25 15 3

JayTMiahEU 2 days ago

That’s a crazy commitment. Can’t wait to hear an announcement when I am 44 about how they hit the goal in 2050

3

srcphoenix 2 days ago

Best mega-cap tech company

14

BENshakalaka TSLA :EV: 2 days ago

Can't think of a better one!

4

bogeybirdieman 5 days ago

Gotta love corporate virtue signalling.

1

kreeper_6 6 days ago

How do I get some of that climate fund? -al gore prolly

1

mr_robot_robot 6 days ago

I don't care. This is a problem the media tells you to care about, not something you care about.But you're told you should - you would if you were smart.

Society clones humans.

1

Mattasuarus 6 days ago

Finally one company that actually wants to help the world except the EU they are cool because 30% of there budget is going to saving the world or at least the EU

0

DJ_Darth_Fader 6 days ago

Bull.

1

jhallen2260 JOE FROGG 6 days ago

We're gonna come back with a plan for you. It's a forty-five day plan. Forty-five days! To get us back, on track. [some claps in the audience] Forty-five points! It's a forty-five day, forty-five point; one point per day. We get forty-five points, we're back in business! [walks away to loud cheers from the shareholders]

[returns to the mic] And you can take that to the bank! [more cheering] And limo lady! We are going completely carbon-neutral! [the room erupts]

1

OkSo74 6 days ago

They’re really trying to spark those Xbox X series sales huh 😆

1

LentilMilkshake 6 days ago

hard to quantify the amount of carbon put into the air by licensees of Microsoft, whose behaviors are enabled by that technology

1

LonelyNarwhal 6 days ago

True. Microsoft could rescind licenses for companies that actively contribute to climate change or promulgate climate change misinformation. That would be extremely progressive if they did that and arguable would ensure them going out of business. In Microsoft's defense they just make software. Whatever people use it for is their business.

2

52MeowCat 6 days ago

Now those are actual climate goals for a company!

7

Parrowdox 6 days ago

Great! shame the world will be fucked by then..

0

The_Epic_OshawottYT 6 days ago

Respect

4

LikeTheWind33 6 days ago

Good ol word games.

1

Black_RL Black RL 6 days ago

Carbon NEGATIVE? Mmmmmm....... marketing too much?

I want it to be true, so I’ll wait for it with hope.

1

hirschnase 6 days ago

Climate change is well known to anyone since ~20 years. 2030, really? Come on guys.

0

DeficientGamer 6 days ago

So they're going to outsource carbon heavy duties to other, foreign companies. The more things change, the more they stay the same.

0

Stewie01 6 days ago

Dont they have data centres in the ocean to cool them down haha

2

porchcouchmoocher 6 days ago

I wonder how efficient my win10 comp would be without the extra 16 gigs of bloat on top of the OS.

1

wekiva 6 days ago

Is this a ‘shell game’ carbon negative (i.e. using greenwas like "carbon offsets," or the real thing?

1

spacesquid42 1 week ago

What about that latest vox video that shows Microsoft and Google exporting it's machine learning software to oil corporations for the faster and better extraction and discovery of new oil sources?....

3

Hamsterminator2 1 week ago

Random thought, but imagine by 2050 we somehow were wildly more effective than we thought we would be at lowering CO2, and accidentally spark a new ice age. Considering it takes decades to "tip" the climate in a direction Will burning fossil fuels be allowed again? Or will we have advanced weather control systems in place by then? Perhaps I'm being over optimistic :)

1

Koala_eiO 5 days ago

It took 100 years of burning dinosaurs worldwide to significantly influence the climate. I doubt 100 years of carbon capture would cause an ice age.

1

Hamsterminator2 5 days ago

It's not as crazy as you think though. Over half the CO2 we pumped into the atmosphere happened in the last 30 years. If we discovered a highly effective way to remove it, say an algae or easily mass produced machine, we could turn it around. CO2 release has been a side effect of industrialisation, not the intention. But if we focus attention on removing it there's no reason we can't spin it back. The last ice age was triggered by evolution of creatures im the sea absorbing CO2 into their shells (which of course became oil ultimately). That happened over a very long period of time- but it's possible.

1

Koala_eiO 5 days ago

Absolutely we could turn it around. It would simply require as much dedication as we have put so far towards pumping CO2 into the atmosphere.

2

eukomos 6 days ago

Wildly so. We would have to develop some insane carbon capture technologies to manage that, I don’t think even covering the world in forests would fully account for how much fossil carbon we’ve burned in the last few decades. And then we’d have to use our crazy futuristic carbon capture tech really irresponsibly. It’d make for a good sci fi short story though.

2

manubibi 1 week ago

Ok. Now every single big company that contributed to pollution and CO2 emissions should do this as well. And KEEP THEIR WORD. Because I mean, we'll have to see whether Bill Gates actually means to do this or if he's just full of shit.

As for us, we can start by ditching vegan diets, fast food, the meat industry and only eat food produced locally, it's the most sustainable and less damaging way of eating. Plus it's healthier and better in every single way. Oh, and ditch fake fur and fake fabric and only purcase real fur, real leather and real cotton by, again, small local companies and Native artisans. Megacorporations need to fuck off and disappear, they're the ones who put us in this mess.

0

NotFromMilkyWay 1 week ago

Sorry for the hot take that they could be carbon neutral today if they wanted. Clearly I should read the source before I write stupid things.

1

xxx_shitpost_xxx 1 week ago

Microsoft hate plants.

1

jknoepfler - @jknoepfler 1 week ago

Alright, I'll drink the Kool-Aid. I think this is an excellent strategic investment for Microsoft that also aligns with timely ethical priorities. I didn't read the post and think "this is corporate glossy bullshit," I read it and thought "this is an actual strategic initiative that is driving broad organizational alignment, which has measurable success criteria, and which makes sense."

I am genuinely surprised by the sincerity, cogency, and aspirational nature of this initiative and its associated PR glossies.

I am measurably more likely to work at and invest in Microsoft after reading this.

I guess they've hacked my demographic?

thomas11 - @thomas11 1 week ago

The bigger, of course also more distant and vague, announcement is that "by 2050 Microsoft will remove from the environment all the carbon the company has emitted either directly or by electrical consumption since it was founded in 1975."

ktpsns - @ktpsns 1 week ago

Something I notice regularly on large companies and universities, literally any organization which is bigger then a single building: The vast amount of energy waste.

This starts at heating rooms like crazy (because it is unmanaged), having unneccessary equipment, computers and lights running all night (because they are unmanaged) and goes up to transportation. It's so simple things like truck drivers who prefer to keep their diesel running during loading/unloading. I guess they do so because either they were told by incompetent managament, have the wrong belief that their batteries could not power the lights, or some other disbelief.

Saving energy starts in the small, also if started by something big. Having said that, I guess a company of the size of Microsoft will have a huge potential to save energy.

throwmeaway2344 - @throwmeaway2344 1 week ago

30,000 employees drive their cars every morning to their suburban campus, conveniently located in unincorporated land between Redmond and Bellevue. Are they going to neutralize that CO2?

Do they have a plan to prevent employees from driving 20 miles each way every day? Their new campus renovation has tons of parking for cars. Any bike lanes? Bus stops?

perfunctory - @perfunctory 1 week ago

> At Microsoft, we expect to emit 16 million metric tons of carbon this year.

So, Microsoft emits as much carbon as the whole of Ireland? Or did I get it wrong?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_greenhous...

(1 ton of carbon = 3.67 tons of carbon dioxide)

RcouF1uZ4gsC - @RcouF1uZ4gsC 1 week ago

>There’s another aspect of carbon math that’s also essential. This is the difference between being “carbon neutral” and being “net zero.” While they sound similar, in fact they’re different.

>Given common usage, companies have typically said they’re “carbon neutral” if they offset their emissions with payments either to avoid a reduction in emissions or remove carbon from the atmosphere. But these are two very different things. For example, one way to avoid a reduction in emissions is to pay someone not to cut down the trees on the land they own. This is a good thing, but in effect it pays someone not to do something that would have a negative impact. It doesn’t lead to planting more trees that would have a positive impact by removing carbon. In contrast, “net zero” means that a company actually removes as much carbon as it emits. The reason the phrase is “net zero” and not just “zero” is because there are still carbon emissions, but these are equal to carbon removal. And “carbon negative” means that a company is removing more carbon than it emits each year. While we at Microsoft have worked hard to be “carbon neutral” since 2012, our recent work has led us to conclude that this is an area where we’re far better served by humility than pride. And we believe this is true not only for ourselves, but for every business and organization on the planet.

>Like most carbon-neutral companies, Microsoft has achieved carbon neutrality primarily by investing in offsets that primarily avoid emissions instead of removing carbon that has already been emitted. That’s why we’re shifting our focus. In short, neutral is not enough to address the world’s needs.

>While it is imperative that we continue to avoid emissions, and these investments remain important, we see an acute need to begin removing carbon from the atmosphere, which we believe we can help catalyze through our investments.

> Solving our planet’s carbon issues will require technology that does not exist today. That’s why a significant part of our endeavor involves putting Microsoft’s balance sheet to work to stimulate and accelerate the development of carbon removal technology. Our new Climate Innovation Fund will commit to invest $1 billion over the next four years into new technologies and expand access to capital around the world to people working to solve this problem. We understand that this is just a fraction of the investment needed, but our hope is that it spurs more governments and companies to invest in new ways as well.

This is one of the most exciting and potentially impactfull announcements. My biggest issue with companies that make a big deal about being "carbon neutral" and "carbon offsets" is that many times it is "voodoo accounting" in which they pay money to another company which claims to have prevented some carbon emission in an unaccountable developing country. Basically, these carbon fees just are another form of indulgences in which rich people pay money to be able continue their sins while feeling good about themselves.

However, "carbon removal" is a game changer. Based on human nature, I do not believe we will be able to change behavior enough to save ourselves. I think our only hope of preserving our civilization is with carbon removal technology.

That is why I am so glad that Microsoft is specifically focusing on this. If other large companies did this, I think there is a good chance that we could innovate our way out of the climate change crisis.

bitL - @bitL 1 week ago

Carbon-negative like in reality, or by outsourcing dirty jobs like how Germany is the greenest country by dumping their garbage in Poland?

sremani - @sremani 1 week ago

I have not seen anything in this letter than #2 Cloud provider in the world is going to be carbon-neutral in 10 years.

Just because I have not seen does not mean its not there. But the meat and potatoes are missing -- especially a company that is building massive data-centers around the world.

perfunctory - @perfunctory 1 week ago

Is their carbon accounting public? Is anybody auditing it? Not really familiar with how this works. Quick googling didn't turn up anything. Could anyone point me in the right direction?

makach - @makach 1 week ago

It is important to have goals to work towards, good luck to you Microsoft and thanks for leading the way!

boyadjian - @boyadjian 1 week ago

Ahaha ! What a joke.

tantalor - @tantalor 1 week ago

What about sales and operation of PCs running Windows?

jammygit - @jammygit 1 week ago

We still shouldn't let them off the hook for their invasive telemetry lately, but for such a large, energy hungry company to be carbon negative is legitimately a great thing.

fierarul - @fierarul 1 week ago

Does Microsoft take ownership of all the wasted electricity / carbon due to their mandatory updates?

ravenstine - @ravenstine 1 week ago

That's all great, but it's not really enough. We're past the point of no return for global warming unless we remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere.

How come Microsoft or Bill Gates don't invest in better CO2 scrubber technology that might make that feasible? Or do they and I just haven't heard of it?

Then again, maybe such a thing could become a "weather weapon".

Show all comments on Hackernews

25 15

Andrew "Not cool enough for an ETH scam" Glidden - @asglidden

RT @propelforward: One man’s cartel/conspiracy is another man’s soft fork. https://t.co/ZIvrsDZPMu

2 12

Vinay Gupta - @leashless

RT @VitalikButerin: Thread: BCH is soft-forking in a Zcash-style in-protocol developer fund. https://t.co/qtESPalw6C I must say, it has not even been one month and @MarkLutter's "weird 20's" are coming true already.

81 334

Nick Szabo⚡️ - @NickSzabo4

RT @SomsenRuben: 4/4 However, BCH is ill-suited for hash wars, because the software rejects all reorgs after 10 blocks! If both sides race for it and reach the threshold simultaneously, this will permanently split the network! A terrible outcome for all parties involved🤯 https://t.co/RneohkTsFh

242 949

Charlie Shrem - @CharlieShrem

I was like “wow this is kinda nice, miners are volunteering to donate BCH to developers”...then I read on and it’s like “all miners who don’t follow us will have their blocks orphaned”....so basically BCH is controlled by 5 people. Good work 🙃 https://t.co/OwXZwlz9Gu

3 13

nic carter - @nic__carter

This is what’s called “dropping the veil of decentralization” cc @angela_walch https://t.co/28hWUMHb0G

3 16

Pontus Lindblom - @ponli137

RT @WhalePanda: $BCH implementing a 12.5% miner's tax is hilarious and anyone not donating will have their blocks orphaned. Literally a centralized totalitarian regime with a 51% attack threat. "A Hong Kong corporation has been set up to legally accept and disperse funds" https://t.co/UsDIv2yEl4

149 592

Preston Byrne - @prestonjbyrne

Miner taxation is theft https://t.co/kVz8zUrcOk

2 8

Bram Cohen - @bramcohen

Oh look Bcash isn't getting 51% attacked and they're claiming it's a good thing. Maybe these miners can offset their donations by keeping the work difficulty artificially low and orphaning anybody else who tries to mine at a profit. https://t.co/xQOFhKLLJJ

1 8

Kevin Pham - @_Kevin_Pham

RT @JackD004: Is this the self-halvening? https://t.co/r9Cmo7i9xJ Interesting move to reduce BCH mining profit by 12.5% right before it gets cut in half anyway. Wonder what profit-seeking honest miners will do...? https://t.co/DGwZtkA4yj

50 145

Dan Held - @Dan-Held

RT @hasufl: BCH to openly establish a cartel that directs 12.5% of all block rewards to a developer fund. The cartel will orphan any blocks that don't donate. Signed by the four largest pools: https://t.co/um89AnpJdd, Antpool, ViaBTC, and https://t.co/SrNbeV1mMA. https://t.co/9FncqVuFmA

41 209

Samson Mow - @Excellion

RT @WhalePanda: $BCH implementing a 12.5% miner's tax is hilarious and anyone not donating will have their blocks orphaned. Literally a centralized totalitarian regime with a 51% attack threat. "A Hong Kong corporation has been set up to legally accept and disperse funds" https://t.co/UsDIv2yEl4

39 143

Peter Todd - @peterktodd

RT @WhalePanda: $BCH implementing a 12.5% miner's tax is hilarious and anyone not donating will have their blocks orphaned. Literally a centralized totalitarian regime with a 51% attack threat. "A Hong Kong corporation has been set up to legally accept and disperse funds" https://t.co/UsDIv2yEl4

68 234

Ledger Only Gives Away Knowledge - @ledgerstatus

RT @WhalePanda: $BCH implementing a 12.5% miner's tax is hilarious and anyone not donating will have their blocks orphaned. Literally a centralized totalitarian regime with a 51% attack threat. "A Hong Kong corporation has been set up to legally accept and disperse funds" https://t.co/UsDIv2yEl4

39 132

Marty Bent - @MartyBent

RT @WhalePanda: $BCH implementing a 12.5% miner's tax is hilarious and anyone not donating will have their blocks orphaned. Literally a centralized totalitarian regime with a 51% attack threat. "A Hong Kong corporation has been set up to legally accept and disperse funds" https://t.co/UsDIv2yEl4

7 16

Alistair Milne - @alistairmilne

Roger Ver: 'taxation is theft' Also Roger Ver: https://t.co/J3e6DlqEbd

8 45

luminairex Yesterday

You know who doesn't have a tax on mining rewards? Everyone, including BTC and BSV. Why not donate the miner's fees instead? If the community wants to increase funding, they can opt to pay a larger fee per TX. BCH is "mostly" free, but if every user knows the fees they pay is going to fund future development, some might be more inclined to do so.

A tax on rewards is going to reduce the hash rate by incentivizing miners to move elsewhere.
If you orphan otherwise valid blocks, you're going to slow down the network for legitimate transactions and push those users elsewhere.
Users are not able preferentially select miners who have paid the tax, and you're punishing them indirectly.
Everyone's security is reduced overall

2

bundabrg Yesterday

As humorous as this is its probably off topic for here. I would love a discussion though on the game theory of this move and how viable their discussion that this "soft fork" ends up being paid for by all the sha256 chains because it doesn't really add up to me.

2

torusJKL Yesterday

I wonder how that works together with the 10 blocks checkpoint.

What if some miners who don't donate create 10 blocks in a row?
Does that mean they will not need to pay the donation and can't be reorged/orphaned anymore?

3

toomim Tommim - Bitcoin Miner - Bitcoin Mining Concern, L Yesterday

I'm against this plan.

I've spoken with insiders at the Ethereum Foundation, Consensys, and the Zcash Foundation, and they tell me their foundations are wastes of money and produce little value, because the leadership doesn't know what to spend the money on.

Do you trust the leadership of this fund to know what to spend the money on?

Absent good leadership, who actually knows what to do, what you end up with is feeding politics. The money goes to people who climb the social ladder. The ones who look good on Twitter, and don't do any actual work.

You know, the ones like Blockstream.

This money will feed those people. And they will grow large, like a cancer. You don't want to feed a cancer.

Fuck this plan. It's a bad idea. It will leave a bad taste in the mouths of anyone using Bitcoin Cash, because they know that part of their money is going to feed a bunch of political bullshit. It's feeding a cancer that stifles real development.

Satoshi hasn't spent a cent. He now has control over $8 billion. He hasn't spent a cent.

To say that development needs a financial incentive is ludicrous. It needs people who fucking care. Who have heart. Who are idealists. Who know the world and want it to be better. It doesn't need your bullshit bureaucracy money-grubbing corporate ladder.

If there's actually a good developer out there who needs food, housing and hardware—let me know, and I'll donate personally. I'll rally troops so they have permanent income. But I'm absolutely not getting behind this cancer. Fuck this.

This is a private entity trying to soft-fork the consensus rules to redirect 12.5% of all BCH mining revenue directly to it.

34

grmpfpff 2 hs ago

>their foundations are wastes of money and produce little value, because the leadership doesn't know what to spend the money on. That is also a concern I have. What's the plan to fund developers that for example get motivated by this initiative to switch to BCH development? From u/deadalnix response it sounds like he prefers to give the control to the established devs he thinks are trustworthy. But are devs the right ones who should have control over how to manage money flow? I would prefer that if we do this, we miners direct our funds directly to who we think is most beneficial. I don't like that I'm being forced to donate my block reward but don't get a say in where it is going.

2

whistlepig33 Yesterday

[Pourenelle's Iron Law of Bureaucracy](https://www.jerrypournelle.com/reports/jerryp/iron.html) is particularly relevant here. ----------------- "Pournelle's Iron Law of Bureaucracy states that in any bureaucratic organization there will be two kinds of people": First, there will be those who are devoted to the goals of the organization. Examples are dedicated classroom teachers in an educational bureaucracy, many of the engineers and launch technicians and scientists at NASA, even some agricultural scientists and advisors in the former Soviet Union collective farming administration. Secondly, there will be those dedicated to the organization itself. Examples are many of the administrators in the education system, many professors of education, many teachers union officials, much of the NASA headquarters staff, etc. The Iron Law states that in every case the second group will gain and keep control of the organization. It will write the rules, and control promotions within the organization. ------------ I agree that this is a horrible idea. Yes.. a creation of a bureaucracy will increase job security for developers. With out a doubt. But for the rest of us that would be a horrible thing.

6

toomim Tommim - Bitcoin Miner - Bitcoin Mining Concern, L Yesterday

Thanks. This is a great articulation of the issue! And although the bureaucracy will increase job security for *some* developers, it will only be for the ones who have been blessed by the (ever-growing) administration. And the administration won't have very good taste in knowing what to build — because they aren't developers themselves, and don't have an incentive to develop that taste. They are guaranteed a paycheck from the tax on mining! They don't have to care! As long as BCH is worth something, they can keep on taxing.

3

v4x2017 Yesterday

Hi. I like your enthusiasm and as a fellow developer respect your knowledge and expertise and I learn a lot from your comments. However, I'd have to disagree with you on this issue. I worked as Software Developer for 13 years and for 11 years was paid sub-standard wages. I was idealistic and I enjoyed solving problems and coding and creating solutions and new technologies (see my site www.2logcoin.com). I worked countless unpaid hours from home and after my regular shift ended. Giving, giving, giving, working myself to the bone for peanuts. And I live in one of the most expensive cities in the world (Vancouver, BC). I want to start family, have a house but that's unrealistic - I had a hard time supporting myself for what I was paid. I think the employer took advantage of my giving and took advantage of my idealism and kept playing with me like a toy - one day he wants one implementation, then changes his mind wants another, then wants a new iOS and Android app by the end of the day because it's urgent. Then at the end of the days it's actually not urgent anymore and, in fact, didn't need to be implemented at all and why was I working on that implementation in the first place when he told me to work on another thing anyway? Yeah I got a raise for last 2 years but this shit just got worse and what I was paid wasn't that much anyways. My point is that regardless idealism and passion for their work, Developers need to be paid decent wages also. It's a sign of appreciation and respect for their profession so they can be better encouraged to innovate and build new solutions. You don't tell a doctor: hey, you are an idealist and have passion for your work so why don't you work for free, you love what you do so why don't you work for free? Why are Software Developers any different? So I think the 12.5% mandatory tax is actually a good one. I hold BCH and I want it to grow in price. I think it's a risk but it's a risk I'm ok with.

