content.

Their readers saw the headlines. It verified how the readers felt. Moving in to the next. They don’t care about getting called out. We are four stories past this.

That debate will never happen. Libturdiots like to talk big but desperately avoid confrontation because that’s where their BS falls apart. I’d be surprised if they even respond to FedEx unless it’s in the form of an apology but that depends on whether this statement impacts their bottom dollar.

SS: FedEx CEO responds to the New York Times over a blatantly biased and inaccurate article they posted. He also challenges A.G. Sulzberger, publisher of the New York Times and the business section editor to a public debate.

Pop yer popcorn.

This is a reminder about the rules of /r/media_criticism:

1. All posts require a submission statement. We encourage users to report submissions without submission statements. Posts without a submission statement will be removed after an hour.

2. Be respectful at all times. Disrespectful comments are grounds for immediate ban without warning.

3. All posts must be related to the media. This is not a news subreddit.

4. "Good" examples of media are strongly encouraged! Please designate them with a [GOOD] tag

5. Posts and comments from new accounts and low comment-karma accounts are disallowed.

Please visit our Wiki for more detailed rules.

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

Oh this ought to be good. Like when Cramer went on “The Daily Show” to debate Jon Stewart.

So what exactly did the NYT piece say?

Sucks that it won't actually happen tho

The rounding error burn is where it goes from defensive to return fire, and that's the best moment in it.

I think we need to stop using the term "call out" unless it results in an actual duel.

Sweet. An old fashioned gauntlet throw down. Fight! Fight! Fight!

Wow, that's awesome. Git'em

Statement from Frederick W. Smith, Chairman and CEO of FedEx Corporation

November 17, 2019

The New York Times published a distorted and factually incorrect story on the front page of the Sunday, November 17 edition concerning FedEx and our billions of dollars of tax payments and billions of dollars of investments in the U.S. economy. Pertinent to this outrageous distortion of the truth is the fact that unlike FedEx, the New York Times paid zero federal income tax in 2017 on earnings of $111 million, and only $30 million in 2018 – 18% of their pretax book income. Also in 2018 the New York Times cut their capital investments nearly in half to $57 million, which equates to a rounding error when compared to the $6 billion of capital that FedEx invested in the U.S. economy during that same year.

I hereby challenge A.G. Sulzberger, publisher of the New York Times and the business section editor to a public debate in Washington, DC with me and the FedEx corporate vice president of tax. The focus of the debate should be federal tax policy and the relative societal benefits of business investments and the enormous intended benefits to the United States economy, especially lower and middle class wage earners.

I look forward to promptly hearing from Mr. Sulzberger and scheduling this open event to bring further public awareness of the facts related to these important issues.

You can really tell they don't understand the game with this article.

Oh I like this article

|| besides faffing about using your in-game avatar to visit other zoos.

Wait we can do that? I want to do that! Let me visit the pretty zoos and steal their ideas! And pet their animals!

||Pandas have become virtually mythical

I bought one for 500 CC pretty recently, to use in my cute-animal-zone (the Fluff Zone!). Building a cute shrine for them today! Far from mythical. They're not cheap, but they're cheaper than grizzly bears right now.

|| highly susceptible to disease, tiny, incredibly short-lived, or even completely infertile

Guy has a point here. The first page at the very least is always infertile animals. Even a broken clock, and all that... Honestly, if you can't release it to the wild (which is the case for infertile animals) you should not be able to put it on the markets either. You messed up and got inbred animals, they're your responsibility now.

|| Well, apart from the time I spaffed 400 hard-earned CC on a sterile antelope, because I didn’t read the listing properly. That was a blow.

Did that with a tiger, put him up for sale, someone else's problem within 10 minutes! I think I even made a profit on the tiger.

&#x200B;

Seriously did this guy even play the game or is he just making up random stuff? Because half of that stuff is pure warthogshit.

Badly written article by soomeoone who apparently hasn't played the game? Hell yeah!

Brilliant article!

Especially the notion that the current economy reminds more of the downfalls of animal trade than the spirit of conservation (look at all those posts regarding baby factories just to pump out CC for better animals. Gameplay incentives to mimick real world behaviour).

It surely isn't the message Frontier had in mind but i nevertheless welcome it.

Franchise Mode is a wonderful idea gone horribly wrong. Being able to purchase animals not only from a simulated animal shop, but from other real players is a great idea. The other day, I bumped into somebody on r/planetzoo who bought one of my cheetahs. It was great.