2

toomim Tommim - Bitcoin Miner - Bitcoin Mining Concern, L 11 hs ago

Thank you for your comment—FYI, I am not Jonathan, but his brother [Michael](https://invisible.college/@toomim). I am also a developer. It sounds like you're thinking about Bitcoin Cash development as a paid programming job, where some boss wants something done, and then goes out to pay programmers to get the thing done. And in that case, the boss certainly does have to pay programmers quite a bit of money, because the boss decides what they work on. However, the problem here is that Bitcoin Cash is not a company with a boss. There is nobody in charge who knows what should be built. The people who know what should be built are the developers themselves, and they are constantly fighting and arguing about what should be built. In fact, knowing what to build is the hardest part! Knowing what to build is also very hard in a startup company. Most startups fail because they don't know what to build. Creating a company that builds what customers want is the job of a CEO. And most CEOs can't do it very well. It's very hard. It requires great taste, experience, dedication, and focus. This makes the difference between success and failure. So it sounds like you are thinking about Bitcoin Cash analogously to a company. But if you do that, you need to ask yourself who is the CEO? Who are the customers? How is this CEO going to do a good job choosing what gets built? What's the incentive if they do well, or poorly? This Hong Kong corporation has not even specified who will be in charge of spending the money. And there is no incentive for them to do well or poorly. It creates so much room for corruption, or incompetence. There's no feedback loop if they do poorly. Even if they waste all the money, they'll get more money in the next block award, no questions asked! It sounds like you've had experiences with companies where they didn't allocate money very well! They didn't pay you very well. Maybe they even wanted to build the wrong thing! And here's the main point — in the absence of great decision-making, you (as a developer) will only get money if you can win the political battles in the company. So you have an incentive to play politics. The money *feeds politics*. This money will just create an inept, ineffective bureaucracy, taking a tax on the entire Bitcoin Cash economy, and confuse and misdirect the actual developers into thinking that they will only be legitimate if they are employed or blessed by the foundation. Because the whole community will orient towards the money. They will want to get it. So they will play politics. And if you come up to this community with a great idea, but little political savvy, you'll get ignored. That will destroy the community. It will no longer be the welcoming, innovative group that we've seen so far. We won't have random developers contributing to the software for free, based on their own ideals. It'll look like the Ethereum Foundation, but worse. The Ethereum Foundation at least has Vitalik nominally in charge. Vitalik is a great taste-maker, but he doesn't do enough directing of the money in the Foundation. BCH doesn't even have that. This looks really really bad.

2

hugobits88 Yesterday

I have to agree. We have done so well without this new initiative.

3

_crypt0_fan Yesterday

Please try to understand that this is a (very late) reaction to Blockstream corrupting on-chain scaling in Bitcoin. Now we compete with Core on one side (financed with 100m+) and SV on the other side (sponsored by a billionaire). This 6m is very bearable for miners and should make a huge difference because it is like 5x or 10x the current money in BCH development.

2

Pretagonist Yesterday

So in reaction to other chains doing bad shit you are going to become even worse just to spite them? You're going to mutilate your own chain to pointlessly fight others? This will become a forever war that can never be won but can always be profited from by those holding the reins. At what single effin point did Satoshi claim this was a good idea? Where in the white paper does he say this? How is this abomination in any single way better than say segwit?

2

gathyr Yesterday

You've put it better than anybody. What a terrible proposal.

6

todu Yesterday

Well and insightfully said. I agree with your whole comment.

11

saddit42 Yesterday

Thanks for perfectly articulating my thoughts that I was too lazy to write down. agree 100%

12

BewareOfShills Redditor for less than 60 days Yesterday

>Satoshi hasn't spent a cent. He now has control over $8 billion. He hasn't spent a cent. Maybe Satoshi starved to death because he didn't spent anything on food? >let me know, and I'll donate personally. This has always been an option, seems it didn't work at all.

2

toomim Tommim - Bitcoin Miner - Bitcoin Mining Concern, L Yesterday

> This has always been an option, seems it didn't work at all. Oh contraire. BCH development is *on fire* with the current model. Have you seen CashFusion? Have you seen all the new hard fork features? Wow!

8

Mr-Zwets Yesterday

Have you listened to what Amaury and others from the ABC team have been saying at all? Whether you like it or not ABC is the leading node implementation on BCH and the software (almost?) all miners run. The team has been very public with their funding issues for over a year now. I doubt BCHD etc have gotten much in funding either. This comment just shows you're really out of touch with the current situation.

2

gonzobon 1 day ago

We tried to warn you people for years.

Centralized cryptocurrencies are bad for end users.

Now you all get to reap the consequences.

2

ShadowOrson 1 day ago

I feel I need to preface just as Peter R is: I’m not arguing for or against the proposal, just trying to gain some perspective.

/u/todu this part is specifically for you, but anyone else can comment (obviously) Regardless of our disagreement I still respect your opinion.

This issue is... wow... At first glance this is exactly what Bitcoin is supposed to do. The miners control the hash, the miners make the decisions since they have skin-in-the-game. But at the same time this could be seen as a hostile takeover.

What would you say (just a hypothetical) if the current BCH miners (that mine consistently on the BCH) were to signal their intent to perform this and that intent was signaled by, say, 75%, of that hash power.

Understand I do not mean hash power that only mines when it is convenient for them. Honestly, not even sure if it s even possible to determine whether specific hash has left/returned.

This is for everyone: Specifically grabbing your attention /u/Bitcoinxio and /u/Peter__R

I think my biggest concern (and yes, there is a little bit of sinophobia here) is the fact(?) that the majority of miners are Chinese and the fund will be controlled by a (this is where I am confused, due to the strangeness that is Hong Kong and it's relationship with the CCCP) a Hong Kong corporation.

What are the specifics of the makeup of the corporation?

Will that information be made available?

Will there be any non-miner representation on the Board?

How will this corporation decide to disburse funds?

Will there be developers on the Board?

Will votes by the Board be made public?

What is the standard for being allowed to ask for funds for development?

Are all the funds going to go to the development of Avalanche?

These are just a few questions that I've thought of since I read the medium article 45 minutes ago.

3

ShadowOrson 1 day ago

Damn.. this is going to take a lot of thinking about to come to a decision on whether or not I can support this (not that it matters all that much since I do not mine)

2

mrxsdcuqr7x284k6 1 day ago

Why are we even talking about this? Non-debate, is to gain time to work hard. When you debate, everything becomes more complicated and it wastes time.

1

macadamian 1 day ago

It doesn't matter what you guys think, if you exchange in BCH you have to pay a developer tax. It's already been decided for you.

1

utrd 1 day ago

OK, this clearly shows that bcash sv is the real bcash, bcash abc is not.

1

MrRGnome 1 day ago

I beg you to ask yourself: what does a corporation taking over BCH look like? What does devs taking over BCH look like?

It looks exactly like creating a protocol rule to pay a corporation of devs and orphaning everyone who doesn't pay the devs. If Blockstream did something like this and had Bitmains mining power you all would be screaming.

2

cheaplightning 1 day ago

Mixed feelings here.. Dev funding- Good. Mystery no detail HK corp - Bad. Governance is a huge problem... Who gets the money and how and who decides... All this needs to be laid out formally.

4

feejarndyce 1 day ago

LOL nice, so decentralized! 4 companies decide to rob all other miners by forcing taxes of them, sounds great.

3

Hakametal 1 day ago

Sorry, but this is retarded.

This proposal was put forward by a group of miners that combined, own ~30% of the network's hash rate at this current time. What gives you the right to enforce this change, and then to threaten orphaning if others don't comply? Have you lost the fucking plot?

I am this close to selling all my BCH for ETH.

3

Salt_Hippo New Redditor 1 day ago

TLDR: A centralized mining cartel has decided to enact a 12.5% tax on all blocks payable to a Hong Kong corporation. They plan to extort 6 million USD from the scheme over 6 months and will be enforcing their decree in May.

7

markblundeberg Mark Lundeberg - Developer Extraordinaire! 1 day ago

Regardless of whether this is 'morally right' or not, I'd like to give one comment on the technical mechanism which sounds like is being proposed:

If this were only enforced by miners (miner soft fork) rather than as a network-wide rule, it would be highly dangerous.

Miner soft forks are simply not a good idea on BCH for a variety of reasons, including the fact that ABC nodes don't follow the longest chain. Here is one scenario, there are many others:

Suppose we start in the usual steady state where BCH is being mined at 2.6% or whatever on average.
Everyone has experienced that the 'steady state' is not really steady at all. There heavy daily DAA feedback oscillations which have incentivised switch miners and discouraged steady miners, and so every day the actual hashrate falls far below 2.6%.
Suppose some other mining pool X with ~1% hashrate waits until the hashrate from 'normal miners' has fallen to a low level < 1%.
The X pool then mines a chain of ~5 blocks without the infrastructure funding output.
If this is only a miner enforced soft fork, then regular nodes will happily accept the X chain. They don't know about this new rule (if they did, it would be a consensus rule).
The plan-following miners have orphaned these X blocks, and now they either have to admit defeat (by following the X chain) or try to win. Let's suppose they are programmed to never give up. When they come back they will be mining on an old tip. As far as regular nodes are concerned, they only see that this chain is a deliberate reorg and it as far as they can tell, it might as well be an attack.
When the plan-following miners do build their chain, now it has to be 2x longer than the X chain. This is because of ABC nodes' "parking/unparking rule", where reorgs of >3 blocks require 2x the proof of work. So, they're at a serious disadvantage.
Not only that, but if the plan-following miners do not respond very quickly and in force, then they will lose permanently. This is because of ABC nodes' "finalization rule", where reorgs of >10 blocks are never considered. To reach this point the X pool needs only 5 more blocks, whereas the plan-followers would have to get 20 blocks before that happens (due to parking).
So, it could happen that all ABC nodes (which as far as I can right now are the primary economically relevant ones in the ecosystem) only follow the X chain without infrastructure fund, and that the plan-following miners have been orphaned off onto another chain. Even if they add more proof of work and eventually get the longest chain, they will only bring over nodes that follow the longest chain, and not ABC nodes. If they keep this up and stay at a longer work than X chain, then the network will be permanently split.

Actually I think that in attempting a miner soft fork on a minority chain is in general not a good idea. It's just a particularly bad idea on BCH.

45

HostFat Yesterday

I don't know if you (ABC devs) have enough time (until may) to make changes so that it can still be secure as a soft fork, but I'm in favor to see it as a soft fork instead of a hard fork, because of its temporary e uncertainty. I mean, I like that if something goes bad, then miners can stop doing this soft fork at any time, without the need for a new release of their prefered node software. Also, if the a new majority of hashing emerge (a new consensus of 51% pow) after a while, they should be able to stop it.

5

mtrycz Yesterday

I have not made my mind on this yet, but it's pretty clear that this proposal will need an adhoc implementation (as stated in the article), and it would simply ignore your unparking considerations. I am more concerned with malicious miners stepping in from BTC or BSV.

5

Ant-n Yesterday

> Actually I think that in attempting a miner soft fork on a minority chain is in general not a good idea. It’s just a particularly bad idea on BCH. I agree that might be the deal breaker, it might simply be impossible to soft fork such rule in a minority soft fork..

4

cryptos4pz 1 day ago

Thanks for the thoughts on a miner soft-fork. I agree it's an undesirable way to go. So let's just make it a full hard-fork. That's the point of hard-forks, and our community embracing them, it's all opt in. That answers the moral question. People can sell their BCH at any time prior to, during, or after the fork if desired, or buy more, same with mining. It's all opt-in and free market. We've already settled on BitcoinABC effectively leading on protocol direction, so it's up to Amaury, and he seems on board. The May 15 HF was looking a bit thin anyway, but now it seems to be shaping up nicely. ;) So we can have: - Dev funding from coinbase reward (hard coded funding address; expires Nov 15 2020) - Potentially reworked difficulty algorithm - Changed sigops counting rule - Higher limit for the 25 chained unconfirmed transactions Was there something else?

2

chalbersma 1 day ago

/u/tippr $0.50

3

tippr 1 day ago

u/markblundeberg, you've received `0.00146776 BCH ($0.5 USD)`! *** [^^How to use](https://np.reddit.com/r/tippr/wiki/index) ^^| [^^What is Bitcoin Cash?](https://bitcoincashers.org/) ^^| [^^Who accepts it?](https://acceptbitcoin.cash) ^^| ^^r/tippr ^(Bitcoin Cash is what Bitcoin should be. Ask about it on r/btc)

2

ninjajaguar 1 day ago

This is CRAZY whoa. I could not hate it more.

1

ISkiAtAlta 1 day ago

Very interesting. This is great news. It proves that Dash was once again on the right track years ago. Bitcoin Cash looks more and more like Dash every day. They keep adding features that mimic Dash, but without masternodes.

Like Roger Ver, all I really care about is financial freedom and prosperity (as well as removing monetary power from bad people). Whether Dash achieves that or Bitcoin Cash matters less than that it’s achieved.

Personally I’ve bet on Dash being more likely than Bitcoin to achieve the above goal, but it’s nice to have competition. If BCH can pull this off, the projects will start to compete for developers through compensation.

Even if they do pull off the ~$6 million fund, they’re going to have a hard time deciding who gets what without masternodes. They will have to go through the funding growing pains that we already have years of experience with.

Below is a clip from the article with a reference to Dash.

Built-in developer funding apparatus (such as on DASH) have both benefits as well as drawbacks. Some key differences here include:

a) There is no “masternode” voting or any other voting. This is a decision by miners to fund development directly.

b) The initiative shall last 6 months (May 15th 2020 — November 15th 2020)

c) The initiative is under the direction and control of the miners, who can at any time choose not to continue.

d) This is not a protocol change. Instead this is a decision by miners on how to spend their coinbase rewards and which blocks should be built on.

For some reason BCH seems afraid of masternodes. They don’t want them, but they want everything they enable. So they have to come up with semi-centralized “poor man” alternatives. I have yet to hear a compelling reason why masternodes are to be feared, but if any of you reading this are BCH fans who feel that way, please help me understand.

Note: $6 million is based on the assumptions in the article:

If we assume a current price of $300 per BCH, then donating 12.5% of the coinbase for a period of 180 days would total $6,075,000 (144 x 6.25 x 300 x 180 x 0.125).

6

PreviousClothing 1 day ago

I am a long time bitcoin bch supporter and I worry that this decrease in hash rate happening so close to the halvening will make bitcoin bch even more susceptible to 51% attacks. It's great that it hasn't happened so far, but I don't think we should assume it never will. If the chain isn't secure, then what's the point if we have extra funding?

2

mrcrypto2 1 day ago

RIP miners gaming the DAA

2

calkob 1 day ago

This is Hilarious....... Clown Show

3

Hash-Away Redditor for less than 60 days 1 day ago

https://imgflip.com/i/3mwx41

4

PiEsper Redditor for less than 60 days 1 day ago

Miners help secure the chain. Making them chose between paying someone you like or leaving to mine something else will result in some of them leaving which will make the chain less secure for some time. If you think that because of game theory this will result in better development, and you actually manage to pull this successfully, then get ready for the shitshow of all the committees that will show up trying to steer mining taxes to their favorite projects. Do we really want to have groups of people rejecting valid blocks because whoever signed the block doesn't want to help their favorite project?

Sure, miners can do whatever they like but it is very un-bitcoiny. If you make valid blocks with no double spends, your blocks should be accepted, not rejected because you are not generous enough according to some cartel... We don't even have avalanche yet to orphan blocks that try to help double spenders steal money, and here we are talking about orphaning perfectly valid blocks.

10

wk4327 1 day ago

Miners are ultimately running network. That only makes sense that they fund software they are using. Not necessarily wallets, ATMs, or payment solutions, but network - hell yeah

4

SamsungGalaxyPlayer Karma CC: 3278 XMR: 9323 1 day ago

Removed as duplicate

1

25 10

FrmBtwnTheBnWSpiders 3 days ago

does this mean he doesn't owe 4 billion dollars to another bitcoin cartoon character

3

Khrimz000 3 days ago

And this shit coin is up 15 percent....this is what makes the crypto space look like a scamming shit fest.

I fucking hate that fucker Craig Wright....i pray i never see this dude in person...

1

AussieCryptoCurrency 4 days ago

This is great for bitcoin

1

sylsau 4 days ago

Is it really a shock?

We have all known this for a while now.

1

sylsau 5 days ago

Is it really a shock?

Many had suspected it for a long time.

1

spanky489 Silver | QC: BCH 31 5 days ago

That f***ing Wright boomed me.

1

lolzor21 5 days ago

OH CASE CLOSED THEN

1

Crypto_To_The_Core 5 days ago

“The file that he’s received did not include private keys,”

More lies and fraud ??? in cryptocurrency land ??? Shocked ! Shocked I tell you !!!

the case will now go to trial, in what, Rivero said, was a slam dunk for Wright.

Oh he'll get slam dunked alright. Right into Cell 103 of Prison Block 13.

3

segwitless 5 days ago

Absolutely no one saw this coming.

7

mattnumber 5 days ago

I am also not Satoshi

7

CommanderSleer 5 days ago

Providing Comedy Gold since 2015.

1

_o__0_ Platinum | QC: CC 775 | VET 5 5 days ago

What does his lawyer's lawyer think?

1

Nigerianscammers 5 days ago

Info confirmed. Craig Wright is an absolute fraud. Faketoshi is his name.

3

vslashg 5 days ago

BuT GuYS WoUlDNt It bE FuNNy If cRAiG WriGhT WaS SaToSHi

4

thehoesmaketheman 5 days ago

[u/GeorgeForemanGrillz](https://www.reddit.com/user/GeorgeForemanGrillz/) and u/snowecat7 hmmm he aint it eh boyz? or are we going to keep going with this

1

SnoweCat7 4 days ago

I don't think he's Satoshi by a long shot, the fun part would be the absolute chaos that would follow if somehow he was able to obtain and reveal the keys.

3

michapman2 5 days ago

There is some humor in the possibility that he is in fact Satoshi but can never prove it because he lost his keys.

14

openfootinsertmouth 5 days ago

Fate can be poetic, sometimes. How sad of a situation would that be, where even the highly-lauded creator of bitcoin Himself gets screwed by the very system he dared to create.

5

bithobbes 5 days ago

Stop posting shit.

1

sirtaptap 5 days ago

Imagine totally, definitely, for realsies having the keys to $8. Billion. Dollars. And you, for some incredible reason, delegated the keys to some rando. And they're not giving you the keys.

Wright still expects that he will receive the keys at a later date

Yes, this seems like a reasonable, slow-paced response anyone missing $8 billion would make.

21

michapman2 5 days ago

If someone snaked $8 billion from me I would skin them alive.

5

KillNyetheSilenceGuy 5 days ago

If there are no keys funds must be safu

8

ETH49f Redditor for 3 months. 5 days ago

can anyone shut this guy up? I mean for real.

he obviously delights in fooling people.

someone needs to like give him the cake on public stage like while he's talking.

1

loverofcoins redditor for 1 week 5 days ago

Well, yeah, of course! :P

Gotta guess there's no bonded courier at all, and he's just making things up as he goes along.... as per usual.

1

supertrader11 5 days ago

You guys crack me up.... Your the fakes....fake community members.... How's this .. Stop focusing on Craig and thinking your coin could go to million tomorrow morning. Craig never told you too hold.... He told you to build cause the tech is like nothing else out there. It follows the original Bitcoin White paper. That's what makes it Bitcoin...... Not weather Craig can prove he is the guy who wrote it or not. It follows what Bitcoin was meant to do.... That makes it so. Craig should have no impact on how the coin performs. As far as I'm concerned the real fakes here are you . The leaders of this project do nothing but spend money on it.... Does that seem like a scam to you. Grow up.... Leave if you don't believe in the project. Eventually, the best coin will win and for me.... That's still Bsv.

1

Nikooohz 4 days ago

RemindMe! 1 year ”lapdogs rekt”

1

FluxSeer 5 days ago

RemindMe! 1 year "lol"

1

RemindMeBot 5 days ago

There is a 1 hour delay fetching comments. I will be messaging you in 1 year on [**2021-01-18 19:10:22 UTC**](http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=2021-01-18%2019:10:22%20UTC%20To%20Local%20Time) to remind you of [**this link**](https://np.reddit.com/r/bitcoinsv/comments/eq7sa8/confirmed_craig_wright_doesnt_have_keys_to_8/fetelm2/?context=3) [**CLICK THIS LINK**](https://np.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5Bhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.reddit.com%2Fr%2Fbitcoinsv%2Fcomments%2Feq7sa8%2Fconfirmed_craig_wright_doesnt_have_keys_to_8%2Ffetelm2%2F%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%202021-01-18%2019%3A10%3A22%20UTC) to send a PM to also be reminded and to reduce spam. ^(Parent commenter can ) [^(delete this message to hide from others.)](https://np.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Delete%20Comment&message=Delete%21%20eq7sa8) ***** |[^(Info)](https://np.reddit.com/r/RemindMeBot/comments/e1bko7/remindmebot_info_v21/)|[^(Custom)](https://np.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5BLink%20or%20message%20inside%20square%20brackets%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%20Time%20period%20here)|[^(Your Reminders)](https://np.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=List%20Of%20Reminders&message=MyReminders%21)|[^(Feedback)](https://np.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Watchful1&subject=RemindMeBot%20Feedback)| |-|-|-|-|

1

tiktoktk 1 - 2 years account age. 100 - 200 comment karma. 5 days ago

This isn't big news! Not sure why this is making headlines in the first place. Bad reputation for the whole industry

1

Ematio 5 days ago

Keys to be delivered in 18 months!!

8

soulstice23 Tin | VET 5 5 days ago

Very suprised! Could've fooled us. :D

1

AlprasCream 5 days ago

BSV has gone from a high of 458 to a low of 241 in a matter of days, so much comedy godl.

13

leducdeguise 5 days ago

Wright still expects that he will receive the keys at a later date

Ah, yes. The "Soon^TM " argument. I've seen it pulled a few times before. Let's see how this plays out

25

satireplusplus 5 days ago

Im soon rich. Thats what im telling myself too all the time. But it doesn't work.

6

Salzikrum 5 days ago

Funnily enough, I’m sure the court had also seen this argument. I can’t wait to see him try and explain this to the judge.

10

25 6

mineus64 Gay 1 day ago

The comment section is fucking disgusting:

This is fantastic. I wish facial recognition was everywhere. It would solve so many of the property crimes, drug crimes, and petty thefts that plague our city. Not that these individuals would necessarily be held accountable, but the next step would be for us as a neighborhood to be able to detect these individuals upon entering the neighborhood and work together to keep our neighbors, children, and homes safe.

That comment is a "Times Pick", something the NYT thinks is a "good comment". JFC.

9

DarkOmne Straight 1 day ago

They'll walk it back when they start noticing enough things about the guilty parties caught on camera.

8

mineus64 Gay 1 day ago

No, they won't. They'll pull bullshit like "AI bias" and try to justify restricting the system to only affecting white/straight/male/etc. people.

4

DarkOmne Straight 1 day ago

P. much what I meant, yeah. EDIT: Right now, facial recognition does the best job at recognizing white people. Now is that because it's been mostly programmed by white people, or...?

2

ourari 2 days ago

Removed: Duplicate

1

Shuzzbutt 3 days ago

makes those anti facial recognition masks suddenly in demand.....

2

JoeBoredom 3 days ago

Opt out - don't install

0

GoodPeopleKillCops 3 days ago

You can already do this with Yandex Image and/or Google Image, and that means the cops already have this capability. That was how antifascists were able to dox chuds, and the fash did this to us.

0

raicopk 3 days ago

> [You can already do this with Yandex Image and/or Google Image](https://www.bellingcat.com/resources/how-tos/2019/12/26/guide-to-using-reverse-image-search-for-investigations/) Thats far from what the article talks about. Edit: looks like you didn't even read the article out of the first couple paragraphs. No need to lose each other's time then.

0

GoodPeopleKillCops 3 days ago

yeah a hipster startup uses analytics to look up social media profiles that linked to mugshot, except now they advertise it in the open, [and not like Palantir had been doing for the past 2 decades](https://www.theverge.com/2018/2/27/17054740/palantir-predictive-policing-tool-new-orleans-nopd). yeah nothing new here. my day job is a data engineer, i could do it with tensorflow and setup similar scripts with public dataset and Facebook API. Actually, an antifascist researcher did it while ago too. https://www.wired.com/story/free-speech-issue-antifa-data-mining/

0

trai_dep 3 days ago

Duplicate post, removed.

1

MuxedoXenosaga 3 days ago

These are enemies of the people

3

OrginalCuck 3 days ago

This makes me wildly uncomfortable knowing Australia’s data laws fucking suck and understanding the Australian government rejected Cambridge analytica’s offer to run campaigns because according to the government we don’t need to import that kind of data mining/propaganda models. We are apparently already exporting them to the world. This is obviously an example of that. Facial recognition exported to the world. Fuck I hate australia this year

2

prairieghost666 3 days ago

Facebook and their other companies made this possible. And Facebook sold data even if the participant had opted out. Including stuff not visible to the general public.

2

i_am_harry 3 days ago

The image collage contains repeated faces which is no doubt a metaphor for how poorly this system performs and how many false positives there are.

1

gautiexe 3 days ago

Fun fact: all the people you see in the image above, dont exist. They were created using a Neural network.

1

TiredOfRoad 3 days ago

Mr. Clement ... wrote that the authorities don’t have to tell defendants that they were identified via Clearview, as long as it isn’t the sole basis for getting a warrant to arrest them.

In other words, this is going to lead to a bunch of parallel construction cases

3

Lionry 3 days ago

“The computer code underlying its app, analyzed by The New York Times, includes programming language to pair it with augmented-reality glasses;”

Hmm, yes. This program is make of language.

1

glockenflick 3 days ago

This is why we DO need CS classes in schools for everyone. People are out there making policy and reporting on these critical issues without the prereqs. But good thing we all had to memorize the atomic number of iridium

1

anunexpectedturnip Power Breeds Parasites 3 days ago

Check out what this bootlicker posted in the comments:

"This is fantastic. I wish facial recognition was everywhere. It would solve so many of the property crimes, drug crimes, and petty thefts that plague our city. Not that these individuals would necessarily be held accountable, but the next step would be for us as a neighborhood to be able to detect these individuals upon entering the neighborhood and work together to keep our neighbors, children, and homes safe."

2

Gr1mb0t 3 days ago

“Imagine a rogue law enforcement officer who wants to stalk potential romantic partners, or a foreign government using this to dig up secrets about people to blackmail them or throw them in jail.”

Whew. Good thing it’s only foreign governments.

2

Danny_Whizz-Bang 3 days ago

Started to read the link. Stopped when I saw the editors considered this a relevant quote: “might lead to a dystopian future or something,”.

NO! Not 'or something'!

Isn't this like that russian app for ID-ing porn stars that was in the news a while back, and a bunch of other existing products? This isn't new tech.

1

majadogatoespe 4 days ago

Besides Roko Basilik, the internet sucks.

1

creativecactus 4 days ago

This was not a good thing to read before bed monkaS

1

A_Sham 3 days ago

sorry homie

1

th_brown_bag 4 days ago

If you don't like it then sell your data to another company and make it unconstitutional to do anything to prevent this.

Free market will save us duh

1

crotasEnd6 4 days ago

Y’all ever watch south park it’s the same thing as troll trace

2

DeepExhale 4 days ago

Paywall tho

1

benthic_vents 4 days ago

I didn’t know Google was secretive!

1

Jericho_Initiative 4 days ago

Oh! Then you're in luck. They are. [https://www.theverge.com/2018/4/4/17199818/google-pentagon-project-maven-pull-out-letter-ceo-sundar-pichai](https://www.theverge.com/2018/4/4/17199818/google-pentagon-project-maven-pull-out-letter-ceo-sundar-pichai) [https://www.forbes.com/sites/arthurherman/2018/10/22/google-and-our-national-security-lost-in-the-cloud/#271c7d4453a7](https://www.forbes.com/sites/arthurherman/2018/10/22/google-and-our-national-security-lost-in-the-cloud/#271c7d4453a7)

1

throwaway98766236 4 days ago

Privacy will still exist. Either this will be made illegal in the developed world and legislation is passed to protect everyone’s privacy, or people will start wearing masks.

0

Jericho_Initiative 4 days ago

Problem solved! Good thing too, for a moment it seemed like people really didn't understand the breadth of intractable implications this technology actually represents. I'll buy a mask.

1

VonBassovic 4 days ago

Interesting!

1

warsie For New Afrika! 4 days ago

/r/stallmanwasright

1

25 1 2

theonethatbeatu 1 day ago

Hey uhhh stupid question here. People have already pointed out that the title is a bit misleading and only refers to iCloud backups, meaning your phone is still encrypted and Apple won’t give access to the gov right?

So am I right in having some respect for Apple for being seemingly the only company to stand up to the US gov and refuse to provide back door entry in the name of privacy? Are there other companies that have done this? Or am i completely misguided and Apple only does this as a formality. Would appreciate a reply on this.

3

Mentalv 1 day ago

For those interested in privacy and have an iPhone.

Hold your Volume Up button and Power button for 5 seconds (until shut down options appear). After that you can’t use Fave ID and you MUST enter the pin.

1

toluwalase 1 day ago

I just press the power button 5 times in a row

1

superking75 1 day ago

F you FBI

2

advertisingisevil 1 day ago

I’d still buy an iPhone over Google infected garbage any day

5

wiser212 1 day ago

How are different from China now?

1

76whitehombre 1 day ago

Not entitled to privacy?

3

HazardMancer 1 day ago

Government forces companies to aid in illegal spying. Oh wait, secretly legal I guess.

6

HassesStuga 1 day ago

Well, whatever it is Apple has done or is doing with regard to this topic, be fair to the users of your products and inform them in plain English about how secure and private our data is. At least that gives us a choice to determine our next move.

3

beny-jam 1 day ago

Nooo please go encrypt everything. Fuck the government this my data

4

VickBallardsWife 1 day ago

Exactly why I back via local encryption on my MacBook Air.

3

sneakernomics 1 day ago

Another reason to drop apple

2

dontreadmynamedude 1 day ago

Just do a tethered back up. They are still able to be encrypted. I don’t like that Apple isn’t doing end to end encryption on iCloud backups but at least backing up to a computer is able to be encrypted.

10

citymongorian 1 day ago

And still the government is asking for more access like a backdoor for device encryption.

Appeasement never works.

9

Veloxis 1 day ago

r/nottheonion

2

kraenk12 1 day ago

Orwell I hear ya!

2

typhoid-fever 1 day ago

the nannycam state

2

gutsonmynuts 1 day ago

Good ol' Bill "totally not the swamp, I swear" Barr.

1

elgato_plumo 1 day ago

If only they would listen when I complain 😭

2

zero_z77 1 day ago

The bigger threat here is, what happens when apple has a security breach?

3

deesee79 1 day ago

Didn’t the telecommunications act circa 96-97-98..?mandate backdoor access into all comm devices..? If so all Apple is doing and saying etc is lip service for the public

3

PatientReception8 1 day ago

Keep bending over Apple.

1

retnyop 1 day ago

FBI and all the other deep state pervs wanna keep their access to all that naughty stuff everyone has and or think they deleted on their iphones for the past 10yrs

0

repfam4life 1 day ago

SS:

The tech giant’s reversal, about two years ago, has not previously been reported. It shows how much Apple has been willing to help U.S. law enforcement and intelligence agencies, despite taking a harder line in high-profile legal disputes with the government and casting itself as a defender of its customers’ information.

God, it just gets worse and worse. Apple doesn’t even follow their own privacy rules that they praise so much! Spying and controlling the population becomes easier and easier for the higher rank government. Let me know what you guys think.

3

mikalrkayn 1 day ago

And people worry about state intervention with Huawei 🙄

2

AutoModerator 1 day ago

[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.

1

25 3

tjobingjule 4 days ago

Another Institute of Justice battle https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hsre7I0UUJA

Loads of good vids there by the way.

1

satoshiscrazyuncle 6 days ago

I hope Americans are prepared for more inflation because that's what you're getting: a LOT more. The Fed is printing at breakneck speed.

Avoid this problem with Bitcoin Cash!

2

phoenixthekat 6 days ago

Civil asset forfeiture needs to end. It's blatantly unconstitutional.

1

anon516 6 days ago

r/shouldhaveusedbitcoin

1

benthair2 6 days ago

44% sounds high, I'd like to see the if the criteria for `ongoing investigation' means they just never finished the paperwork.

1

TronixPhonics redditor for 3 months 6 days ago

Ridiculous!

Side note, should he really be driving if he's mentally declining like that?

1

weepingguitars 1 week ago

Also, imagine saving in infinitely printable government scam money. Over his lifetime, he lost tens if not hundreds of thousands of dollars to inflation. Bitcoin Cash fixes this too.

10

okboomer99069 redditor for 3 months 1 week ago

gad damn

1

PancakeVsWaffle 1 week ago

"The lawsuit claims the only criteria the DEA has for seizing cash is if it finds amounts greater than $5,000."

Holy fnck. You're not allowed to have any cash sum greater than $5k??? Wtf.

2

AutoModerator 1 week ago

Join CryptSter - Crypto Social Network +MarketPlace | +Business Pages | +Groups | +Forums and more! Crypto Business Directory, list your business now!

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

roveridcoffee 1 week ago

1 - bitcoin fixes this 2 - I hope they not only get the money back, but also that they seek damages liquidation.

F***ING World we live in

6

davewantsmoore 1 week ago

Reality: If you violate the laws of your country significantly enough, you will be punished.

2

MobTwo 1 week ago

Read the news, did that family violate the laws? I think not but their money got confiscated anyway. How is that legal?

2

davewantsmoore 1 week ago

>How is that legal? Doesn't sound like it was.

1

tellamoredo 1 week ago

The DEA has a father and is a really shitty daughter.

1

Industrial_Revolutio 1 week ago

Government can touch it what are you talking about

0

MobTwo 1 week ago

But I don't have any cryptocurrencies in my phone. ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) After I crossed the border, my lead turns to gold again with the seed words. ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

8

SpacePirateM 1 week ago

GG if they install spyware on your device.

0

MobTwo 1 week ago

That's why I have burner phones. =)

3

Pickle086 1 week ago

That's smart, but have you covered any potential leaks? Cameras, gps, number?

0

MobTwo 1 week ago

It doesn't matter if I have leaks. I don't own as much crypto as people think. I like to refer to myself as hobo for a reason. I am in BCH mainly because of ideological reasons. But this will be a long road ahead.

4

Pickle086 6 days ago

Ohh, that's cool... I can consider myself too, I have only one wallet actually, and it't not btc or bch related, but it is really cool

2

coinstash 1 week ago

In Australia you're required to supply the keys to any password protected device at the border. Can't touch it? You're dreaming.

3

weepingguitars 1 week ago

It's very easy to make a VeraCrypt encrypted partition with plausible deniability. Give the slaveowners your fake password and the actually valuable data is safe.

8

blackdvck 1 week ago

So just delete your wallet while going through customs ,reinstall when you land .to easy that's why BTC rocks.

1

weepingguitars 1 week ago

You mean BCH rocks. You'd still lose a ton to BTC fees. Especially with the amount of transactions one would have made over their lifetime saving up like this guy did.

6

MobTwo 1 week ago

But I don't have any cryptocurrencies in my phone. ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) After I crossed the border, my lead turns to gold again with the seed words. ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

8

SpacePirateM 1 week ago

GG if they install spyware on your device.

0

MobTwo 1 week ago

That's why I have burner phones. =)

4

SpacePirateM 1 week ago

This. Australian border guards will steal your crypto on HW wallets/laptops etc. your only chance is a memory seed. https://micky.com.au/aussie-ex-pat-will-never-return-after-digital-strip-search-reveals-sex-tapes/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf

6

ArtigoQ 1 week ago

Anyone else surprised by the amount? $82k as a lifetime savings is not that much. Though I guess at 79 you dont need that much

2

[deleted] 1 week ago

That's still an uncomfortable amount of money to lose and you know it.

2

Adamsd5 1 week ago

That's actually more than most people have at that age (or any age).

4

davemich53 1 week ago

Bigger criminals in the Federal Government than there are on the streets.

6

Best_Bing_Bong 1 week ago

A 2017 review by the Justice Department inspector general found only 44 of 100 seizures by the DEA were related to an ongoing investigation or resulted in a new investigation, arrest or prosecution.

Literally fucking government sanctioned armed robbery.

15

tranceology3 1 week ago

"Brown said her grandparents kept their savings in cash because they lived through the bank runs of the Great Depression, and her father adopted the habit"

Well that's a very bad habit, considering banks are FDIC insured. With so much at stake (health problems - gum disease, needing money to fix up the car) why take the risk of carrying $80k??? You could lose it, or get that stolen! That's like traveling with your BTC private key on a piece of paper in your wallet!

0

Adamsd5 1 week ago

It may be a bad habit... I would never do it... But it is a right. Fdic insurance is great, but nobody knows how that will work if we have bank failure. How long will you have to wait for your money? What forms to fill out? What proofs of identity? Just a sad situation.

1

HitMePat 1 week ago

Carrying it is risky, but what choice did she have? Her dad stashed the money for years and she was planning to bring it to the bank. In hindsight she probably wishes she just caught a later flight and deposited it at a bank closer to where her dad lived...But she even went as far as googling if it was legal to fly domestically with that much cash and confirmed it was. Granted, she could have been robbed by bad guys, or her cab driver, or had anything else go wrong...but she took that risk which was small. The fact that the TSA stopped her after they scanned her luggage and the DEA seized it is bullshit. Before we know it Trezors and Ledgers are going to be on the TSA xray screeners hit list too.

4

Adamsd5 1 week ago

I thought the same thing. For that much cash, I'd stay another night.

1

pathtoknowhere redditor for 7 weeks 1 week ago

Yeah, but as long as you've got at least one paper backup somewhere and have used a 25th word/passphrase, I'd let 'em have it and clear out those accounts when I get to my destination. It's the difference between a life-changing event for the worse and an annoyance.

3

FartUnderTheSheets redditor for 3 months 1 week ago

Ugh, I would've killed someone in the middle of the airport.

5

lostcorass redditor for 3 months 6 days ago

Right? SOMEONE is getting hazard pay TOO!

2

Mark_Bear redditor for 3 months 1 week ago

Someday, they're going to just take it from our checking/savings accounts.

Oh, wait, that's already happened and is still happening... via "money printing".

Bitcoin fixes that, too.

17

gimballock2 1 week ago

Come on Bitcoin can be stolen. You're not going to memorize your keys.

0

Mark_Bear redditor for 3 months 1 week ago

Memorizing a 24 word passphrase is easy. Memorizing a private key isn't that hard, either.

6

[deleted] 1 week ago

I'll be damned if I can ever remember a "5J" private key...

5

Mark_Bear redditor for 3 months 1 week ago

You can do it. You memorize things all the time without even trying, or knowing. The key is repetition, repetition, repetition, repetition, repetition, repetition... There are also some "memory tricks". For example, make up a musical jingle. Or, "...3cca1MJ..." could stand for "3 cool cats and 1 Michael Jackson" -- even if it's "silly" it works. Advertisers know this, and they play the same ads over, and over, and over on TV and the radio. Here's a chance to use it yourself, on yourself, for a good thing. Even if you memorize your private key (or pass phrase), you should still have two hand-written (and triple-checked) copies stored in two different locations.  Repetition, repetition, repetition...

0

TronixPhonics redditor for 3 months 6 days ago

I wonder if anyone has memorized how to draw their QR code. I'd like to see that being drawn (link if anyone's done it).

0

BubblegumTitanium 6 days ago

QR code’s are not designed to represent cryptographic keys

1

TronixPhonics redditor for 3 months 6 days ago

Where did I say that? I know it's off topic a little from what you're talking about but I was just wondering. Like, hey what's your wallet address I'll send you some. Then the person just draws their qr code, scanned, and boom.

0

HitMePat 1 week ago

You'd be a fool to trust any serious amount of money to a memorized key though, if that's the only way the key is stored. If you have a hidden backup hard copy somewhere you can retrieve sometime in the future if your memory fails...sure, then go ahead and memorize it if you think you can. But almost no one is gonna be able to memorize a seed phrase or a private key for a long period of time without ever referring to the source.

0

Mark_Bear redditor for 3 months 1 week ago

Where, specifically have I ever said to rely only upon a memorized key or passphrase? Memorizing and writing down are not mutually exclusive. Wise people will do both.

0

HitMePat 1 week ago

Where specifically did I say that you specifically said that? You posted about using repetition to memorize a key and recommended some mnemonics to help. I pointed out that relying on memory is stupid so that no one thought memorizing a key is actually reliable.

1

Mark_Bear redditor for 3 months 1 week ago

I see. Sorry about the mix up. Thanks for taking the time/effort to point out that we both agree on this.

1

n8dahwgg 1 week ago

No but I can rely on cold storage mnemonic phrases to manage it. Sheesh

2

Mi_Hyung_Lo 1 week ago

DEA: Crimes?!? We donneed no stinking crimes!

5

gynoidgearhead 1 week ago

What the fuck happened to the constitutional protection against unreasonable searches and seizures?

9

insipidgoose 1 week ago

Yeah DEA is garbage and this shit is unconstitutional.

11

MimeGod 1 week ago

Civil Asset Forfeiture is bullshit.

If there's no conviction of a crime, seizing assets should not be legal.

8

24 3

DThos 2 hs ago

Is a mook an "NPC"?

1

2legit2fart 2 days ago

Submission Statement:

A beef-only thinker is someone you cannot simply talk to. Anything that is not an expression of pure, unqualified support for whatever they are doing or saying is received as a mark of disrespect, and a provocation to conflict. From there, you can only crash into honor-based conflict mode, or back away and disengage.

The author uses a programming analogy to describe the thinking behind internet fights, "beef-only thinking", where crashing and attempted recovery is the only way to restart. With an analysis of social dynamics between online "teams" (aka knights and mooks, as well as state agents) fighting endless culture wars on the Internet of Beefs (IoB), the author makes the claim that the reason we do this is because we no longer know who we are or who we're fighting for. History has stopped and in order to get out of this cycle of conflict, we need to crash and burn.

(FYI: It's pretty long.)

6

AutoModerator 2 days ago

Remember that TrueReddit is a place to engage in high-quality and civil discussion. Posts must meet certain content and title requirements. Additionally, all posts must contain a submission statement. See the rules here or in the sidebar for details. Comments or posts that don't follow the rules may be removed without warning.

If an article is paywalled, please do not request or post its contents. Use Outline.com or similar and link to that in the comments.

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

heronumbertwo 3 days ago

Example 1: Randiya. Where anything and everything devolves into how much you hate fazist mudi and how big of a chutiya one is for not denouncing him

1

AutoModerator 3 days ago

Welcome to /r/saltierthancrait! Please familiarize yourself with this post for the rules and guidelines of this sub before participating. If you are experiencing any problems or have any issues, please use the report function or do not hesitate to contact our moderators directly. Remember, while STC is a community for discussion and critique, it is also peppered with satire. Take what you read here with a grain of... salt. Thank you and May the ~~Force~~ Salt Be With You!

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 days ago

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

1

BadSysadmin 5 days ago

Ribbonfarm is far to highbrow for this cesspool

1

IgnoranceIsTheEnemy 5 days ago

They must have spent time on reddit.

1

DaveChild Stark Raving Sane 5 days ago

Found on the other place. !HatTip u/ScreamOfVengeance.

1

TipHatBot 5 days ago

Awesome, /u/DaveChild tipped their hat at /u/ScreamOfVengeance! Here are some highlights from ScreamOfVengeance's recent posts and comments: * On /r/unitedkingdom: [UPDATE Why Boris Johnson’s Funding from Hedge Funds is a Matter of Public Interest](https://bylinetimes.com/2019/09/12/why-boris-johnsons-funding-from-hedge-funds-is-a-matter-of-public-interest/) ([118 comments](https://www.reddit.com/r/unitedkingdom/comments/d4weo4/)) * On /r/Whatcouldgowrong: [Kiddie car on the road](https://i.imgur.com/EqLoGRo.gifv) ([16 comments](https://www.reddit.com/r/Whatcouldgowrong/comments/d0ta9v/)) * On /r/ukpolitics: [So here's @michaelgove standing next to Luftwaffe band on Day of German Unity, telling German audience that decision to leave EU on par with fall of Berlin Wall and East Germans' quest for freedom. Shouts from audience: "Nonsense" https://t.co/lFG9ZpdTkY](https://twitter.com/PeterRNeumann/status/1179824942021566468?s=09) ([225 comments](https://www.reddit.com/r/ukpolitics/comments/dcvciu/)) * On /r/AskUK: [Yes, but it's too late for me. I already have kids.](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskUK/comments/el0z2s/post/fdeyaix/) * On /r/unitedkingdom: [>Section 10(2)(b) of the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 explicitly commits the UK not to “create or facilitate border arrangements between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland after exit day which feature physical infrastructure, including border posts, or checks and controls, that did not exist before exit day and are not in accordance with an agreement between the United Kingdom and the EU”. ...](https://www.reddit.com/r/unitedkingdom/comments/ddtknh/post/f2pcqpy/) * On /r/ukpolitics: [Balfour Declaration?](https://www.reddit.com/r/ukpolitics/comments/t1_fd2ljha/post/fd2uxow/) This is the 1st time that ScreamOfVengeance has received a hat tip and the 31st time that DaveChild has given one. * * * I'm a bot! | [About Me](https://www.reddit.com/r/TipHatBot/comments/cthf57/what_is_this_bot/) | [Opt-out](https://www.reddit.com/r/TipHatBot/comments/ct5wnm/opt_out_of_tiphatbot/) | [Feedback](https://www.reddit.com/r/TipHatBot/comments/ct5wx1/tiphatbot_feedback/)

1

DaveChild Stark Raving Sane 5 days ago

Interesting read, and some nice analogies (and great choices of language). But I think they've overlooked a group - lurkers. There are far more people reading online discussions than there are participating. The reach of a single discussion can be far wider than the collection of mooks or knights participating.

Sure, usually they are not going to reach much beyond the people directly involved, but sometimes they do, and that's where some people see value in participating. Often, you aren't going to convince the person you are talking to to change their mind, but those who are reading may be far more open to persuasion.