The problem is that it was immediately ruined by price gougers.

A good example: There's 10k conservation credit limit on selling animals (meaning that you cannot sell an animal for more than that much). In the game's offline market (Challenge Mode, with no online elements), the store refreshes every minute or so with a new batch of animals. More expensive animals might be as high as 1,200 CC. For gold-quality (the highest tier of stats available), you can expect to pay around that much even for rare animals, like Bornean orangutans or African elephants. Maybe upwards of 1,600.

Contrast this with the live market. Frontier puts out cool, conservation-based community challenges. The last one was to breed lowland gorillas. Prior to the event, gorillas ran about 1,250-1,400 CC for a gold-quality breeding gorilla. After the event? Price gougers bought all the gorillas on the market, and bumped their prices up to 4k for elderly, infertile gorillas, which are a dead investment. High-quality ones that could still breed, and therefore earn your credits back, began at 6,000. These animals are not worth that much, because they're slow-breeding, long-living animals. But the gougers held them hostage if you wanted to participate. And the people who listed gorillas for a reasonable price to help others out found that they were being snapped up by gougers, and re-listed for exorbitant prices.

Frontier themselves drop animals for fair prices into the market, but it's so infrequent and in such limited quantity that it's not at all a viable way to obtain animals. You're completely at the mercy of the player market, which means new players are railroaded into spending 10 hours farming cheap animals before they can afford anything they actually want, which sucks.

And the thing is, you don't NEED to gouge prices to be incredibly wealthy in the game. I have two or three hours logged in a separate zoo that just breeds and sells lions at fair prices (or releases them to the wild -- a guaranteed way to make CC) and I already have more CC than I'll probably ever spend.

Now you might be thinking "why play Franchise mode if there's an offline version where you can avoid all this?" My answer to new players is yes, definitely do that. Avoid Franchise until Frontier steps in and starts policing the market. The problem is that Franchise mode connects all your zoos, and allows you to trade animals between them. This gives you the opportunity to buy head starts when starting a new zoo, a bit like NG+. But you can't do this in challenge mode... at all. So players want the benefits of playing Franchise, but the market is ruining it. It really, really sucks.

It's super unfortunate that a game which is supposed to be about conservation, education, and a love of animals has become a game of turning animals into cryptocurrency.

I feel like this just isn’t the experience tbh? There are spells where the market has no cash animals for long periods but usually, refresh for a minute or so and you can get a healthy slew of ungulates, tapirs, monitors/komodo dragons, macaques, and the odd flamingo. Occasionally you even see hippos, mandrills, and saltwater crocs for $.

It’s not a highway to lions but you can definitely make steady progress with starter animals that still feel like a real zoo.

I’ve also had only one purchase in 65 hours of Franchise play which has said ‘too slow’ after I tried to adopt - and my connection is average at best, I took three hours to download the damn game 😅.

Funny article but definitely not the reality of franchise.

In any case, the fact nobody is selling for cash has put CC at a massive premium

And that's how the game works, you dingleberry.

https://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2019/11/18/planet-zoo-is-temporarily-a-game-about-mass-producing-knackered-warthogs/

Good heavens that's an article full of rubbish.

Well they may complain but trust me my warthogs aren't knackered

Wut, I didn't know u could sell for cash. How does one do it.

After playing the Beta, I could immediately tell the shared market was going to be an issue. I just don't see why they included it at all to be honest. They could have had the entire market offline and that would be fine, but forcing some sort of pseudo-economy was bound to fail in some way.

I'm so glad I cancelled my pre-order and used it to buy Disco Elysium instead.

Frontier are great at making an application where you make a theme park/zoo.

The game part doesn't exist.

Is pathing still trash?

So does this game answer the age old question of how to deal with 35 to 50 feral hogs?

This is actually fucking dope. It makes it seem like a real zoo but I'd like some sort of "expedition" feature where you can send off people to different continents and have a chance to bring back a rare animal(s) at least then you aren't totally behest to the economy.

Holy shit this was a funny write-up of a wonderfully bizarre situation. By the time I reached the part

Since you can only sell animals as adults, I was faced with regular population explosions of unshiftable young peafowl. As a result, the colony was regularly ravaged by plague, starvation and injuries due to brutal peckfights.

I was almost crying with laughter.