The criticism is a bit like saying that bloggers are wasting their time shouting into the void because the people commenting are only really other bloggers looking for attention themselves. That last bit might be true, but the occasional post will reach further than the usual crowd of readers, and participants are not necessarily representative of the whole audience.

1

DaveChild 5 days ago

Interesting read, and some nice analogies (and great choices of language). But I think they've overlooked a group - lurkers. There are far more people reading online discussions than there are participating. The reach of a single discussion can be far wider than the collection of mooks or knights participating.

Sure, usually they are not going to reach much beyond the people directly involved, but sometimes they do, and that's where some people see value in participating. Often, you aren't going to convince the person you are talking to to change their mind, but those who are reading may be far more open to persuasion.

The criticism is a bit like saying that bloggers are wasting their time shouting into the void because the people commenting are only really other bloggers looking for attention themselves. That last bit might be true, but the occasional post will reach further than the usual crowd of readers, and participants are not necessarily representative of the whole audience.

3

Rob-With-One-B 5 days ago

This sounds like the left-wing version of “NPCs”.

2

TommyGrippo Where's Hilary Benn gone? 6 days ago

I'm finding that the older I get the more common it is that I come across something that I simply don't understand. I'm talking about don't even know where to begin type levels of misunderstanding.

This would be one of those articles. What on earth is it on about? What's it got to do with politics? Why is it here? Why am I reading it? Why the fuck am I bothering to comment when it's sunny outside on a Saturday morning?

2

ScreamOfVengeance 5 days ago

Try reading it again.

1

SpaceBoggled 5 days ago

Yes.

1

DevilishRogue Libertarian capitalist 8.12, -0.46 6 days ago

Online public spaces are now being slowly taken over by beef-only thinkers

That is so much the case on this forum but those doing it seem all too frequently to either refuse to believe they are or otherwise think it is okay because their side has the moral high ground. It certainly explains the deterioration this place experienced up until towards the middle of last year when the mods started banning for this kind of behaviour.

7

DurkaTurk02 6 days ago

Was a good read if slightly long winded. Made some really good points but his simplicity and somewhat inclusion of any who post with curiosity being unwitting participants is reductive to me. Whilst it is a good general outline of the IoB and the players who take part, it does not place enough stock or importance on the 'Freelancers' who are more in number than assumed.

4

ScreamOfVengeance 6 days ago

A beef-only thinker is someone you cannot simply talk to. Anything that is not an expression of pure, unqualified support for whatever they are doing or saying is received as a mark of disrespect, and a provocation to conflict. From there, you can only crash into honor-based conflict mode, or back away and disengage.

7

BaronAleksei 6 days ago

This one is pretty good, I love an extended metaphor. “The Holy Grift” got me.

2

Palentir 6 days ago

My best guesses here.

First, politics has become a philosophy of life for the people who get into it. As in a lifestyle. This really makes ending a beef in any way other than capitulation impossible. If the path to utopia requires low taxes, anything else is bad. You can't negotiate on dogma, nor can you compromise on axioms. You can't negotiate on wokeness either. It's weird, because there are actually "conversion" stories. I used to be Liberal but then something happened. I used to be conservative but something happened.

Second, the amount of power people have over politics is really small right now. The best single predictor of what specific policies will be put in place is the position of the wealthy. So it's really a low stakes game. You don't have to worry much about being right, because the chances that you will be permitted to have a voice in these issues is pretty low. And when there's no need for people to come together to solve problems there's again less need to come together on issues.

Third, Americans are a lot less connected to other people and a lot more stress. So I think some of this might be the result of political arguments being a safe place to let out frustrations in places where you're unlikely to get much real life blowback. You can't yell at your jerk of a boss, you can't yell at your wife or your kids or your neighbors. But you can yell at those damn (liberals/conservatives), you can cheer on your own side. So it's basically catharsis.

3

KnotGodel utilitarianism ~ sympathy 5 days ago

>Second, the amount of power people have over politics is really small right now...You don't have to worry much about being right, because the chances that you will be permitted to have a voice in these issues is pretty low Not to be too much of a downer, but the personal policy-based benefits of voting were always several orders of magnitude smaller than the costs of voting. Being right has always been several orders of magnitude less good for your wellbeing than being "right".

1

SpermToss I will toss semen at the far right and at woke neo 6 days ago

A mook takes note of a casus belli in the news cycle (often created or co-opted by a knight, and referred to on the IoB as the outrage cycle), and heads over to their favorite multiplayer online battle arena (Twitter being the most important MOBA) to join known mook allies to fight stereotypically familiar but often unknown interchangeable mook foes.

Gamers RISE UP.

8

Dorkfarces Libertarian Stalinist 6 days ago

This article says real things gayly but maybe that's what the terminally online need

1

AutoModerator 6 days ago

Help Bernie out: register to vote - donate - make calls - text - find events - volunteer sign-up

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

K0mmissar 6 days ago

I guess one way of looking at the IoB is to view it as the birth pangs of a new identity or the death rattle of all our previous identities.

Humans need an in group, but they also need to be individuals. In a way, the internet makes it impossible to believe either that I have a real in group. So much of the world disagrees with me, and necessarily so because there is a sizable sum of outgroups for any position. At the same time, it is statistically unimaginable that you or I will ever be anything other than plankton in a very large pond.

Now that culture is huge, it isn’t ours any more, and we don’t belong in it.

I was reading Civilization and its Discontents recently, and I think Freud’s perspective on the individual/social conflict is illuminating. The desire to belong and the desire to matter are both immutable, though they’re often in conflict.

Maybe the internet of beefs is just the swirling, emergent consequence of this internal conflict writ large. It might sound obvious, because every large scale cultural shift is just another expression of human nature. But I do find it interesting to think about how human nature qualitatively changes depending on the scale at which it is expressed.

I’d love to hear anyone else’s thoughts on this.

7

Haffrung 6 days ago

>But I do find it interesting to think about how human nature qualitatively changes depending on the scale at which it is expressed. Scale is the real issue. We're predisposed to feel in terms of communities of 300 or so. Modern, 20th century communications and culture increased that massively. But it was still mediated by much smaller numbers, and people still felt connected to small, local groups. It was distressing and alienating to live in modern society, but we recalibrated our instincts sufficiently to make it tolerable. Or tolerable enough that our institutions still functioned. Now we swim in a sea of millions, and it's terrifying. We cannot recalibrate our instincts to that scale. Our in-group vs out-group boundaries are under unrelenting assault. Our need to demonstrate group solidarity intensified. Our distress at dissent or ostracization amplified.

5

magadget 6 days ago

And here I thought that was an advertisement for daddy Peterson’s grift diet.

0

AllegedlyImmoral 6 days ago

This comment is danger-close to being culture war inflammatory, while also contributing nothing substantive. Please don't do that here.

4

not_perfect_yet 1 week ago

Hm.

Neat. Although the article is a bit long and too detailed. The term "internet of beef" is pretty good, but I don't think the social dynamic is really that interesting. Given a situation of course there are those who exploit it and some who are trapped in it.

I agree that lots of people are engaged in arguments that don't matter, I think recognizing that is more important and more central. As opposed to the internet "connecting" people. It's been said before that platforms split communities, but that nothing really gets said or done isn't as mainstream.

We are not beefing endlessly because we do not desire peace or because we do not know how to engineer peace. We are beefing because we no longer know who we are, each of us individually, and collectively as a species. Knight and mook alike are faced with the terrifying possibility that if there is no history in the future, there is nobody in particular to be once the beefing stops.

Eh, I disagree. E.g. right and left don't beef because they don't know who they are.

Events, even seemingly historic events, continuing to happen does not mean history is continuing past its end. I am convinced — even as Fukuyama himself (come at me bro) walks back his theories — that history did in fact end with the fall of the Berlin War, and that the emergence of vast mook classes around the world is a natural consequence. History ends not when the stream of apparently historic events ends, but when the world loses a sense of a continuing narrative, and arrives at what psychologists call a sense of a foreshortened future.

That wasn't what the "end of history" was about, was it? I thought the idea was that the west "won" and we'd slowly approach a democratic world state of human rights without conflict because everyone had somehow recognized western society as the best model?

9

Shredophile 2 days ago

In another light, right and left are beefing specifically to maintain their identities - it's much easier to fall into an aporia of existential dread when you fully question your actions and beliefs (or those of your society/community) than when you are immersed fully in a dialectic struggle for [insert hot-button issue here]. Think about it from a sort of McLuhanesque perspective - the battle lines may change, but the fundamental "message" of each beef is more about who the individuals and communities involved are and who they would like to be. Full disclosure - I have yet to fully read the article but wanted to provide an alternative viewpoint to this specific evaluation in your comment.

1

fubo so we read and we watched all the specially select 1 week ago

A beef is a ritualized, extended conflict between named, evenly matched combatants who each stand for a marquee ideological position, and most importantly, reciprocate each other’s hostile feelings in active, engaged ways. A beef is something like the evil twin of a love affair.

Um, hey guys, has someone told this person about Homestuck?

12

ralf_ 1 week ago

What is the opposite of the Captain America "I understood that reference" meme? Because I want to post it here.

8

JustWhie 6 days ago

The line before that is Thor saying "Monkeys? I do not understand." You could use that one.

4

20 7

sonicode 1 day ago

BTCPay Server is as important of a contribution to bitcoin as segwit was. Maybe more.

1

Pheigns redditor for 3 weeks 2 days ago

So I read through the website and don't quite understand what problem this is solving.

For example, a merchant wants to start accepting Bitcoin. What does this do for the merchant that can't be accomplished by posting a QR code at the checkout counter or on the website? What additional features am I missing or not understanding? Invoices?

1

systemicbliss_ 2 days ago

Amazing news! These types of developments will continue to build out the payment infrastructure that we're all dreaming of with efficiency, privacy, and security.

1

BubblegumTitanium 2 days ago

Could satoshilabs support this? Instead of rolling their own? I’m sure they could make a kickass desktop app but this would be better for the community.

1

exab 2 days ago

It uses Hardware Wallet Interface by Bitcoin Core. Is Trezor bridge not needed?

4

exab 2 days ago

Kudos.

1

et_shorts 2 days ago

This thread is a goldmine for studying bots on social media!

2

Saroon5 2 days ago

Looks cool!

1

MrRGnome 2 days ago

Fantastic. Love to see my HW wallet of choice Coldcard supported. Thanks for this work!

1

doginabox-69 2 days ago

What is a node?

1

Explodicle 2 days ago

https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Full_node

1

GibbsSamplePlatter 2 days ago

Built on HWI! https://github.com/bitcoin-core/HWI

3

NimbleBodhi 2 days ago

What a great open source project, amazing to see it progress so much and so fast. And to think it all started out as a simple 'fuck you' to Bitpay which hasn't done jack shit to improve their tech in the last few years.

5

dgtlM 2 days ago

Dayum, what's not to love about BTCPay?

Serious question...

0

gonzales82 2 days ago

This is what a lot of people have been waiting for. BTCPay is turning to be a Bitcoin unicorn.

3

norfbayboy 2 days ago

Sweet!

2

chrisw1996_ 2 days ago

What is btc pay?

11

EphyFowler 2 days ago

From their [website](https://docs.btcpayserver.org) > “In layman's terms, BTCPay Server is a self-hosted and automated invoicing system. When checking out, the customer is presented with an invoice. Each time, a different address is tied to a particular invoice, so there is no address re-use. BTCPay follows the status of the invoice through the blockchain and informs a merchant when he can fulfill the order safely.” > “BTCPay is code, not a company. There is no third-party between a merchant and a customer. Merchant is always in full control of the funds. There are no processing or subscription fees. BTCPay Server is free to use and completely open-source, so developers or security auditors can always inspect the quality of the code.”

22

jetrucci 2 days ago

open source payment processor for your business

10

[deleted] 2 days ago

[deleted]

0

weight_of_my_sins redditor for 6 weeks 2 days ago

Please read the website

4

TheBitcoinDudde 2 days ago

Ok I read it. I still have no idea what this is. It sounds like a wallet app for PC?

0

[deleted] 2 days ago

[deleted]

0

R_u_having_fun_yet 2 days ago

its not a middle man, it's NOT a business, it's open source software you can run yourself. that's the whole point. it replaces the likes of bitpay and allows you to run your on PoS system for your online shop WITHOUT a middleman it's an awesome piece of software. like say you are running a online shop, you connect that with your own instance of btcpay and then when someone goes to checkout it generates a QR code and does the whole checkout shebang and tells your shop "yep they paid" it's basically selfhosted "middleman" service so you don't need a middleman if that makes sense the only thing it can't do for you is convert btc to fiat, but other then that it 100% replaces the middlemen i say you should probably read the website since you are indeed very confused about what a btcpay server is

9

TheBitcoinDudde 2 days ago

That's awesome that sounds like a really nice peice of software and something good for the communtiy. Yes I had no idea what it was after reading the website. That is why I asked for an explanation. Now you gave me one and it sounds great. I hope these guys take over all those scammers that make you top up just to take more fees.

3

wasawasawasuup redditor for 3 months 2 days ago

> Could you just tell me? Could just read the website and do some thinking and very basic research for yourself? Why are you expecting to be spoon fed answers? We're not your parents.

3

TheBitcoinDudde 2 days ago

No it's ok. I don't have time to waste reading it. I won't use it. I have no need for it anyway.

0

DrSilas 2 days ago

Just a quick note (someone will probably answer your other questions): Bitcoin was never about no middle man. Middle mans like banks are needed for a functioning system if this system is ever meant to get to a serious size. The concept of a middle man like a bank or a payment provider also isn’t a bad one. What is bad and what’s bad with the current system we have is the power distribution where these middle man hold more power then the other parties. Bitcoin is not about having no middle man, it’s about redistributing the power to the relevant parties like us people.

0

TheBitcoinDudde 2 days ago

They should answer if they were trying to get users to use them as a service. How do you trust a business handling your money that won't even give a reply to it's potential customers. I thought that Bitcoin was about not needing a bank or anyone else to handle your own money. At least that is what it is for me and has been working out well that way. Also "Bitcoin is not about having a middle man." Your grammar is atrocious!

1

KZSpectre 2 days ago

Its been wild watching btcpayserver grow and progress. It feels like just yesterday it started and yet here we are. Looking forward to the next big development

26

n8dahwgg 2 days ago

BTC pay server is amazing. Thank you all so much for what you do

12

bjman22 2 days ago

The importance of something like this cannot be understated !!! Wow. Thanks to all the folks at BTCPay server !!!

43

ZPM1 redditor for 3 months 2 days ago

Cannot be "overstated", but I get your point. Unless of course you are being sarcastic and you truly believe this is a nothinburger and no can understate the importance of it.

1

bjman22 2 days ago

not being sarcastic...misconnection between brain thought and hand typing :)

1

BubblegumTitanium 2 days ago

*cannot be overstated I totally agree.

7

diydude2 2 days ago

Seconded! This is a huge win for privacy and security, allowing anyone to make full use of their node.

5

pos_terior 2 days ago

Agreed! Nice job BTCPay devs!

11

peakfoo 2 days ago

Very cool. I will be trying this out. Thank you for all your hard work!

5

25 2

GOB_Farnsworth 1 day ago

FYI Sanders said something similar a while back:

http://nymag.com/intelligencer/amp/2019/06/bernie-sanders-2016-rigged-wont-pledge-support-winner.html

1

MormonMoron 1 day ago

So they both stink? Agreed.

0

GOB_Farnsworth 1 day ago

Nah, Hillary's good. She's just been constantly maligned by the right wing since the 90s, and the far left wing since 2015.

2

shadow_moose 1 day ago

If you talk to Trump supporters, make sure to mention this. I've flipped a few people in the past few days just by telling people that Hillary hates Bernie and that must mean Bernie is good. I mention that he might release her emails and all of a sudden you've made a Bernie supporter out of a Trump supporter. It's astounding how easily manipulated they are. They hate Hillary so much, they'll literally vote for a socialist if they know Hillary doesn't want them to.

1

th_brown_bag 1 day ago

Is this like how she forgot he was standing right behind her during here fight for healthcare in the 90s?

Pretty sure she sent several letters thanking him for his work over the years

1

th_brown_bag 1 day ago

Is this like how she forgot he was standing right behind her during here fight for healthcare in the 90s?

Pretty sure she sent several letters thanking him for his work over the years

1

frenlybear 2 days ago

Fuck Hillary

2

handlitisgay 2 days ago

You have to like Hillary Clinton. Hillary Clinton is more than a president. She is an idea, a world-historical heroine, light itself.

When people told me they hated Hillary Clinton or (far worse) that they were "not fans," I wish I had said in no uncertain terms: "I love Hillary Clinton. I am in awe of her. I am set free by her. She will be the finest world leader our galaxy has ever seen."

I wish, in those exchanges, I had not asked gentle, tolerant questions about a hater's ridiculous allergy to her, or Clinton's fictional misdeeds and imagined character flaws. More deeply still, I wish I had not reasoned with anyone, patiently countered their ludicrous emotionalism and psychologically disturbed theories. I wish I had said, flatly, "I love her." As if I had been asked about my mother or daughter. No defensiveness or polemics; not dignifying the crazy allegations with so much as a Snopes link.

Maybe "I love her" seemed too womany, too sentimental, too un-pragmatic. Not coalition-building, kind of culty. But people say with impunity they love Obama, the state of Israel, their churches, Kurt Cobain. In the end, I wish I'd said it because it's true.

And I'm not alone in my commitment. Millions of Clinton's supporters — we were thanked by Clinton as the "secret, private Facebook sites" — expressed it among themselves, all the time, in raptures or happy tears with each new display of our heroine's ferocious intelligence, depth, and courage. We were frankly bewildered by the idea that anyone would hedge their commitment to her ("You don't have to be her friend"; "Yes, she's made mistakes"; "lesser of two evils"). We didn't remember anyone turning to this stock ambivalence when discussing Obama, Babe Ruth, FDR. If only one reporter — they knew about us — could have published a headline like "Clinton Inspires Historic Levels of Adoration From Her Supporters" about the people who have had their lives transformed by the power of her brilliant campaign, unrivaled effectiveness, and extraordinary career. Just one headline like that, like the ones Bill Clinton got.

Usually a legend is made by men and media — the legend of Kennedy, say, or Jim Morrison — and then, much later, a biopic, pretending to evenhandedness, reveals the legend's shortcomings, his "human" side. The shortcomings are almost always something exactly no one actually believes compromises his heroism. His problem drinking. His mistreatment of women. Well, takedowns of Hillary were always already written. She has somehow made the time to hear out each dead-end line of reasoning about her fake mortal sins, and often she has also thanked everyone for sparing her further moral lashings, as if that were a kindness. Under cover of "humanizing" the intimidating valedictorian, reports and investigations and media clichés vilified her. But the feminist hero never got to be a legend first. And yet she is one, easily surpassing Ben Franklin, Henry Ford, Steve Jobs.

I want to reverse the usual schedule of things, then. We don't have to wait until she dies to act. Hillary Clinton's name belongs on ships, and airports, and tattoos. She deserves straight-up hagiographies and a sold-out Broadway show called RODHAM. Yes, this cultural canonization is going to come after the chronic, constant, nonstop "On the other hand" sexist hedging around her legacy. But such is the courage of Hillary Clinton and her supporters; we reverse patriarchal orders. Maybe she is more than a president. Maybe she is an idea, a world-historical heroine, light itself. The presidency is too small for her. She belongs to a much more elite class of Americans, the more-than-presidents. Neil Armstrong, Martin Luther King Jr., Alexander Fucking Hamilton.

Hillary Clinton did everything right in this campaign, and she won more votes than her opponent did. She won. She cannot be faulted, criticized, or analyzed for even one more second. Instead, she will be decorated as an epochal heroine far too extraordinary to be contained by the mere White House. Let that revolting president-elect be Millard Fillmore or Herbert Hoover or whatever. Hillary is Athena.

2

Verily-Frank 2 days ago

Fuck off Hillary. I have no skin in this game, but you are a self-important venal bitch. You lost, bitch, and it was all your fault. Please skulk off and let others try to present an alternative worthy of the voters' consideration. There's a good girl.

1

mouthsmasher 2 days ago

Hillary is the turd that won't flush.

1

Chino_Blanco 2 days ago

High school.

2

philnotfil 1 day ago

This comment has been removed for violating comment rule 2: 2) Be substantive. We do not allow: low effort one-liner comments, memes, off topic replies, or pejorative name calling. Source your facts. If you're claiming something to be true, you need to back it up with a qualified source. If you have any questions or concerns, please feel free to message the mods.

1

MormonMoron 2 days ago

I agree that Dems are acting like petulant high schoolers right now.

0

Ryanm715 2 days ago

I love this sub. Watching the lemmings circle the wagons around Bernie over in r/politics is just amusing at this point.

7

3DQW 2 days ago

Gotta thank these idiots for this in-kind contribution to Bernie’s campaign. What’s next? Have death itself somehow come out against Sanders?

1

thecleverfeather 2 days ago

I think she may regret running now after watching this shit show of a primary election.

0

pissingindigo socialism will cure my small dick 2 days ago

The Clinton cries out in pain as it strikes you

10

PandasArePeopleToo 2 days ago

Unless all the candidates for the Democratic nomination AND the Establishment come out strongly condemning Hillary for refusing to commit to Bernie if he's the nominee, they can STFU about unity and I don't want to hear another word about VBNMW.

4

ZgylthZ 2 days ago

Blue no matter who unless it’s someone who isn’t corrupt, then fuck you

6

opelly 2 days ago

Wow. They are desperate.

1

iamcoolstephen1234 2 days ago

and declining in an interview with The Hollywood Reporter to say whether she would endorse and campaign for him if he's the Democratic 2020 nominee.

So not exactly working against him, but not committing to offering her support, either.

1

iuodgeekmom 2 days ago

After what he did to Warren, and the feeding frenzy of his followers that followed, I think more and more people are starting to wake up to how toxic this man is. In fact, the events of the last few weeks (including trying to smear Biden with the word "corruption", the lies about Social Security, etc) made me finally decide, once and for all, that I'm going to vote for Biden. I even donated to his campaign for the first time.

I used to think I wanted Warren, then Pete...but I can't risk throwing away my vote in a way that could help Sanders win. I worry that Warren, even after what he did to her, could give him her delegates and I worry that Pete just isn't ready to be president yet (although some day I certainly hope I get to vote for him!).

17

RemoteText 2 days ago

Imagine! Supporters of Bernie Sanders, rushing to defend Bernie Sanders! The nerve.

40

M_Messervy Democratic Socialgrift 2 days ago

Bernie *Bros*, let's not pretend there are any women here. Bernie wouldn't allow it.

13

og_m4 inconvenient truths and tough love 2 days ago

She's turning into a female Trump

7

fugwb 2 days ago

She makes trump look like a choir boy. What a horrible sack of steaming stinking shit she is. And in her twisted sick mind she actually thinks she is more likable than Bernie. On a positive note, I believe her hatred towards Bernie will actually help him. Look for a bump in the polls and in donations after this.

1

jcs50 2 days ago

She won't commit cuz she knows he's not gonna get the nomination.

9

gonzone 2 days ago

the endorsement no one wants ...

3

metronomemike 2 days ago

She is owned. 4 more years of trump IS better than Bernie’s revolution to these bought centrist ass hats.

13

walkinman19 2 days ago

That's for damn sure now! Hillary laid it right on the table in all its stinking glory! It will be PUMA when Bernie gets the nomination from her and her cabal. It will be up to us and all the new voters we can get to the polls to wash these damn corporate dem sellouts out of the party!

4

wildbillcody54 2 days ago

Can’t disagree.

2

Ordinate1 2 days ago

And yet, he has the highest favorability ratings of anyone currently running for president, while Hillary had the lowest ratings of anyone to ever run for president. Strange world you Republicans live in.

5

EvidenceBasedOnly 2 days ago

I don’t get why people say things that are verifiable lies: [Biden aggregate net favorability: -4.5](https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/joe_biden_favorableunfavorable-6677.html) [Bernie aggregate net favorability: -6](https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/bernie_sanders_favorableunfavorable-6676.html)

0

Ordinate1 1 day ago

Did I say net? Try again.

0

EvidenceBasedOnly 1 day ago

Click the links... same thing for raw favorability.

0

Ordinate1 1 day ago

Click on new in the sub; tons of polls coming out with Bernie on top.

0

lovestosplooge500 2 days ago

Bern Sanders has no chance of beating don trump. Orange man will label him a socialist who will raise everyone’s taxes. He won’t be able to flip enough of the states trump won in 2016.

0

Ordinate1 2 days ago

> Bern Sanders has no chance of beating don trump He polls the best against Trump. >Orange man will label him a socialist who will raise everyone’s taxes Socialism doesn't have the negative association that it used to, at least for the 60% of the country who aren't already committed to Trump. > He won’t be able to flip enough of the states trump won in 2016. He beat Hillary in the 2016 primary in exactly the swing states that cost her the election.

2

EvidenceBasedOnly 2 days ago

> He polls best against Trump This is just verifiably untrue: [Biden vs Trump: Biden +4](https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/us/general_election_trump_vs_biden-6247.html) [Bernie vs Trump: Bernie +3](https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/us/general_election_trump_vs_sanders-6250.html) This is also ignoring how Bernie does better in the deeper blue states and Biden does better in the more moderate/swing states.

0

Ordinate1 1 day ago

Um, Bernie is winning more than Biden over Trump in Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania.... Who cares about national polls? Hillary beat Trump by 3 million votes; that's not how we elect presidents, though.

0

lovestosplooge500 2 days ago

The polls didn’t favor orange man in 2016. Orange man is a master of labeling people. Bern will be labeled a socialist who wants to raise people’s taxes and regulate businesses. What kind of idiot in a swing state is going to change their vote from the candidate who has lowered their taxes to the one who will increase their taxes?

1

Ordinate1 2 days ago

> The polls didn’t favor orange man in 2016. ...and he didn't win the popular vote. He just happened to hit the states that he needed to win the electoral college. Them's the breaks. >Orange man is a master of labeling people. Bern will be labeled a socialist who wants to raise people’s taxes and regulate businesses. And Trump is used to duking it out with mealy-mouthed corporate whores like Hillary Clinton. Bernie has a clear message and can address those accusations head-on. >What kind of idiot in a swing state is going to change their vote from the candidate who has lowered their taxes to the one who will increase their taxes? Nice shift! You were saying that he was going to be accused of that, and now you are assuming it to be true! The fact is that people will pay less overall, which is all that anyone cares about. The fact is that Bernie polls very well in places like Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania... and flipping those from 2016 will win the election.

1

Ibisboy3 2 days ago

Until people get a full understanding go whoa Bernie really is. You know, an old communist. Honeymoon in the USSR, supporter of communism in Central America, advocate of the gov take over of many private industries etc. Right now many considering him just think he is a kook who has accomplished nothing in his last 40 years. They therefore assume he is harmless. His history will come back to haunt him if CNN doesn’t take him out of contention sooner.

1

Ordinate1 1 day ago

The old scare tactics just don't work anymore, at least not on anyone who doesnt reflexively vote Republican, and why the #*@$ would you want to pander to them? CNN tried their best... and it backfired. Warren tried her best... and it backfired. This is what happens when clueless rich people try to manipulate a group of people that they can no longer relate to.

1

Ibisboy3 1 day ago

Nothing I have said is not truthful. It is not a tactic. People will reject him as they learn more about his views. Wait and see. Perhaps you lack historical context regarding communism? Not sure. If so, do a little reading about Mao, Stalin and Pol Pot perhaps. You can get a feel for how the doctrine works out when implemented. The horrific results to humanity and abject failure to to achieve anything beside a plummeting standard of living in every implementation ever attempted tends to be a dealbreaker for most people.

1

Ordinate1 Yesterday

My father is a retired history professor; I have more background knowledge on the subject than you with the simplistic ideas you have presented. But we don't want the USSR or China; we want Scandinavian-style Socialism, a mixed economy with the best of both Socialism and Capitalism, while minimizing the problems associated with both.

1

lovestosplooge500 2 days ago

I will bet you anything you want bern sanders will never be potus. I’ll start at $1000

1

Ordinate1 1 day ago

No bet; I half expect him to be shot, or even mysteriously disappear, if he wins the primary.

1

broksonic 2 days ago

I had to google baroness to find out what it meant. Your vocabulary is on point.

4

25 2

NTOMods 5 hs ago

Greetings, dwarrior1992. Unfortunately, your post has been removed from /r/nottheonion because our rules do not allow:

Articles or subjects that have been featured here before (rule #5). This includes minor updates to stories already featured here, or different articles about the same event. Nobody wants to read the same old shit over & over.

For a full list of our submission rules, please visit our wiki page.

If you're new to /r/nottheonion, you can check out NTO101: An Introduction to /r/NotTheOnion for more information on our rules and answers to frequently asked questions.

This decision was made by human mods; the bot just does our dirty work. If you have any questions or concerns, feel free to message the moderators. Please include a link to the post you wish to discuss, it doesn't autofill from here. Also, if you claim it's not a repost and we can clearly point to the original here, there may be mockery at your expense.

1

59078-0-476-8-16439 1 day ago

Nice taste of his own medicine

1

RealFunction 1 day ago

so give it to the fbi

1

dtheme 1 day ago

So should we all delete Whatsapp now? Or have they fixed this vulnerability?

1

Snowreaper 1 day ago

Lmao, MBS did it, he knows he did it. Anyone who has received that file has been compromised. This goes much much deeper than Bezos.

1

ecommerce-questions 1 day ago

Conspiracy time, and this has probably been mentioned elsewhere, but here we go: >While AMI insisted it was tipped off about the affair by the estranged brother of Bezos’s girlfriend AMI could have been tipped off by the brother of his girlfriend, but how did they get the content on the phone itself? We obviously know that it was MBS that did it. But how did that get coordinated? AMI has very, very close ties to Trump, who has very, very close ties to Saudi Arabia. He also hates Bezos. AMI gets tipped off from the brother of the girlfriend and then reaches out to Trump about it who then uses a pal in MBS to coordinate a casual conversation with Bezos so he can drop the infected video to get access to the leaked content that AMI then uses in their article.

1

bramburn 1 day ago

He is looking for the d

1

davcole 1 day ago

Scary!

1

AM096X 1 day ago

"Friendly WhatsApp exchange" 🤔

2

QueenAnneBoleynTudor 1 day ago

Greetings, Rhysasaur. Unfortunately, your submission has been removed from /r/nottheonion because our rules do not allow:

Content that doesn't have an oniony quality to it (rule #2). Your submission may be better suited for another subreddit instead.

For a full list of our submission rules, please visit our wiki page. If you're new to /r/nottheonion, you can check out NTO101: An Introduction to /r/NotTheOnion for more information on our rules and answers to frequently asked questions. If you have any questions or concerns, feel free to message the moderators. Please include the link to the post you want us to review.

1

Spamcheesecake 1 day ago

Piece of shit got shat on.

3

Double-Up-28 1 day ago

Looks like our allies are hard at work defending freedom and democracy all around with world.

3

hifumiyo1 1 day ago

MBS approves the murder of Jamal Kashoggi, who writes for the Washington Post, which is owned by Jeff Bezos, whose phone was hacked at the behest of MBS... nothing to see here...

3

McLeavey 1 day ago

Good. I mean, who the hell cares?

0

fatcIemenza 1 day ago

Because he did it through a hacked WhatsApp file and he undoubtedly did the same to Jared Kushner

2

frizzykid 1 day ago

Regardless of how you feel about Bezos, its pretty disgusting that the leader of a foreign country would do this, and its important to have this knowledge out there. Also who knows what they were planning on doing with the data they stole.

5

McLeavey 1 day ago

I don't think its disgusting. It would be foolish to imagine that both of these obscenely wealthy men don't have all sorts of weapons of information in their arsenal. These men employ their own paramilitary security forces, and can buy whatever intelligence they need, in much more discreet manners than hacking a cellphone. Imagine You are the richest man on the planet and you are somehow vulnerable to the info on your phone?! Thats laughable if not just completely absurd. Also, why do you give a shit about Jeff Bezos? I mean, how much thought do you imagine ol Jeff gives to your life or the privacy challenges you face?

0

frizzykid 1 day ago

It's not about Jeff Bezos, its about data security. NO major world leader should not be hacking into ANYBODIES phones. People take our data for granted. It shouldn't be like that. If you feel that its ok for foreign countries to steal anybodies data you are just an ignorant person who has absolutely no idea how valuable your information is.

3

McLeavey 1 day ago

Again, its naive to think that these cyber espionage games arent happening. Im not an MBS apologist, the guy is a murdering tyrant. But I can't imagine why any of this matters to me or you. Ok lets pretend we live in a world where data security for average people like you and me was an actual thing. Surprise! It isnt. If you think whatsapp or any commercial mobile text app is 100% secure, you are kidding yourself. Seriously, don't believe me? Perhaps a visit to eff.org or watching a few DefCon conference videos will help you out. Finally if you believe that no world leaders should be doing this kind of thing, perhaps a letter to your local senator is a good place to start, since I garauntee that the NSA/CIA/DHS et all, are fully capable of extreme intrusions into anyones privacy. Wake up. This has been happening for years. We as Americans are just as complicit.

0

OnyxBaird 1 day ago

I'm positive that it has to do with his divorce and huge loss of cash.

1

marcmaslov 1 day ago

смешная новость

1

maximum38 1 day ago

Мне больше всего интересно какая ос У него

5

LoopForward 1 day ago

Gentoo?

1

my_2020_username 1 day ago

Jeff came to Turkey to his funeral. Nyt is Jeff's, right?

1

ubertr0_n 1 day ago

> Nyt is Jeff's, right? The WP.

2

my_2020_username 1 day ago

Oh right.

1

NotTheOnionBot robot overlord 1 day ago

Thank you for your submission to /r/NotTheOnion! Your submission has been automatically removed since your submission's title appears to be different from the headline of the article you submitted. Submissions with altered titles are not permitted, all titles must be the headline from the article, copy-and-pasted.

Please read the information below before modmailing us. We will not answer your modmail if your issue was addressed below.

Do not add periods or quotation marks to the title.
Do not use the suggest title button. Instead, copy-and-paste the article's title directly from the link you are submitting.
Make sure your source doesn't have a paywall. Because of the method used to check titles, submissions from sites that have paywalls may be removed since the bot cannot access the article. If your source does have a paywall, you can resubmit from an alternative source that is not behind a paywall.

You may resubmit with the correct title, but remember that our other rules must be followed as well. For more information on our rules, check out /r/NotTheOnion/w/NTO101.

I'm a bot, and this action was performed automagically.

1

perestroika-pw 2 days ago

Aastal 2018 imbus Jeff Bezosi telefonist välja suur kogus andmeid pärast seda, kui talle oli videosõnumi saatnud Saudi Araabia kroonprints Mohammed bin-Salman (tuntud ka luusae-Salmanina pärast seda, kui Saudi Araabia julgeolekutöötajad tapsid ja tükeldasid ajakirjanik Jamal Khashoggi kuningriigi Türgis asuvas saatkonnas).

Juhtumisi on Jeff Bezos ajakirja Washington Post omanik, Jamal Khasoggi oli aga ajakirja kaastöötaja.

Digitaalse kriminalistika spetsialistide kätte maandus telefon möödunud aasta jaanuaris, pärast seda kui National Enquirer avaldas Jeff Bezos'e intiimse eraelu detaile, paljastades muuhulgas miljardäri armusuhte. Tabloid-ajaleht väitis, et said vihje armusuhte kohta Bezos'e sõbranna vennalt. Nüüdseks on väide kaheldav ja tundub tõenäolisem, et idamaa kroonprints on miljardäri survestanud ja survele mitte allumisel olid tagajärjed.

While AMI insisted it was tipped off about the affair by the estranged brother of Bezos’s girlfriend, the investigation by the billionaire’s own team found with “high confidence” that the Saudis had managed to “access” Bezos’s phone and had “gained private information” about him.

Kaudse tõendina võib kõlvata MbS-i tihe läbikäimine David Pecker'iga, ajalehe National Enquirer omanikfirma juhatuse esimehega, ning seda uudise avaldamisele eelnevatel kuudel.

Süüdistust küberründes peavad usutavaks ka Saudi dissidendid ja Guardiani andmetel on seda pidanud tõenäoliseks ka ÜRO eriraportöör Jamal Khasoggi tapmise küsimuses.

The Guardian understands a forensic analysis of Bezos’s phone, and the indications that the “hack” began within an infected file from the crown prince’s account, has been reviewed by Agnès Callamard, the UN special rapporteur who investigates extrajudicial killings. It is understood that it is considered credible enough for investigators to be considering a formal approach to Saudi Arabia to ask for an explanation.

Kõik eelnev on kirjutatud ilma Jeffi pärast sügavalt muretsemata, kuna temal, erinevalt lihtsurelikest, on suur ja hästi rahastatud turvameeskond ja head eeldused sääraste tempude vastu kaitstud olla. Riik aga, mis lubab oma kõrgetel esindajatel teha kuritahtlikke trikke välismaa ettevõtjate vastu...

...olen veendunud, et see riik meelitab investoreid nagu avatud klooriballoon kärbseid. ;) Toksilise õlikunniga äri ajamisest on ilmselt huvitatud kõik ja veel mõned.

1

DeinsBane 2 days ago

Very juicy story, didn’t know Saudi Arabia had the guts to hack someone like Bezos’ personal phone

3

1amathrowaway 1 day ago

Well once America let them get away with the horrific torture and murder of a journalist, I think they realized they could do more or less what they wanted. (not trying to turn this into a political thing, but just stating factually true events)

6

therealbrolinpowell 1 day ago

This makes it pretty clear that you didn't even _click the goddamn link_. If you had, you'd have seen that the sub-header for the article, in bold print beneath the image that sits directly below the article title, describes this hack as having occurred FIVE MONTHS BEFORE THE MURDER. I'm not saying that your opinion on the matter is wrong, just misinformed. Bin Salman was a thug and Saudi Arabia was attempting this kind of shit well before it executed a botched murder right in the public eye and an obvious cover-up immediately after.

1

DeinsBane 1 day ago

Idk man journalist are one thing. The worst they can do is write one bad story. Rich man Bezos can buy an army or something.

1

1amathrowaway 1 day ago

Well, the idea behind the journalist thing is that the country with the world's strongest military and cyber capabilities would maybe do something in response to such a blatant violation of international law. No one in the world is rich enough to command more muscle than the United States government. I'd argue that the Khashoggi thing was "getting away with it" way more than this.

1

RedditItalyBot 2 days ago

Ciao, abbiamo rimosso il tuo thread.

Hey, your submission has been removed.

Il tema è di interesse prettamente locale, o l'argomento è molto specifico o di nicchia.
La pubblicazione di contenuti che non riguardano direttamente l'Italia, o che siano particolarmente tecnici / di nicchia, è ammessa solo come thread di testo nel quale sia presente una breve descrizione del tema / una sintesi dei punti chiave dell'articolo che renda l'argomento quanto più fruibile possibile dalla popolazione generale del sub.

ENGLISH: The topic is of local relevance, or it's very specific / technical.
Topics that aren't directly related to Italy, or that are very specific / technical, are allowed only as text submission with a short introduction of the subject capable of making it interesting and accessible to the general population of the subreddit.

Appellati | FAQ | Appeal | FAQ (Eng) | More info about me

1

Wer-Wolf 2 days ago

Саудовцы взломали телефон Джеффа Безоса. Принц Салман лично послал ему видео с вирусом, утверждает расследование.

В прошлом году таблоид National Enquirer выпустил скандальный материал о том, что Безос якобы изменял жене. Богатейший человек планеты заинтересовался, откуда у желтой прессы его личные сообщения. Эксперты долго изучали его телефон и пришли к выводу, что его взломали саудовцы.

Еще весной 2018 года Безос переписывался в WhatsApp с правителем Саудовской Аравии Мухаммадом ибн Салманом. Принц послал главе Amazon и владельцу Washington Post видео, в котором оказалась программа для взлома. С телефона выкачали массу данных.

Телефон взломали за несколько месяцев до убийства саудовской разведкой колумниста Washington Post и критика властей Джамаля Хашикджи. «Он [Салман], вероятно, считал, что если у него есть что-то на Безоса, это может изменить освещение Саудовской Аравии в Post», — сказал эксперт по национальной безопасности.

https://t.me/owglobal/4400

9

uglyraed 2 days ago

Worst time to be a international student from a middle eastern country studying cyber security and going through US immigration in a few days :(

10

ExpatiateDy 2 days ago

Where's the Feds on this? I don't find it comforting that attacks happening on the US's free press go unanswered by law enforcement. We should be indicting MBS.

1

carrotcypher 1 day ago

If literally ordering the [brutal torture and murder of a US journalist (Khashoggi) in an embassy](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assassination_of_Jamal_Khashoggi) didn't do the trick of getting the US government involved, why would hacking a phone of someone they are threatened by suddenly get them interested?

1

FlipBarry 2 days ago

Boo hoo fuck him

0

NotTheOnionBot robot overlord 2 days ago

Thank you for your submission to /r/NotTheOnion! Your submission has been automatically removed since your submission's title appears to be different from the headline of the article you submitted. Submissions with altered titles are not permitted, all titles must be the headline from the article, copy-and-pasted.

Please read the information below before modmailing us. We will not answer your modmail if your issue was addressed below.

Do not add periods or quotation marks to the title.
Do not use the suggest title button. Instead, copy-and-paste the article's title directly from the link you are submitting.
Make sure your source doesn't have a paywall. Because of the method used to check titles, submissions from sites that have paywalls may be removed since the bot cannot access the article. If your source does have a paywall, you can resubmit from an alternative source that is not behind a paywall.

You may resubmit with the correct title, but remember that our other rules must be followed as well. For more information on our rules, check out /r/NotTheOnion/w/NTO101.

I'm a bot, and this action was performed automagically.

1

17 9

AuntMarie Yesterday

super high quality post. I tend to lurk the other reddits for similar posts to invalidate my preference for ethereum but rarely to never find it.

The only drawback is that it is so chockful of tech heavy info that I need to find the time to read and digest it all.

2

ParticlMaximalist Yesterday

Honestly expected this to be a 2-3 liner.

0

diglos76 Yesterday

This is gold. Thanks for your work!

2

aaqy 1 day ago

It's on Ethereum would be such a great slogan. I'd like to see it used everywhere. Thanks a lot for your constant effort.

3

TastyCroquet 1 day ago

Superb writeup !

3

interweaver 1 day ago

Excellent retrospective - there's always so much going on that I don't hear about any other way than your Week/Year in Ethereum posts. Thanks so much! Feeling even more excited to see where the 2020s take us now.

4

SMcKie [Amentum] 1 day ago

This likely took forever to write and curate. Shoutout to you two. I can’t imagine how massive the 2020 YIR will be!

4

CryptoMods Bronze 1 day ago

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.

1

CryptoMods Bronze 1 day ago

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.

1

Sargos Platinum | QC: CC 152, ETH 95, ADA 52 | r/Android 1 day ago

Summary of the topics from the article:

The Ethereum Economy continued to grow. DeFi remains the largest sector within Ethereum, and we saw early signs of growth in gaming & decentralized autonomous organizations (DAOs).
Ethereum nudged into the mainstream. Major corporations, financial institutions, consumer brands, and even celebrities began actually using Ethereum.
Ethereum 1.0 improved. A number of projects led to major performance improvements, and a direction was chosen for long-term sustainability.
Eth2 made progress as an engineering project, and laid the foundation for launching in early 2020.
Layer 2 made steady progress, with new tech capturing the community’s attention. Rollups and Zero Knowledge technology made the largest strides this year, while other technologies like state channels made steady progress.

1

AutoModerator 1 day ago

Ethereum(ETH) Basic Info: Website - r/Ethereum - Abstract - History - Exchanges - Wallets

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

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

mylhowse 1 day ago

Eth2 is coming — get ready to stake in 2020.

9

CryptoMods Bronze 1 day ago

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.

1

CryptoMods Bronze 1 day ago

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.

1

AutoModerator 1 day ago

Ethereum(ETH) Basic Info: Website - r/Ethereum - Abstract - History - Exchanges - Wallets

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

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

ChazSchmidt 1 day ago

Fantastic work!

9

DCinvestor Long-Term ETH Investor 1 day ago

Excellent write-up as usual- thank you Evan and Josh for helping to catalog all of this!

For your time-machine reading pleasure, here is the write-up from last year as well: @jjmstark/the-year-in-ethereum-87a17d6f8276">https://medium.com/@jjmstark/the-year-in-ethereum-87a17d6f8276

Any incredible amount has happened through the past 2 years bear market. I wonder where the next two will take us?