If Frontier handles this the same way they handle Elite: Dangerous, they’ll simply nerf warthogs and force the community to rely on a different exploit. Maybe they can add tour buses that are very lucrative for 6 weeks, then play whack-a-mole with the best routes.

The one thing I don’t get about this article, and maybe someone who plays the game can help me out, is why do the warthogs have any value at all at this point? They sound easy to breed on your own, so once you have a dozen or so would you ever need to buy more?

So a pumba simulator?

Read this earlier and it's pretty funny, but I'm not sure what the benefit of having this shared market is. If you play offline you get an AI controlled version of it which, if you didn't know any better, plays the exact same way as this online version - except without the crippling problems.

Neat idea but unsure of the reason for it

The fact that everyone in Ethtrader is bearish is counterintuitively the most bullish sign.

It screams BUY BUY BUY

It seems like the more I browse crypto subreddits, the more I notice the same trends. Every top 20 coin feels like they're going to topple BTC as the king. Coincidentally all the moon posting bulls all have huge bags of their coin. Hmmm.

This is something expected, as tokenization is the biggest utility of ETH, at least for now. But as long as you need ETH to use the Ethereum network, I only expect the price to go up.

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.

It's only logical to assume tokens on top of Ethereum would be the ones having more transactions as time goes by and more scalability and tx/s are increased. When ETH 2 comes along, this figure will certainly skyrocket with a game like Gods Unchained running at the scale of Hearthstone can easily have several times more transactions per second than raw Ether transactions, that was the whole point of Ethereum. This happening is not proof that Ether is either being used as a store of value.

I started rading this "article" and frankly, I don't think you do this sub a favor by posting such low quality pieces. The author uses a lot of lame, buzzy catchphrases but stumbles in inconsistencies and never really explains anything to back up his arguments.

Example for inconsistencies:

[...] sharing none of the store of value characteristics of gold.

... next sentence:

It is possible to argue that Ether is digital gold. It is also possible to argue that Ether is digital oil. In fact, Ether is all this and more.

Threre are a lot more examples of this. The text is a mess.

This is way too soon. Bitcoin has been around longer and unless I hear my Uber driver talk about this, I'm not going to take this as certainty.

Thank you for submitting to /r/CryptoCurrency,

Your post has been removed because there are already 2 posts about this coin on the front page.

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

The world is truly gonna be tokenized at this rate. Will it change global finance though is yet to be seen.

Aint gonna age well

Amen to that. 🙏🏻 Can hardly wait.

Excellent post Mr_Yukon it's things like this that make you truly marvel at what lies before us. We are creating a transaction based economy whos fuel is ETH, whos use-cases are nearly unlimited and whos tokens that are used for fuel are also income generating... The future is bright 🕶️

Ether’s problem (and it’s a good problem to have) is that there is no real-world analogy to describe the vast value with which it possesses as an asset

Best real world analogy IMO is adenosine triphosphate (ATP). ATP is the energy currency, the competition for which drives traditional biological evolution similar to how our surrogate currencies drive the human technological branch of bio evolution. ATP can be wrapped in biological "smart contracts" like glucose to facilitate transport and glycogen for long term store of value, but without transacting in it, the chemical processes inside the body would not run precluding the superstructure built on top of these processes that relies on that economy. I wish more economists/governance theorists would study biology as the human body alone represents a homeostatically balanced resource economy between 30+ trillion human cells and 100+ trillion bacterial cells, all with varying requirements.

Won't replace BTC's store of value model unless a LOT is changed. For more info read The Bitcoin Standard.

I highly doubt it'll ever happen. I think they'll just be different foundational layers of the new internet economy

I started investing in ETH two years ago because I believed it to be a superior transaction currency to BTC. Sounds like I was wrong. Time to sell?

With DAI going multi collateral, does the collateral asset argument for Eth still hold?

Interesting writing, but actually not answering in that sense what is expected to be pricewise in the upcoming years. Any thoughts?

Nice content but I think EIP 1559 would make this actually a benefit for ether. (more network activity = greater ether price)

Interesting read, but not sure I agree

LETS. GOOOO.

Ada crowd sale was in Japan according to Japan laws out of SEC jurisdiction. Besides ADA will be fully decentralized when launched

Their attention is just not on cardano yet. Gotta decide what the number 2 coin is before deciding number 12.