36

RadhaShankar 1 day ago

Good times ! Incredible stuff

1

14 9

Dan Held - @Dan-Held

RT @100trillionUSD: Bitcoin risk & return last 11 years was better than EMH/non arbitrage/CAPM expectation based on 50 yrs bond, gold, stocks data. What do you think? Not enough data? Market overestimates risk (btc dies, govt ban etc)? Taleb's turkey (tail risk / fat tails)? https://t.co/XTKQCGkfRd https://t.co/u6Dv3kh70F

101 491

Pontus Lindblom - @ponli137

RT @100trillionUSD: My second #bitcoin article! "Efficient Market Hypothesis and Bitcoin Stock-to-Flow Model". Looking at arbitrage, risk & return models and derivative markets. https://t.co/FIMcEZWDPn

454 1474

Samson Mow - @Excellion

RT @adam3us: I've been advocating for creation a capital guaranteed Bitcoin structured product, where say 10% of capital goes in bitcoin and the 90% compounds to recover capital over the term. and get retail users thinking about buying that, less risky and still good upside. https://t.co/38PPlNKCuB

6 44

Adam Back - @adam3us

I've been advocating for creation a capital guaranteed Bitcoin structured product, where say 10% of capital goes in bitcoin and the 90% compounds to recover capital over the term. and get retail users thinking about buying that, less risky and still good upside. https://t.co/38PPlNKCuB

2 15

Christopher Wheeler - @Stocktrader

Efficient Market Hypothesis and Bitcoin Stock-to-Flow Model by @100trillionUSD https://t.co/WBcHXeY7W9

107 505

Michael Goldstein - @bitstein

RT @pierre_rochard: “I think the simple answer is that the market currently overestimates future risk, like it overestimated risk last 11 years.” — @100trillionUSD https://t.co/tqYWPnNSgi

6 16

Pierre Rochard - @pierre_rochard

“I think the simple answer is that the market currently overestimates future risk, like it overestimated risk last 11 years.” — @100trillionUSD https://t.co/tqYWPnNSgi

94 461

Dennis Parker⚡️ - @Xentagz

RT @100trillionUSD: My second #bitcoin article! "Efficient Market Hypothesis and Bitcoin Stock-to-Flow Model". Looking at arbitrage, risk & return models and derivative markets. https://t.co/FIMcEZWDPn

23 150

Raz - @suprraz

People are afraid of that which they do not understand. Efficient Market Hypothesis and Bitcoin Stock-to-Flow Model by @100trillionUSD https://t.co/WlUDl2LMgF

0 0

FrmBtwnTheBnWSpiders 3 days ago

Do you understand that you are literally mentally retarded if you think everyone in the world wants to get rich on gambling just like you tried (and failed) ( , and that everyone, like you, thinks it's both ethical and possible). The very definition of a degenerate. Everyone here thinks people like you are literal pieces of dog shit, we don't actually even care that much about cryptocurrencies in general other than to laugh at deranged retards like yourself.

1

yogibreakdance 2 days ago

of course. However it really depends on who is the majority. if one day the number of people you call retarded is more, then you are retarded. And the retarded people is growing since 2011 at this rate you will turn retarded by 2032

1

theydoit4free 4 days ago

I am a generous guy so I will wait until it's worth 100k to buy, I know you will need fresh buyers then more than ever

2

yogibreakdance 4 days ago

there's always bitcoin buyers than you could possibly count

1

theydoit4free 4 days ago

in that case i will wait for 1m

1

imeanwhyevenbother 4 days ago

Oh, you're serious.

That's the kind of buttery critical thinking skills I want to see! Shut up and just buy!

2

yogibreakdance 4 days ago

sure man, if you had spent long enough time in this space you would have realized by now that those people who are up on top, buy first, read later. By the time you've finished researching, analyzing, arguing, most of the time that ship has sailed, then you turn salty become butter, face laughing crying within.

1

imeanwhyevenbother 4 days ago

Beyond parody.

2

thesmokecameout 5 days ago

The analogy is flawed because most people are going to pick up free money off the ground whether they think it is overvalued or undervalued.

Obligatory exception: Venezuela, where paper notes have become effectively worthless unless you have a gigantic brick of them, and even then they're more useful to make a fire for cooking or heating.

1

frizzyhaired 5 days ago

Current bitcoin markets are indeed reasonably efficient because easy arbitrage opportunities are not possible.

the lack of arbitrage opportunities does not imply that prices are efficient. indeed if the markets were efficient and this argument were right then it would already be reflected in the price.

My conclusion is that bitcoin markets are indeed reasonably efficient and price in S2F model, but also overestimate risk

so markets are efficient but.... not thaaaat efficient. gotcha. or maybe they are efficient and your model is wrong. or maybe they are not efficient and the price reflects nothing at all.

3

thehoesmaketheman 4 days ago

dang dude other than the ok boomer stuff you really are pretty cool. i guess we all have our flaws

1

Athanor25 4 days ago

> S2F model SFYL model

2

Crypto_To_The_Core 5 days ago

S2F model was published as a bitcoin valuation model, inspired by Nick Szabo’s concept of unforgeable scarcity and Saifedean Ammous’ analysis of S2F [1][5][6]. S2F is a measure of scarcity.

LMFAO @ Scarcity bullshit.

Yep, Bitcoin's definitely NOT open source, and there are NOT 3,000+ Bitcoin clones out there, and NONE of them can be infinitely copied and/or forked.

Keep sticking your head up your ass and sniffing your farts COINERS, and I'm 100% SURU it will all somehow make sense one day.

2

ionfrigate 4 days ago

I really wish people would stop making this argument this way. It's not exactly wrong, but as stated it's pretty damn unconvincing. What gives any online project value - open source or closed source - isn't the code. It's the people attached to the project. Does it have an active development team? Are there a lot of people using it? Is there an active community to provide technical support and advice? Put it this way: I could, perfectly legally, make a clone of Wikipedia within a day or two, complete with web hosting and DNS pointers. I bet you that Microsoft or Amazon would pay billions of dollars to acquire the actual Wikipedia. They wouldn't give me a red cent for my clone of it. No, the danger with cryptos - and why their claims to scarcity are overrated - is that the community could fracture. These are a bunch of criminals looking to buy illegal shit untraceably, scammers looking to fleece their latest marks, and idiots looking to get rich quick. In other words, these aren't people who are invested in Bitcoin itself, but rather see it as a means to an end. If something that seems like a better means to that end (getting drugs or getting rich, basically) comes along, they could indeed jump ship. However, I will point out: that's true whether or not it's open source. Despite what some people (even here) seem to think, cryptocurrencies are not rocket science. Your average software developer could probably hack one up from scratch in just a couple weeks. No, the barrier is not the code - it's actually attracting a significant part of the community. As I say, I think this fragmentation is a lot more likely in the crypto sphere than it is in say, social media or web browsers, but it's still a barrier. But it really is facile to say that because Bitcoin is open source, anyone can clone it, and therefore it's not scarce. That's just not why its scarcity is overrated.

0

thehoesmaketheman 4 days ago

the community could fracture? thats not the problem. the problem is that blockchain is useless. worlds already decentralized. you always have the oracle problem so you cant eliminate trust. its just a useless item. however, if we are moving past that. the community fracturing? really? wtf are you talking about? you mean getting new bagholders to buy in under you? yea. thats a problem. its the problem with any pyramid scheme. whats your point

2

ionfrigate 4 days ago

Yes, blockchains are useless. They are useless because they are incredibly inefficient, and don't solve any real-world problem that wasn't already solved decades ago. My point is that brilliantly pointing out that code and data can be copied is a stupid argument for why they are useless. What I'm saying is that code is only a small part of the value proposition of any computing project - be it a glorified Excel spreadsheet, an operating system, a website, or fucking Candy Crush. Just because I can copy the code of an open source project doesn't mean I can magically clone all the non-code parts of that project - like the userbase and developers. This is just as true for legitimate projects like Wikipedia and Chromium as it is for bullshit cancers on our society like Bitcoin.

0

Crypto_To_The_Core 4 days ago

>brilliantly pointing out that code and data can be copied is a stupid argument for why they are useless. Never said that's why they are useless. I said that's why scarcity claims are utter bullshit. It can be copied and reproduced infinitely. And the community argument is facile. Anyone can get a community behind any crypto - pay some crypto influencers, have some air drops, give away a few million tokens for free, get a bunch of people in, do a PUMP so they all think they are going to the moon, and presto you have a community. The crypto "community" is bullshit. They'll turn on you in a second to make a quick buck. There is no community. Your claim that the community has great value is wrong.

1

thehoesmaketheman 4 days ago

Good deal buddy! It's like my company - we can put in good HVAC but if everyone quits then it real doesn't matter how good we are. I guess.... Hmmm I have no idea what you're talking about.

1

imeanwhyevenbother 4 days ago

> No, the danger with cryptos - and why their claims to scarcity are overrated - is that the community could fracture. You state this as a hypothetical, but it's reality. Just look at all the bitcoin forks, and even forks of forks.

5

ionfrigate 4 days ago

Yes, I was going to add something about how the forks that have gained some degree of traction (BCH, Litecoin, etc) did so because they were able to draw away a good amount of the Bitcoin community, often due to the presence of prominent ~~con artists~~ crypto evangelists. I just thought my comment was already overlong. I will say that the existing forks, while they have fragmented the community, haven't reached the level of "existential threat to bitcoin". But I definitely believe that it's a possibility that one will in the future.

0

Crypto_To_The_Core 5 days ago

Jeesus you Butters must be so fucking desperate for new bag holders to be shilling your pyramid scams here.

17

jstolfi 5 days ago

That is a big load of bullshit.

Stock-to-flow theory applies to commodities that have both production and consumption. If there is no hoarding or speculative trading, the theory says that the market price and the production volume (the "flow") will be where the price x production curve crosses the price x consumption curve.

Hoarding and speculaive trading (the "stock") complicates that theory because some production may go to the "stock" and some consumprion may be satisfied by the "stock". As the "stock" increases relative to the "flow", it makes the price more volatile and unpredictable.

Bitcoin has no consumption: all the coins that are printed by the miners go into hoarding or trading. Thus its "flow" is zero, and its "stock" is all the coins that exist, and the stock-to-flow ratio is infinite. In that case, the theory says that the market price will be zero divided by zero -- that is, it has nothing to say.

But of course nothing will shake your faith in your Orange God (not Trump, the other one)...

19

pdesgrippes 3 days ago

Also your 'definition' does not appear to tally with conventionals definition of S2F: "**Stock to Flow Ratio** is the amount of a commodity held in inventories divided by the amount produced annually. It is a measure of abundance. Gold has the highest stock to flow ratio of all commodities and as a result it should never normally remain in [backwardation](https://monetary-metals.com/gold-economics/lexicon/#backwardation) as there is no shortage of gold." 'Consumption' is not a requisite.

1

jstolfi 3 days ago

> 'Consumption' is not a requisite. It is implicit in the definition of commodity. It is assumed that, in the long run, consumption = production. Note that the conclusion you quoted > Gold has the highest stock to flow ratio of all commodities and as a result it should never normally remain in backwardation as there is no shortage of gold refers implicitly to it: if there is no consumption, there cannot ever be shortage. For most commodities, the "stock" is at most a couple of times the "flow", and thus production must match consumption when averaged over a few years. Gold is an extreme case where the stock may be more than 100'000 tons, production is maybe 5000 tons/year, and consumption maybe 3000 tons/year. Unlike most commodities, many people and institutions buy gold specifically for long-term holding. Thus the stock not only is maybe 30 times the yearly consumption, but is constantly growing. Therefore, the only thing that "stock to flow" theory says about gold is that it makes no sense to apply commodity theory (production vs consumption) to it. And for bitcoin it is the same, but with infinity instead of "30".

2

pdesgrippes 3 days ago

>criminals looking to buy illegal shit untraceably, scammers looking to fleece their latest marks, an If that argument is true, why have we seen the level of cointegration (price/S2F) so constant to date? Would the same arguments around hoarding and speculation apply to gold (ignoring consumption)?

1

jstolfi 3 days ago

> why have we seen the level of cointegration (price/S2F) so constant to date? The proposed formula is > 0\. price = A x S2F ^ B. In log scale, that is log(price) = log(A) + B x log(S2F); that is, choosing A and B means vertically shifting and scaling the graph. At the largest scale, smoothed over several years, the bitcoin price grew quickly at first and then gradually slowed down. The S2F ratio grew quickly at first, then gradually slowed down. Thus, by adjusting A and B, it is not surprising that one can get match that looks good by eyeball. But an equally good match can be obtained with almost any other function that grows quickly at first and gradually slows down. 1. Some people have posted fits of a logarithmic function: log(price) = A x log(time) + B. 2. I bet that one could get a good fit also with the total amount N of coins in existence, log(price) = A x log(N) + B. 3. I posted a [fit with a quadratic](https://www.reddit.com/r/Buttcoin/comments/ehn42b/price_predictions_for_20202021_backed_by_math/), log(price) = A x time ^ 2 + B x time + C. Yet each of these models will give a very different predictions for future prices. Butters like the S2F model (0) because the S2F ratio will grows practically exponentially from now on: the S2F double every four years, so, with those fitted parameters, the price should increase 10-fold every 4 years. Thus the S2F model (0) is merely a re-edited and obfuscated version of the old logscale linear trend model, log(price) = A x time + B. The predictions of the log-log model (1) ~~are similar, but the doubling time may be longer or shorter, depending on the parameter A.~~ [**Correction:**] predicts that it will take increasingly longer intervals for the price to double. Model (2), based on number of coins in existence, predicts instead that the price will tend to a maximum, maybe $10'000 or $20'000, and never go above that. My quadratic model (3) -- which has a very good fit, at least as good as the S2F one -- instead says that the price will reach a maximum in the first semester of this year, and then start to decrease, faster and faster. Take your pick 8-). But, if you are impressed by good fits, have a look at [this one](http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~stolfi/temp/worldcomm-closing-price-log-extrap.png). A bigger problem with the S2F model is that it lacks a plausible explanation. The size of the "stock" or the "stock to flow ratio" do not increase demand per se. The stock to flow ratio of seawater is huge, but that does not create any demand for seawater. For a normal commodity, an increasing stock with constant production rate should cause the price to drop; but their model says that it should go up. And, again, if there is no consumption, one cannot use stock and/or production to predict the price. As with gold, the current price of bitcoin is based entirely on irrational expectations by traders and hoarders about the future prices. The price chart is simply a display of their mood over the years...

2

pdesgrippes 3 days ago

Thanks for the reply! I think you successfully explain that correlation can be spurious but ignore cointegration? [https://medium.com/burgercrypto-com/reviewing-modelling-bitcoins-value-with-scarcity-part-ii-the-hunt-for-cointegration-66a8dcedd7ef](https://medium.com/burgercrypto-com/reviewing-modelling-bitcoins-value-with-scarcity-part-ii-the-hunt-for-cointegration-66a8dcedd7ef) With regard to consumption/demand it would seem to me that 'store of value' with regard to Gold and Bitcoin and their hardness makes them unique indeed and they are not solely commodities as such and perhaps are special cases with multifaceted properties. They are both mediums of exchange/money and whilst the stock of USD and others inflates endlessly, constantly depleting purchasing power and every world reserve currency to date has been supplanted at some point -- gold and bitcoin offer an alternative to this -- bitcoin trustlessly. Many central banks recognise this; China and Russia have been de-dollarizing for years and buying gold. Any price chart of anything tradeable is a display of mood/sentiment over time. Does that matter? That said, if we measure the mood of future generations it's apparent they are far more interested in putting savings into Bitcoin than previous generations (I speak as one of the older generations). [https://thenextweb.com/hardfork/2019/12/06/millennials-prefer-bitcoin-over-disney-netflix-stocks-boomers-hate-it-all/](https://thenextweb.com/hardfork/2019/12/06/millennials-prefer-bitcoin-over-disney-netflix-stocks-boomers-hate-it-all/)

1

jstolfi 3 days ago

> cointegration Cointegration is a somewhat obfuscated name for "does the residual (difference between model and data) look like random variation about zero"? The idea being that, if it does, there is no point in adding more simple terms to the model, or changing its formula to another simple formula, because such changes cannot improve the fit. It does not mean "the fitted formula is the right one", much less "the fitted formula is a good predictor for future prices". I haven't checked with the computer, but by eyeball all four models above have random-looking residuals. Meaning simply that they fit the data about as well as any simple formula could. Yet they give vastly different extrapolations. In fact, the S2F model has those jumps every 4 years that don't correlate with the bitcoin price (in spite of what the author claims). The fitting between S2F and PAST prices ignores those jumps, which end up in the residual and interpreted as part of the "noise". The fitting effectively uses a smoothed S2F (SS2F) where the reward drops gradually with time, instead of by jumps. However, the future of the S2F model is dominated by those jumps: they increasingly turn the S2F into an exponential staircase that goes on forever. On the log chart, that is a staircase along a straight line. But past prices definitely don't fit a linear trend. So that analysis essentially fits a curve to the data, then extrapolates the slope at the end with a straight line... By the way, the block reward is scheduled to eventually become zero (not very small, but exactly zero) in a hundred years time. At that point the S2F will become infinite (not very large, but really infinite). That does not make any sense... There are plenty of things that have very large or even infinite S2F, and yet have small and decreasing value. Like 5-year-old car models, 500 rupee banknotes, incandescent light bulbs, ... In fact, those things have vanishing value **because** there is a large stock that will never be depleted by consumption...

2

pdesgrippes 2 days ago

Thanks again for the reply. One small point, there would still be fees forming the block rewards after the mining reward goes to zero...

1

jstolfi 2 days ago

But the fees should not count as "production", because they are not new coins. By the way, the "stock to flow" plots in that article seem far too noisy. Since he is using 1-month intervals, between halvings the "flow" should have been almost constant (4320 times the block reward), and both the "stock" and the S2F ratio should grow linearly. I was wondering where that noise could come from. If he included the tx fees in the "flow", that could explain it...

2

yogibreakdance 5 days ago

Don't be so boomer tunnel visioned. Golden ratio has been applied to so many fields ranging from art math to TA.

0

CertainCoat 4 days ago

Another mathematical concept with broad application is the number zero...

1

jstolfi 4 days ago

Next time I buy my shoes I will demand that their length over their width be the golden ratio.

2

yogibreakdance 4 days ago

Next time I buy my shoes, I'll make sure it's heavy enough for low gravity

1

Cthulhooo 5 days ago

I bet you couldn't really explain what this article says using your own words if you life depended on it.

7

yogibreakdance 4 days ago

No, in fact, didn't read. Can't read anything longer than 4 lines these days. It's so moony

0

Cthulhooo 4 days ago

See, it doesn't matter what the article says or even if it's right, wrong or just irrelevant. What matters is the narrative, number go up, number always have to go up, all the fluff is just an excuse for number go up mantra.

3

yogibreakdance 4 days ago

I don't interest myself in "right or wrong or reason", I think more often in terms of "when", sometimes "how high it could" but always "no hesitation"

0

Cthulhooo 4 days ago

You flaunt your ignorance like it's some sort of virtue and even unabashedly admit you just copy pasted an article you use as a lever for your idea without even reading 4 lines deep what's inside. Neither here nor in your past interactions you couldn't even conjure a good argument for your opinions and instead offer inspirational quote style vacuous mantras. For the love of god it must take elephant size of ego to be proud of such vast hollowness I almost feel bad.

2

yogibreakdance 4 days ago

If you don't believe me or don't get it, I don't have time to try to convince you, sorry

1

brighton36 3 days ago

I don't know why these are getting downvotes. You are gentleman, sir

1

happyscrappy IT Specialist 5 days ago

Yeah. I wish I had known to take off my good shoes before wading into this.

7

AlprasCream 5 days ago

How much do you want me to buy?

8

johnnydanger2 2 days ago

Yes.

1

The_Artilleryman 5 days ago

But what if number go down?

14

mmortal03 3 days ago

Buy the dip!

2

yogibreakdance 5 days ago

More important is how low can it go vs how high will it go ? Maybe 4000 vs the sky .

0

routinely_sarcastic 5 days ago

Maybe zero.

6

yogibreakdance 5 days ago

even zero, it's only 9000 points down, the upside on the other hand is pretty much no limit. Anyone having balls would get some and see what happens, pussy would stay sideline and miss all the actions.

0

beanietulipbubble 4 days ago

And there's nothing to say you couldn't keep endlessly guessing the next number correctly on a roulette table. You *could* lose your money, or you *could* have infinite wealth. Only a pussy would stay sideline and miss all the action.

2

yogibreakdance 4 days ago

Damn you are too smart, can't you just buy my bags like what others did

1

thehoesmaketheman 4 days ago

there are thousands of blockchains. nearly everyone lost on all of them. I dont know what math youre doing, but if you look around - the math is that you lose.

2

yogibreakdance 4 days ago

fuck blockchain, stick with bitcoin

1

thehoesmaketheman 4 days ago

Why there's no difference between any of them

1

yogibreakdance 4 days ago

there's a difference, you buy blockchain coins for store of less value, you buy bitcoin for store of value

1

Crypto_To_The_Core 5 days ago

Yeah you're sky-high alright.

8

SnapshillBot 5 days ago

I think Bitcoin will do for mankind what the sun did for life on earth.

Snapshots:

swallow your pride and jealousy and... - @100trillionUSD/efficient-market-hypothesis-and-bitcoin-stock-to-flow-model-db17f40e6107">archive.org, archive.today

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

2

Miky06 5 days ago

the problem with efficient markets is that it assumes investors with much much more capital than capitalization of market itself.

in bitcoin it is not the case, thus information is not reflected in prices

or better, information is reflected in prices, but prices are misaligned with real value

2

admin_default 6 days ago

Stock-to-Flow only demonstrates historical correlation - it can’t be trusted to forecast into the future since the model breaks after 3-4 halvenings and eventually S2F predicts an infinite price for bitcoin.

2

CannedCaveman 5 days ago

Maybe the ‘infinite’ price comes when Bitcoin has become the unit of account for the world and the dollar has hyperinflated into oblivion. In the model the price of Bitcoin is denominated in dollars, so who knows how accurate that part is ;) I agree with what you are saying, but the model does give a lot of reasons to be positive about the coming years. It would be a surprise if the model would break in let’s say the next 3 years. Although there is always a chance of that happening.

2

admin_default 5 days ago

I get that S2F has some people excited because it gives the comfortable illusion of inevitable price increases. This distracts from the reality that adoption, and only adoption, will ultimately determine Bitcoin’s fate. There’s legitimate risk and hard work ahead. And if Bitcoin ever does reach the moon, don’t just credit some pseudoscientific chart theory - give thanks the hands that built Bitcoin; Finney, Andersen, Thad, Ulbricht, Dorsey, Shrem and many many more.

1

CannedCaveman 5 days ago

Ofcourse it’s not the model that pushes the price, but the S2F model does describe the valuation of a scarce asset, like gold. And since it seems to fit with all the data since Bitcoin’s inception, it is a reason for people to be optimistic about price. So when you say adoption, please mind that saving/investing/speculating are also usecases and signs of adoption. I don’t think Satoshi created Bitcoin to make payments easier, but to offer an alternative to money created by banks and governments. So how people use that money is not part of the philosophy and shouldn’t give you a bad taste. I think crypto will only get adopted if it makes something easier to do or has the potential to make people more money. Otherwise people won’t get interested. Fiat, with it’s debit and credit cards, Apple pay, PayPal etc work just fine for paying at a store. It’s the true scarcity, or better yet, the inability of governments and banks to create more that makes Bitcoin unique and valuable.

2

Mark_Bear redditor for 3 months 6 days ago

The efficient market hypothesis is bullshit. The data (reality) does not fit the hypothesis, so you have to toss it out, or be an idiot.

Need poof? Bubbles. I'll pick Beanie Babies as an example, but the same can be said (at various times) of stocks, real estate, precious metals (the silver bubble), and Bitcoin. During a bubble the current market price does not accurately reflect actual market value. The end. EMH is toast.

1

admin_default 6 days ago

Wow. Here is Mark_Bear of Reddit come to settle the decades long academic debate about EMH with his ground breaking theory of “But what about bubbles?” None of the leading economist who’ve spent entire careers studying EMH had ever thought about that before. Clearly, some Nobel prize worthy research you did there.

8

Dotabjj 5 days ago

How do we falsify emh? If btc follows s2f model in 2021 @100k, would you abandon it?

2

Mark_Bear redditor for 3 months 5 days ago

I see you're unable to refute the logic.

1

vakeraj 6 days ago

You don't understand EMH. EMH means that markets trend towards efficiency over time, not that they're perfectly efficient every moment of every day.

12

Mark_Bear redditor for 3 months 5 days ago

I'll think about that. Thank you.

3

bitusher 6 days ago

EMH theory is controversial and flawed in numerous aspects but accidentally useful for amateur investors where in most cases the wisest investment for most their portfolio are index investments like the SPDR over the long term, 20+ years. even 9.7% average compounded almost always outperforms land (un-utilized) investments historically. Than again , those that take incredible risks can find far greater alpha like we see in Bitcoin but not every investor should invest so aggressively as we all have different responsibilities and risk tolerances

9

5 16

Tuur Demeester - @TuurDemeester

RT @jack: Square Crypto is focusing on Lightning! ⚡️ https://t.co/boOiAAlLwc

622 3108

George Kikvadze ⚡ - @BitfuryGeorge

RT @jack: Square Crypto is focusing on Lightning! ⚡️ https://t.co/boOiAAlLwc

607 3046

Steve Lee - @moneyball

RT @hongkim__: I was reminded of this fact when I read @sqcrypto's announcement today they are working on a Lightning Development Kit: https://t.co/MmFMOx99oO Basically, it will make it easier for existing bitcoin wallet providers to add lightning capabilities.

1 6

Paul Walsh - @Paul__Walsh

RT @jack: Square Crypto is focusing on Lightning! ⚡️ https://t.co/boOiAAlLwc

375 1847

Meltem Demirors - @Melt_Dem

an awesome step forward for bitcoin looking forward to seeing what you build, fellow bitcoiners! https://t.co/ikyO317ew6

2 20

Michael Goldstein - @bitstein

RT @sqcrypto: We’ve got the team. We’ve got the mission. We’ve got hit or miss tweets. And now it’s time to talk about what we’re building: Introducing the Lightning Development Kit, or LDK. ⚡️ https://t.co/o73cJy7Cur

433 1393

Pierre Rochard - @pierre_rochard

RT @sqcrypto: We’ve got the team. We’ve got the mission. We’ve got hit or miss tweets. And now it’s time to talk about what we’re building: Introducing the Lightning Development Kit, or LDK. ⚡️ https://t.co/o73cJy7Cur

466 2361

Chef Nobody - @i_amm_nobody

RT @jack: Square Crypto is focusing on Lightning! ⚡️ https://t.co/boOiAAlLwc

166 761

Christopher Wheeler - @Stocktrader

RT @sqcrypto: We’ve got the team. We’ve got the mission. We’ve got hit or miss tweets. And now it’s time to talk about what we’re building: Introducing the Lightning Development Kit, or LDK. ⚡️ https://t.co/o73cJy7Cur

481 2441

Ben Davenport ⚡️ - @bendavenport

RT @sqcrypto: We’ve got the team. We’ve got the mission. We’ve got hit or miss tweets. And now it’s time to talk about what we’re building: Introducing the Lightning Development Kit, or LDK. ⚡️ https://t.co/o73cJy7Cur

229 729

Matt Odell - @matt_odell

RT @sqcrypto: We’ve got the team. We’ve got the mission. We’ve got hit or miss tweets. And now it’s time to talk about what we’re building: Introducing the Lightning Development Kit, or LDK. ⚡️ https://t.co/o73cJy7Cur

142 455

Marty Bent - @MartyBent

RT @sqcrypto: We’ve got the team. We’ve got the mission. We’ve got hit or miss tweets. And now it’s time to talk about what we’re building: Introducing the Lightning Development Kit, or LDK. ⚡️ https://t.co/o73cJy7Cur

247 776

Wayne Vaughan - @WayneVaughan

@Tierion ... Today @sqcrypto announced the Lightning Development Kit. It's going to be an interesting 2020 for Bitcoin. https://t.co/qQDDOChrwM

0 1

Matt Corallo - @TheBlueMatt

RT @sqcrypto: We’ve got the team. We’ve got the mission. We’ve got hit or miss tweets. And now it’s time to talk about what we’re building: Introducing the Lightning Development Kit, or LDK. ⚡️ https://t.co/o73cJy7Cur

93 285

ecurrencyhodler - @ecurrencyhodler

RT @sqcrypto: We’ve got the team. We’ve got the mission. We’ve got hit or miss tweets. And now it’s time to talk about what we’re building: Introducing the Lightning Development Kit, or LDK. ⚡️ https://t.co/o73cJy7Cur

142 455

Dennis Parker⚡️ - @Xentagz

RT @sqcrypto: We’ve got the team. We’ve got the mission. We’ve got hit or miss tweets. And now it’s time to talk about what we’re building: Introducing the Lightning Development Kit, or LDK. ⚡️ https://t.co/o73cJy7Cur

605 2110

14 7

ninjajaguar Redditor for 6 months. 1 day ago

betting on bitcoin is a big reason why i am bullish on $SQ stock.

2

infernalr00t Gold | QC: BTC 46, CC 36 | TraderSubs 13 1 day ago

Why no comments about lightning being death?.

1

Qwahzi Silver | QC: CC 993 | NANO 777 1 day ago

Because everyone already knows 😂 This is still a good development for Bitcoin though, even if it doesn't really solve day-to-day usability and scalability

0

Patrickwojcik Tin Yesterday

Hahahaha yeah, and did you know how funny it is to me when someone makes a Yoda sentence hahaha like being death XD

1

[deleted] 1 day ago

[deleted]

2

Qwahzi Silver | QC: CC 993 | NANO 777 1 day ago

Have you tried using the Lightning Network for yourself? How about Nano? I've tried many of the LN wallets that are out there, and they all have the same fundamental issues that cannot easily be abstracted away. Nano is faster, simpler, and cheaper (0 fees) than the Bitcoin Lightning Network. LN isn't a solution for one off peer-to-peer payments. You first have to open a channel on the first layer (which costs fees and time), so LN primarily helps in cases of repeat transactions, not one off peer-to-peer transactions. You also have to pre-commit some amount of BTC AND all channels routing to your destination must have enough BTC to route your payment. LN issues: - Requires opening & closing channels on the first layer (costs fees + time) - The first layer currently doesn't have enough TPS to onboard even a PayPal level of users that want to use LN - Must be online at all times - For core nodes, **private keys** must be held online - You must pre-commit BTC capacity to fund channels - Some of your channel capacity has to be reserved to close the channel - The cost to close a channel can fluctuate, potentially trapping your BTC - If a channel is force closed, you have to wait for your money to be returned - The seed is not enough to recover LN funds, you have to backup current state - LN routing is not a solved problem; one third of LN payment attempts fail: https://blog.dshr.org/2020/01/bitcoins-lightning-network.html - Optimal LN usage will be through centralized hubs that route payments for you (who will probably require KYC) - LN requires some level of trust (hence Watchtowers) - LN trends towards centralized, well-connected nodes See page 49 of the Lightning Network whitepaper: https://lightning.network/lightning-network-paper.pdf Here are some video comparisons of the two: - https://youtu.be/iVNyr4Q3jq4 - https://youtu.be/rTatxbpRbH8

0

tekdemon Platinum | QC: BTC 245, CC 96, BCH 81 | r/Android 1 day ago

So you’ve pointed out a lot of the weaknesses of LN. But it’s rather misleading to pretend like there aren’t already solutions to many of these and solutions coming for most of the rest. Square will easily be able to abstract away 95% of this.

2

Qwahzi Silver | QC: CC 993 | NANO 777 1 day ago

How do you abstract away opening/closing channels, fees, minimum balances for channel closes, and the online requirement in a scalable (i.e. no subsidies) and non-custodial way?

1

[deleted] 1 day ago

[deleted]

2

Qwahzi Silver | QC: CC 993 | NANO 777 1 day ago

Autopilot randomly selects nodes to connect to, and you should always wait for confirmation to be safe. It doesn't solve the reserved balances issue either (for channel closing). 1s/byte is still a fee, and you can't guarantee the first layer will always accept 1s/b fees for opening/closing. Fees are an additional UX issue for users (choosing the right fee, leftover dust, etc) "Generally" is not always. Those edge cases are going to bite average users hard at times. The safest case is to be online or to have a watchtower (more hassle, more fees). **I don't have to deal with any of that hassle, and I get a better experience.**

1

jamckp Tin 1 day ago

>Autopilot randomly selects nodes to connect to, and you should always wait for confirmation to be safe. It doesn't solve the reserved balances issue either (for channel closing). What issue do you see with randomly selecting nodes? Also, it doesn't need to randomly select, that's a design choice that has been made and it can be changed if required. >1s/byte is still a fee, and you can't guarantee the first layer will always accept 1s/b fees for opening/closing. Fees are an additional UX issue for users (choosing the right fee, leftover dust, etc) 1s/byte is currently approximately 1 cent. It's still a fee but that 1 cent allows me to keep a channel that can be spent from and paid to for as long as I choose to keep a channel open, most of mine have been open for more than 10 months now. I've never had a channel funding transaction take more than a day, If that changes in the future it can be dealt with then - you can always bump the fee if it's really required. >"Generally" is not always. Those edge cases are going to bite average users hard at times. The safest case is to be online or to have a watchtower (more hassle, more fees). Watchtowers cost penny shavings in fees, again not a real problem as far as I'm concerned. >I don't have to deal with any of that hassle, and I get a better experience. An order of magnitude more people use Bitcoin than Nano, I would argue that Bitcoin has a better experience by virtue of the fact that the average Bitcoin user finds it much easier to find someone to transact with than the average Nano user. That doesn't seem to be changing either, the average daily transaction volume on Nano has been on a slow decline for more than 2 years now.

2

jetrucci 1 day ago

Awesome news to the moon!

3

DecryptMedia Redditor for 1 months. 1 day ago

Anybody knows what LN node they're building on?

1

jwinterm 1 day ago

If you scroll through the thread it says their kit will be based on rust-lightning. Rust, it's so hot right now.

4

jqueryin Gold | QC: XLM 44 1 day ago

Breaking News: Twitter and Square CEO holds Bitcoin; Not Afraid To Pump It

4

alluva redditor for 3 months 2 days ago

This will be of decent help to LN’s move forward. Square is really throwing themselves into Bitcoin, and LN will be one of the developments that gets more players on board.

3

meta96 Silver | QC: BCH 209 | IOTA 31 2 days ago

Thought Liquid is the way to go?

0

jwinterm 1 day ago

Ok, well, the multi billion dollar payment processing company thought lightning is the way to go.

4

keymone Gold | QC: BTC 60 | BCH critic | r/Programming 25 2 days ago

The way to go is away, for you personally.

2

BakedEnt Platinum | QC: ETH 579, CC 141 | TraderSubs 569 2 days ago

Triggered maxi.

2

KalEll66 2 days ago

Lightning is the answer to Bitcoin being universal as banks increase their monopoly and fees.

2

philipp_bb redditor for 3 months 1 day ago

LN definetly can be the answer. I am curious on how the square solution will look like.

2

LoneroLNR 2 days ago

But isn't Jack Dorsey the censorship queen. Who can trust him with anything crypto related?

0

WittyStick redditor for 3 months 2 days ago

Jack Dorsey himself isn't really into censorship, but he basically has his hands tied behind his back at Twitter because his entire workforce is SJWs.

4

NimbleBodhi 2 days ago

There's no need to trust him, the project mentioned in the article is open source, so we can verify for ourselves whether to trust it or not. Frankly, I think it's great to see them funding developers to help expand the LN ecosystem.

14

LoneroLNR 2 days ago

Yeah but it is their SDK, and their API, and their entire Dev kit. The fact that it is open source means the SDK is open source, but it doesn't change the fact that there is still a need to trust him. Why would I connect my services to somebody else's API who is known to not fit in with the censorship-resistant crowd? Facebook's dev kit for their crypto Libra is open source, but that doesn't mean Libra should be trusted. Politics or not, it never plays out well when big tech gets involved with these types of technologies.

0

TheBlueMatt Matt Corallo - Bitcoin Expert 2 days ago

There’s no server or counterpart to trust. It’s just Lightning, but an easier way to books build apps on top of it directly.

8

LoneroLNR 2 days ago

Are you sure about that, then why did they have to base an API off of the pre-existing Rust lightning project? Also, where is Square's repo to verify it isn't connecting or pinging to anything? I can't find it on their list yet: [https://github.com/square](https://github.com/square?)

1

TheBlueMatt Matt Corallo - Bitcoin Expert 2 days ago

Given I wrote or reviewed almost every line of it, yea, I’m sure. The work we’re basing things on was linked in the blog post - https://github.com/rust-bitcoin/rust-lightning .We’re super independent from the rest of square and have a mandate to build up bitcoin so that square can go use it more broadly in the future, even if we literally compete with square in the short term (which arguably we did by funding BTCPayServer).

12

LoneroLNR 1 day ago

Interesting, perhaps I'm wrong then if you are independent dev team that is just part of the division. Only time will tell. Link to the repo?

2

TheBlueMatt Matt Corallo - Bitcoin Expert 1 day ago

Repo link is in the comment. If we lose our independence the obvious way you’ll learn is when we all quit :)

4

LoneroLNR 1 day ago

So Rust Lightning is the Square Lightning dev kit or am I missing something?

2

TheBlueMatt Matt Corallo - Bitcoin Expert 1 day ago

The basis of it, yes. We’re gonna be building out docs and examples and language bindings etc to make it easy to use, but the core is there.

4

bliess 2 days ago

So many alts will tumble when LN gets rolled out

9

CONTROLurKEYS 2 days ago

Rolled out on Twitter?

4

Dotabjj 2 days ago

Specially on twitter with it’s wide user base.

1

JeerFear 2 days ago

LIT

0

AutoModerator 2 days 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.

0

reinaldo866 2 days ago

>Leftist SJW in control of my money

Nope.

0

butcherofballyhoo 2 days ago

Immutable...ish?

3

st333p redditor for 3 months 2 days ago

Anybody knows what LN node they're building on?

8

throw_cs_far_away 2 days ago

https://github.com/rust-bitcoin/rust-lightning read the original blog post https://medium.com/@squarecrypto/what-were-building-lightning-development-kit-1ed58b0cab06

12

st333p redditor for 3 months 2 days ago

Thanks!

0

Usher_Techs redditor for 4 days 2 days ago

Ok.

0

12 7

jenny82ishere redditor for 6 weeks 6 days ago

Here's an example of a mainnet SegWit V1 (Taproot) address:

bc1pqyqszqgpqyqszqgpqyqszqgpqyqszqgpqyqszqgpqyqszqgpqyqs3wf0qm

How is this readable or type-able?

2

pwuille Pieter Wuille - Bitcoin Expert 5 days ago

Maybe you're a bit thrown off by all the repeated characters in the address; this is a specially constructed address with all zeroes in the public key. Actual addresses won't have that. In practice P2TR addresses will look more like this: `bc1pwp33g0q5c5txsp9arxsry4k6zdzfs4nce4xjtgdsccefvpysxf3qkevnf4`, very similar to existing P2WSH addresses.

6

d3vrandom 6 days ago

you use the copy paste functionality of your OS when dealing with addresses. no one types them in manually.

3

Cthulhooo 6 days ago

Jesus Christ, imagine checking it manually because you're paranoid and need to be sure you don't have a copy paste malware. A nightmare from hell.

0

almkglor 5 days ago

It's not that hard, I do that all the time when transferring funds between wallets.

1

Cthulhooo 5 days ago

> pqyqszqgpqyqszqgpqyqszqgpqyqszqgpqyqszqgpqyqszqgpqy How would you make this 'not hard' and smooth?

1

almkglor 5 days ago

Sheer brute force. I mean, once upon a time, the sequence abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz was completely unknown to you, yet you can repeat that in your sleep now. I even use completely-random passwords, because they're actually not that hard to memorize, my wife was shocked when she managed to memorize one in a few days of everyday use of a password-protected device. This is easier than you think, human brains are better at this stuff then you might assume.

1

1107461063 redditor for 3 months 6 days ago

It has begun

1

pwuille Pieter Wuille - Bitcoin Expert 6 days ago

Happy to answer any questions people may have.

Note that this is just a PR to request BIP numbers to be assigned. Even when that happens, it is not in any way an approval for it to become adopted.

26

CannedCaveman 6 days ago

How many people are actually coding this with you? Do you design and code it yourself mainly, or with colleagues from Blockstream or also with help from outside?

2

pwuille Pieter Wuille - Bitcoin Expert 5 days ago

I think "coding" is the wrong term to use, as so far efforts have been focussed on reviewing the BIPs (the specification). For these, I'm not the only author (co-authors are Anthony Towns, Jonas Nick, and Tim Ruffing), but there are dozens of contributors too who helped clear up and otherwise improve the document. The consensus implementation for Bitcoin Core has been largely my work (though also with a few other contributors), but is largely unreviewed at this point.

6

Septem_151 6 days ago

Can you explain, in layman terms, what taproot and shnorr is?

6

almkglor 5 days ago

When you own some coins on the Bitcoin blockchain, there is a "policy" that allows that coin to be spent. Most typically, for an ordinary HODLer, that policy is a singlesig, i.e. it takes only one signature from one person to spend it. This is the most common policy and is the hardest to identify because there are so many of them. Other policies are possible, but the standard singlesig policy (called P2PKH or P2WPKH) and all non-singlesig policies (called P2SH or P2WSH) are easily distinguishable from each other. Further, all non-singlesig policies require the exact policy to be divulged at spending time. So even though onchain, all non-singlesig policies that are *unspent* are indistinguishable from each other, once spent, the exact details of the policies have to be divulged. Other non-singlesig policies include such constructions as 2-of-3 multisignatures, which can be spent if, well, 2 out of 3 persons indicated in the policy agree to it. This is often used as a simple backup policy: the 3 "persons" are actually hardware devices owned by a single whale HODLer, and they have the hardware devices in different places, so if one of those places is burned down or something, they can still recover their funds. Alternately, a 2-of-3 multisig can be used in an escrow/arbitration contract, where a seller wants to sell a real-world product but the buyer does not want to pay unless the product arrives and the seller wants assurance of getting paid when they deliver the product. They can introduce a third party, an arbiter, which in case of a dispute is able to judge whether the buyer gets refunded or the seller is paid, so they use a 2-of-3. If both buyer and seller agree (2 of the 3 parties) then they can spend the fund on what they agreed on (e.g. if they agree that the seller cannot provide the product, they can agree to a refund, or if they agree that the buyer has received the product, they can agree to give the money to the seller outright). In case of disagreement, the arbiter is contacted and is informed about the facts of the case, and either the aribter sides with the buyer (again, 2 of the 3 parties agree) or the arbiter sides with the seller (2 out of 3). More complex policies are possible, such as HTLCs which are used in Lightning and cross-chain atomic swaps, and so on. Again, those policies are distinguishable onchain from plain singlesigs even when not spent, and when already spent, the entire details of the policy are visible, which can be used to identify what applications/websites were used, and can help narrow down ownership of a coin. What Schnorr does is that it allows all n-of-n policies (i.e. 2-of-2, 3-of-3, 4-of-4 etc) to look exactly the same as a singlesig policy, and it also becomes possible (though more difficult) for k-of-n policies (i.e. 2-of-3, 3-of-4, 2-of-5, etc.) to look exactly the same as singlesig policies. This is a pretty massive boost. For instance, the above arbiter example requires a 2-of-3 and that is now possible to be indistinguishable onchain from a singlesig 1-of-1. The nice thing is that the exact policy is never revealed *even if the coin is spent*: it looks exactly like a singlesig 1-of-1 even after spending. Taproot is the observation that in almost any policy, there is an implicit "if everyone can agree to the result of the policy, then we don't have to reveal the policy and just sign with an n-of-n that everybody agrees". This is called the taproot assumption: there exists some superset of all participants such that if they all agree to what the policy "really" is, they can all sign to whatever the policy *would have done*. For example, in the arbitration case, if everything is clear-cut, then it's possible that all three participants (buyer, seller, arbiter) can agree on a single result, and they could just be asked to sign a 3-of-3 that this single result is what should happen given the policy. So Taproot is based on Schnorr, where n-of-n is possible to hide with all the 1-of-1, and also hides a "detailed policy" in the Taproot address. If all participants can agree on the result of the policy, then they just sign with the Schnorr protocol and the detailed policy is never released onchain --- a massive privacy win for them. On the other hand, if somebody disagrees and prevents the n-of-n signing from completing, anyone can just reveal the policy onchain and use the policy to spend the funds in accordance with the policy. For example, an HTLC to do an intra-chain CoinSwap can be embedded in a Taproot policy that is hidden in a 2-of-2 of the swapping participants: Schnorr ensures that if everything goes smoothly, the 2-of-2 is indistinguishable from normal singlesig spends, and the Taproot hidden policy ensures that if something goes wrong, the swap is either completed or aborted with no "intermediate" states where one side gets its refund *and* the other side's money. A third thing you did not ask but which I am answering anyway is MAST, which has been integrated into the Taproot proposal. Most policies have an "OR" branch, i.e. an HTLC is EITHER person A spends this in exchange for revealing the preimage of a hash OR person B spends this after a specific block height / time is reached. In principle, if the participants follow one branch, there is no real need to reveal the other branch (it isn't going to be followed anyway, so why publish it to the world?), but in current P2SH and P2WSH, the entire policy, including branches not taken, has to be published. MAST simply allows just the branch that is taken to be published, hiding the other branches. This gives a little more privacy. This only comes in if a hidden Taproot policy is revealed: the *entire* policy does *not* have to be revealed, only the branch that the participants want to follow, giving a smaller privacy boost.

7

throwawayagin 5 days ago

Thank you for this.

1

WalterRyan 6 days ago

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nf\_GCdCaQww](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nf_GCdCaQww)

1

d3vrandom 6 days ago

It's a building block towards supporting more complex uses of bitcoin.