Mining is, by its very nature, more decentralized as compared to a stake

The exact opposite is true. The only explanation is that some bitcoiner is trying to save his bags and explained it to him wrong.
The neo and eos approach could be conceivably considered a security because tokens produce gas/cpu time by itself with no risk, but not eth2 staking.

https://medium.com/blockchain-at-berkeley/does-proof-of-stake-violate-securities-law-part-i-a7a647764787

https://medium.com/blockchain-at-berkeley/does-proof-of-stake-violate-securities-law-part-ii-5946315f182b

Other than just the argument that staking isn’t a passive investment and requires work (node uptime and maintenance, computation) the argument of a common enterprise and less decentralization in PoS vs PoW is wrong. There is still no common enterprise just as there isn’t in PoW. Furthermore if they understood Eth 2.0 they would understand there will be more decentralization with a decrease in node requirements, greater profitability in running a solo node rather than pooling, the advent of decentralized staking pools that spread out staked ETH across many validators (such as rocket pool), and the removal of ASICs and economies of scale that inevitably come with PoW.

Basically every point they mentioned makes no sense.

This is really strange. Why say that right now? It seems to me like a tactic to scare people into selling to accumulate more at a better prices.

If they say ETH 2.0 is a security then almost all cryptos will have to be declared as securities also.

Opinions?

That's pretty stupid. Validators do work, it's not a passive investment. And this work is validating transactions honestly and assembling blocks.

Moreover, a lot of professional staking operators are heavy on ops side. So it's a rather competitive field. It's not "passive" by any means!

If CFTC and SEC will continue to create unreasonable regulations in the US, the US will certainly lose its leadership in technologies and will not own the future. They work against the US!

This sounds like incompetence to me, the reality is at some point you can paint arguments for and against, or you can just say legislation is outdated. However to sit on the fence or make successive U-turns, or fail to provide clarity is incompetent. Assuming ETH 2.0 remains decentralised, which it will if it is to launch successfully, then the arguments remain the same as ETH 1.0.

Decrypt guys, please don't become Coindesk.

This article won't be getting my click, I'm not going to pay this journalist

“Mining is, by its very nature, more decentralized as compared to a stake which reduces energy costs by giving it just one validator or a line of validators,”

What?!! This is completely false. We have seen the future of POW (look at Bitcoin mining). The barrier of entry is huge. 32 ETH is very reachable right now for any "would be" miner out there. You would spend less if you buy ETH to stake than you would if you spend money to buy a 6-GPU rig on current devices that can mine ETH efficiently.

This doesn't change the fact that the native token that is ETH will still power dApps (this doesn't change moving forward to POS). Therefore, still a commodity. The underlying consensus (or a change on it) doesn't dictate any of this. I agree that the title is very misleading. Rakesh Sharma is one of those POW advocates who doesn't mind destroying the planet. Possibly a miner too.

Title of the post should be amended to: "Rakesh Sharma from Decrypt thinks that CFTC may label ETH 2.0 tokens a security". The flair should also be set to "FUD" or "Comedy".

The title is misleading. Article doesn't have a cite of CFTC's chairman saying that Eth 2.0 could be categorized as a security. That is purely an analysis made by the journalist.

Binance is a fraud. Elastos clearly won their "community vote for a free listing" and they snubbed Elastos because they wanted them to pay over a million dollars instead... even though they won. Screw this exchange, only a matter of time before they do something shady to a project you support.

Elastos isn't alone here either. Digibyte and Vertcoin also will never be listed because they refuse to pay an extortion listing fee. SUCH a shame that cryptocurrency was created to eliminate the middle man and yet we have the worst middleman ever in Binance. Sad times people.

By allowing manipulation, shorts and allowing other trade practices that are banned in most 3rd world countries.

Binance has also began expanding into the derivatives market with Binance Futures offering perpetual swaps for BTC/USD to compete against Bitmex

This is great - there's a lot of fluff in the space but this is just a cool story about one of our biggest players. cool stuff for people trying to build big haha

Its always great seeing successes especially in crypto

Bookmarked!

Binance's rise is nothing short of amazing.

Total puff piece.

The fuse has been lit on binance, only a matter of time before it blows up.

Superb read. I have to admit this is gr8 start for someone who have no clue who is CZ and what binance is and offers.

Every time I see a photo of Changpeng I immediately think "FUNDZORO ARE SAFU".

Bizonnaci, we miss you!

CZ has the batman symbol on his forehead