1

bearCatBird 6 days ago

The root of the tree is the best place to get the sap but after you tap it you have to wait a long time and will likely fall asleep and shnorr a bit. Similar to waiting for bitcoin tech upgrades.

5

Rhamni 6 days ago

Do you have any estimate on what a realistic time frame might be?

1

gizram84 6 days ago

About 18 months.

1

pwuille Pieter Wuille - Bitcoin Expert 6 days ago

I'd rather not speculate about that.

10

johnturtle 6 days ago

How would this BIP be activated, using miner activation as defined in BIP9 or user activation like segwit?

2

d3vrandom 6 days ago

It's just a BIP. It has to be implemented and tested first which is a whole other thing. Only after that can you talk about activating it on mainnet.

2

Hanspanzer 6 days ago

'omg it's happening!!!'

0

Cryptoguruboss 6 days ago

Wut wut

0

bluethunder1985 6 days ago

Gonna be yuuuge

0

AstarJoe 6 days ago

Are these bots?

1

bluethunder1985 6 days ago

which bots. this kinda posts? Yeah probably.

1

art_of_bug redditor for 4 weeks 6 days ago

Good, but clickbait. Expected Bitcoin Core PR.

1

Kalin101 6 days ago

Same here.. still interesting!

1

Marcion_Sinope 6 days ago

(Insert Ron Paul 'It's Happening' meme here)

0

dietrolldietroll 6 days ago

FYI:

https://youtu.be/nf_GCdCaQww?t=617 Bitcoin Q&A: SegWit, Schnorr, Taproot, and Graftroot

https://youtu.be/YSUVRj8iznU Taproot, and Schnorr, and SIGHASH_NOINPUT

39

ProoM 6 days ago

This needs more upvotes.

6

i0X 6 days ago

A pull request for the BIPs. Let’s not get ahead of ourselves.

54

10K9k3dXmJ86Xq5j redditor for 3 months 6 days ago

ELI5?

3

Septem_151 6 days ago

A BIP stands for “Bitcoin Improvement Proposal” and is documentation about a change that may or may not be implemented into Bitcoin.

10

LiveCat6 6 days ago

could you do me a fav and outline the overall process for BIPs to be implemented? So BIP gets proposed.... then what.. then what.... protocol is upgraded. Thx in advance!

12

backafterdeleting 5 days ago

Note that not all BIPs ever get implemented or are even relevant for bitcoin core. Some are just standard ways for wallets to communicate for example. The idea behind a BIP is that once it's "fixed" as a concrete proposal, various projects can implement it in a compatible way, and say "implemented in accordance with BIP[x]". But they don't always need to.

2

ProoM 6 days ago

It goes vaguely like this: Most of communication between bitcoin devs is done through this mailing list [bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org](mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org) (it's got some good reads would def. recommend signing up). First there's an idea for a protocol change, it bounces back and forward for a couple of months (or years) and once it's polished enough a BIP is created, then discussion continues regarding this BIP, and often expands to other mediums, for all the arguments to be heard loud and clear. Lets say everyone's super happy with it and no one has any concerns or objections (never happens) then a pull request gets created for the feature branch of actual implementation, to see how it would look like in code. This then gets updated and reviewed a lot to meet the standards. Once that's approved and merged into BIP feature branch, there's further discussion whether or not to merge it into the main code for testnet testing and when to release it. The whole process might take 3 or more years, and wast majority of changes never make it through. The idea behind bitcoin development is to have a stable and reliable protocol that doesn't change often and doesn't change in grandiose ways, meaning all flashy cool features are most likely going to be rejected.

23

LiveCat6 6 days ago

Awesome thank you. So when Peter opens a pull request for the taproot BIP, that means that the idea is now about to be coded as the first iteration of what the code would look like, and then the discussion continues, as you said above?

4

pwuille Pieter Wuille - Bitcoin Expert 6 days ago

Really what it means is that we (the BIP authors) believe the drafts are ready to be published. It's a rather arbitrary criterion, as some BIPs are published while being heavily edited, while others only are in a pretty mature state. In this case, I believe the BIPs are fairly mature. That doesn't mean they're done, but barring significant flaws found, there probably won't be any semantical changes to the spec.

18

phileo 5 days ago

How do you go on finding flaws? Is it mostly other coders going through the script in order to find spelling errors or inefficient executions or is it mainly just stress tested on the testnet? How often would you say are flaws found? Great work btw and I can't wait to see the implementation. :)

3

pwuille Pieter Wuille - Bitcoin Expert 5 days ago

So far review has focussed on the BIPs/specification rather than the actual details of implementation. That means discussions have been mostly about questioning design decisions. For example in the past months we switched from 33-byte public keys to 32-byte public keys (after realizing there is provably no security loss from doing so), and dropping P2SH-Taproot support. There where many other smaller improvements that just made the documents more clear, without actually changing the semantics of the specification. In parallel to the specification we also do have an implementation of the new consensus rules, though that is mostly unreviewed for now, and likely the target of review in the near future. There are tests included as well, which in fact did help us find a small bug in the implementation too.

6

CannedCaveman 6 days ago

Great work Peter, love the progress.

2

LiveCat6 6 days ago

Thanks very much. Guesses as to possible implementation timeline? 2020?

3

pwuille Pieter Wuille - Bitcoin Expert 5 days ago

I'd rather not speculate on when it may be active on mainnet.

7

MakeTotalDestr0i 5 days ago

what about speculate on how long it takes to code something like this from start to *nearly* complete code . not all the other stuff and actual implementation or full review and such looking for an answer of (less than a year) or (more than a year)

1

pwuille Pieter Wuille - Bitcoin Expert 5 days ago

No need to speculate; there already is a full implementation of the consensus rules, written in a few weeks' time. What takes time is review, discussion, and getting agreement - not implementation.

5

MakeTotalDestr0i 5 days ago

thanks.

1

[deleted] 6 days ago

[removed]

9

Treyzania 6 days ago

Jokes aside. Theoretical and general research discussion is on https://ethresear.ch, but a lot of more practical planning and application of research is done on https://ethereum-magicians.org.

1

buttonstraddle 6 days ago

Ahhh. Definitely misleading title.

5

castorfromtheva 6 days ago

Even now? That's interesting.

0

9 7

SYD4uo Yesterday

aww, you guys should have just enabled OP_EVAL with recursion level of inf and called it ETH back in 2011!

No, no, sry,.. just a lame joke...

Congrats on this. Seriously.

lmao, sry for being a dick, obv all you guys do is highly appreciated - as a clueless noob i'd like to see less magic numbers but what do i know!

e.g. i like the comment about

if ((hash_type > SIGHASH_TAPOUTPUTMASK) && (hash_type <= SIGHASH_TAPINPUTMASK || hash_type > (SIGHASH_TAPINPUTMASK | SIGHASH_TAPOUTPUTMASK))) return false;

being far more readable or friendly for newcomers than

if ((hash_type > 3) && (hash_type < 0x81 || hash_type > 0x83)) return false;

1

Bitcoin_to_da_Moon redditor for 3 months Yesterday

when Shnooky, Rooty and Scrippy are activated we will go to DA MOOOON!

1

jamckp 1 day ago

This + the new LND release. Big day in Bitcoin development.

1

lobt 1 day ago

Resources for the curious:

Podcasts/Interviews with the devs:

10

time_dj 1 day ago

Yeah buddy!

2

odyficat redditor for 5 weeks 1 day ago

I shall pull a request to call them Shnooky, Rooty and Scrippy.

14

bearCatBird Yesterday

How about Snorky

1

Bitcoin_to_da_Moon redditor for 3 months Yesterday

a new bitcoin dev was born

4

pwuille Pieter Wuille - Bitcoin Expert 1 day ago

I like it.

14

adsorptionspectra 1 day ago

What do these BIPs do?

5

pwuille Pieter Wuille - Bitcoin Expert 1 day ago

You already got a few responses that discuss the major things they add. I'll add another: extensibility. A new mechanism is added for extending scripts with new opcodes, that's far simpler to coordinate and use than the existing witness versioning. This hopefully clears the way for adding more useful opcodes to Script in the future.

10

lobt 1 day ago

Resources for the curious: - [Quick Overview of Schnorr/Taproot/Tapscript](https://bitcoinmagazine.com/articles/2020-and-beyond-bitcoins-potential-protocol-upgrades) - [More on Schnorr](https://bitcoinmagazine.com/articles/the-power-of-schnorr-the-signature-algorithm-to-increase-bitcoin-s-scale-and-privacy-1460642496) - [More on Taproot](https://bitcoinmagazine.com/articles/taproot-coming-what-it-and-how-it-will-benefit-bitcoin) Podcasts/Interviews with the devs: - [Pieter Wuille](https://letstalkbitcoin.com/blog/post/lets-talk-bitcoin-400-the-tools-and-the-work) - [Andrew Poelstra](https://letstalkbitcoin.com/blog/post/what-bitcoin-did-110-schnorr-taproot-graft-root-with-andrew-poelstra)

1

bitusher 1 day ago

TL;DR version- Schnorr signatures allows more efficient use of blockspace so we have more transactions per block without increasing resource costs Taproot allows privacy txs to share the same anonymity set as regular onchain transactions thus eliminates the concerns with everyone forced to opt into a privacy Bitcoin wallet to have a larger anonymity set.

17

pwuille Pieter Wuille - Bitcoin Expert 1 day ago

It's a bit unfair to use the term anonymity set here; Taproot doesn't directly break transaction linkage. What it does is make simple payments and multisig transactions and Lightning channels and many more things *policy* indistinguishable from each other; you won't be able to tell from just blockchain data which is which. You will however still see which transactions spend funds from which other transaction. (*) Taproot does enable a very nice atomic swap (Adaptor signatures) construction, which also is indistinguishable (assuming it goes through) from other types of transactions. This could be used as a mixing mechanism (like CoinJoin is today), but its benefits are subject to such schemes actually being adopted.

9

Empact 1 day ago

Just to add a few more to these: \* MAST enables larger scripts to be used with less cost and more privacy - you only have to reveal the portion of the script that enables the coins to be spent \* Schorr enables more use-cases through its linearity - you can for example, combine multiple signatures into a single valid signature, or "tweak" a signature with another value that itself represents private or conditional information

7

WalterRyan 1 day ago

I believe this proposal doesn't include signature aggregation yet, that will be a separate upgrade which will hopefully come soon after.

3

pwuille Pieter Wuille - Bitcoin Expert 1 day ago

Schnorr signature have the linearity property inherently, and that comes with a whole bunch of things that can be done on top without explicit support from consensus rules (e.g. key aggregation enabling cheap multisig, simple adaptor-signature based atomic swaps, blind signatures, ...; with more complex protocols also native threshold signatures and more). Those things become available with just Schnorr signatures on chain (included in BIP 340/341), but obviously require wallet support. What is not included is *cross-input* aggregation, as that requires explicit consensus rule support. So while in many cases Schnorr signatures permit reducing the number of signatures per *transaction input* to one - to reduce it further to one per *transaction* another change is necessary. BIP 341 has some rationale on why this isn't included.

14

WalterRyan Yesterday

Thanks for the clarification!

1

Empact 1 day ago

That's right, but the linearity is a fundamental element that will be present from the start, so you should be able to build upon it by interacting with the network/protocol directly, from outside the Bitcoin Core software.

1

bitusher 1 day ago

Correct , and these changes also require adoption from wallets as well.

1

arcrad 1 day ago

Another sweet aspect of Schnorr: >Linearity: Schnorr signatures provide a simple and efficient method that enables multiple collaborating parties to produce a signature that is valid for the sum of their public keys. This is the building block for various higher-level constructions that improve efficiency and privacy, such as multisignatures and others (see Applications below). I believe then no one can differentiate between normal p2pkh and p2sh mutisig.

1

GibbsSamplePlatter 1 day ago

It's a set of proposals to upgrade Bitcoin script with some nicer wheels

5

1blockologist 1 day ago

oh shit real code

30

lobt 1 day ago

Hijacking top comment: Resources for the curious: - [Quick Overview of Schnorr/Taproot/Tapscript](https://bitcoinmagazine.com/articles/2020-and-beyond-bitcoins-potential-protocol-upgrades) - [More on Schnorr](https://bitcoinmagazine.com/articles/the-power-of-schnorr-the-signature-algorithm-to-increase-bitcoin-s-scale-and-privacy-1460642496) - [More on Taproot](https://bitcoinmagazine.com/articles/taproot-coming-what-it-and-how-it-will-benefit-bitcoin) Podcasts/Interviews with the devs: - [Pieter Wuille](https://letstalkbitcoin.com/blog/post/lets-talk-bitcoin-400-the-tools-and-the-work) - [Andrew Poelstra](https://letstalkbitcoin.com/blog/post/what-bitcoin-did-110-schnorr-taproot-graft-root-with-andrew-poelstra)

28

Sota_de_espadas 1 day ago

When schnorr & taproot & tapscript on bitcoin core?

8

jgun83 1 day ago

Late 2020 or early 2021 seems to be the consensus, but who knows. These things can take time and they need to be right.

15

violencequalsbad 1 day ago

Really? I am wondering how this is going to be activated. Obviously we can't do a MASF like how we went about segwit originally. (We had to do a UASF to force the miners to activate the MASF in the end). I never heard what the actual plan was. I mean I am a UASFer fo' life but....is that what we're doing?

3

bitusher 1 day ago

A variation of BIP 9 as discussed here- https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2020-January/017547.html

8

varikonniemi 1 day ago

so 4 years until activation if we assume the chinese miners resist like last time. Way too slow.

0

bitusher 1 day ago

If some miners resist for bullshit reasons again there will be another UASF occur by year 2

8

WittyStick redditor for 3 months 1 day ago

Well the good thing is that miners now have a precedent to learn from. They can either go the way of Bitmain or accept the Bitcoin the market chooses.

12

WalterRyan 1 day ago

They certainly won't use BIP 9

2

walloon5 1 day ago

Will they use a different BIP or a different process altogether

1

WalterRyan 1 day ago

Soon there will be talk and discussions about the activation method, but I have no idea how it will happen in the end. Only thing I know is that it will be certainly interesting to follow (and participate)

2

12 4

alsomahler Yesterday

!lntip 3000

1

lntipbot Yesterday

Hi u/alsomahler, thanks for tipping u/roasbeef **3000** 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

Kalin101 Yesterday

The list of upgrades is absolutely incredible for a ~2month time between this and the last release. Wow.

2

N0tMyRealAcct 1 day ago

Reading the blog post I feel that this is a really impressive release. Lots of good progress.

Personally I care the most about liquidity improvements, which is covered in this release by MPP features and circular payments. Both of these will decrease the need for on chain transactions.

2

sreaka 1 day ago

Nice work roasbeef!

3

DJBunnies 1 day ago

Keysend payments seem to require a direct channel to the recipient, is it expected to work over a route in the future?

2

guggero_lightning 1 day ago

No, it works for any route. But the receiver has to enable the feature manually (for now, until it‘s been tested in the wild for a while).

3

DJBunnies 1 day ago

Currently? I couldnt get it to work except direct, even when all nodes in the route had the flag enabled.

3

roasbeef Lightning Network Expert 1 day ago

Only the destination needs to have the flag enabled. The intermediate nodes don't even really know that it's a keysend payment! What error do you see when you try to launch the payment? Is this in a controlled simnet environment, or on mainnet?

6

DJBunnies 1 day ago

Testnet. Am travelling currently, but i seem to recall the error was complaining about the last hop not supporting something. Like a-b-c would fail, but a-c would be fine. Will relay when i get back, if you're interested.

1

laninsterJr 1 day ago

This should be sticky post. Great news!

3

AstarJoe 1 day ago

“Spontaneous” payments

One of the most frequently requested features for Lightning has been the ability to send “spontaneous” payments, in which the receiver of a payment doesn’t need to be involved in the payment ahead of time and doesn’t have to generate an invoice before the payment is sent. These “spontaneous” or “push” payments are more like what Bitcoin users have grown accustomed to, as opposed to invoice-based systems like credit cards. In lnd v0.9-beta, we’re introducing an experimental feature called Keysend that allows for spontaneous, invoice-less payments. Like Multi-Path Payments, Keysend uses custom TLV onion payloads to transmit the payment preimage so that a payment receiver can settle payments without an invoice. A future release of lnd will also support AMP, which is essentially a sharded Keysend payment that supports additional features such as recurring payments.

Was very encouraging for me to read. I don't think this technology will ever begin to approach adoption without the conveniences and streamlining that we have all come to expect from apps and banking systems in 2020.

24

cedricthe redditor for 3 months 1 day ago

core backend tech first... UI later.

10

gta3uzi 1 day ago

Parallel development's probably ideal here.

5

laggyx400 1 day ago

Anyone could build a beautiful GUI for it right now.

2

wasawasawasuup redditor for 3 months Yesterday

[Somebody already has](https://zap.jackmallers.com/)

4

cedricthe redditor for 3 months 1 day ago

Jump in and make a killer UI

6

saucedonkey 1 day ago

This is how bitcoin and other crypto will dominate traditional finance and existing payment channels. Spontaneous payments and low fee lightning transactions will drive adoption because businesses are paying excessive fees to card processors and banks for cash services. If I were a bank or payment processor I would be trying to get in on this early before my competitors do.

8

Immediate-Host redditor for 6 weeks 1 day ago

!lntip 20000

5

lntipbot 1 day ago

Hi u/Immediate-Host, thanks for tipping u/roasbeef **20000** 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

exa61 1 day ago

What is a difference from previous version?

0

AlanArtemisa 1 day ago

- Support for multi-path payments (allowing payments to be split up and routed by different routes to allow working around liquidity bottlenecks), in the backend all transactions are now part of a 1-out-of-1 multi-path payment. - Push-payments, not requiring an invoice like before. Now you'll be able to spontaneously send a few thousands sats to somebody without having to request an invoice for the exact amount. - Added extra option for sending small amounts of data with payments - Extra flexibility for funding channels - Improved security by allowing more granular permissions and by allowing to specify to which bitcoin address a channel balance is refunded when the channel is closed - Circular payments added which allow for better channel liquidity management - Routing improvements - Improvements for developers using LND - Compatibility improvements - Some bug fixes That should about sum it up.

14

roasbeef Lightning Network Expert 1 day ago

Nice summary 😎

10

zer0fks 1 day ago

Check the release notes; https://github.com/lightningnetwork/lnd/releases

3

martinus 1 day ago

Yes

1

sunbro43va 1 day ago

went down far enough to see them talking about "push" payments which is exciting. Being able to send a payment without an invoice is a step in the right direction for sure.

3

tldr-hodl 1 day ago

Well, you could click the link perhaps..?

12

Immediate-Host redditor for 6 weeks 1 day ago

This is the kind of news we are waiting for!

19

tldr-hodl 1 day ago

Cheers!

5

10 3

hellomynameisfi 2 days ago

It won't stop soon (probably at least not before the US presidential elections this year). FED has their hands tide. If they stop the market goes WAAAAAAAY down (S&P could drop even 50-60%), if they continue: the dollar supply will inflate and (somewhat counter-intuitively) the cost of servicing both own (USD denominated - raising interest rats) and foreign currency denominated debts will rise (as inflation is not uniform throughout the economy and USA is not the only player on the currency markets).

The question I have is how exactly is FED injecting all that new printed money into repo, as it is basically just about selling and repurchasing of "loan collateral". Does this mean that FED prices that collateral higher then the market would? Are they buying worthless shit of the market pumping the price??

I am not sure I understand their strategy correctly, but to me that sounds like a recipe for disaster.

1

IntrepidBurger redditor for 3 months 2 days ago

The purpose of this is to maintain inflation at 2%. This is a good thing. You want this, otherwise people hoard their wealth and there's no productivity growth.

This is not a "problem" for Bitcoin to solve. This is not why Bitcoin is good.

Please stop making the rest of us look like economically illiterate clowns.

0

hellomynameisfi 2 days ago

>The purpose of this is to maintain inflation at 2% The purpose is far from it. It is being down to keep the stock market up and the appearance of a strong economy to ease the market tensions. This raises the inflation.

3

IntrepidBurger redditor for 3 months 1 day ago

Inflation doesn't "prop the stock market". That's not how it works. Please don't speak of you're economically illiterate. It makes everyone look dumb here.

1

hellomynameisfi 1 day ago

> Inflation doesn't "prop the stock market" That is exactly how it works. "Inflation" is the inflation of monetary supply. Raising prices are the result. You do know that inflation is not uniform throughout all markets, don't you? Currently rising US stock prices are an expression of currently occurring inflation in their financial economy.  > Please don't speak of you're economically illiterate OMG. You are so funny. Check yourself before you wreck yourself 😂

2

IntrepidBurger redditor for 3 months 1 day ago

>Currently rising US stock prices are an expression of currently occurring inflation in their financial economy. That... Is not how it works, at all. I really wish there was a "I'm talking to a teenager" flair on this sub.

1

hellomynameisfi 1 day ago

Learn some basic economics before you make a fool out of yourself 😂

1

IntrepidBurger redditor for 3 months 1 day ago

The massive irony

0

fresheneesz 2 days ago

What is "hoarding" wealth? That's otherwise known as saving money. > there's no productivity growth. Inflation doesn't create productivity or growth. It depletes it. Inflation distorts the market causing people to invest in losing-bets when those losing bets beat inflation. > This is not why Bitcoin is good. This is absolutely the #1 reason Bitcoin is good. Its called sound money. > Please stop making the rest of us look like economically illiterate clowns. You're right. You certainly don't need help with that..

5

IntrepidBurger redditor for 3 months 1 day ago

Wealth is only hoarded if it is not invested. A low inflation rate is desired precisely because you don't want it to appreciate in value on its own (deflation), as that encourages hoarding. Please don't speak if you don't understand basic econ.

0

fresheneesz 1 day ago

Please read this if you actually want to understand what I'm telling you: https://www.reddit.com/r/BitcoinDiscussion/comments/czdlzf/thought_experiment_minercontrolled_emission/eyzgvki/

1

IntrepidBurger redditor for 3 months 1 day ago

Literally none of that giant diatribe is true. If you were an intellectually honest person who I believed would change his mind based on new information I'd break it down for you. But you're not. Literally every economist agrees on the nature of low inflation being beneficial for capital investment and growth. People do not risk investments over long periods when they can't account for the risk involved. We know your because this is exactly what happened in the first half of the 20th century. It's amazing that on Reddit you have C-average college kids who think they know more than every economist combined. It takes a specific kind of arrogance to be that stupid.

0

fresheneesz 1 day ago

Here's one nobel prize winning economist who doesn't think inflation is great: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NgSqZKx0mNI

1

fresheneesz 1 day ago

> Literally every economist agrees on the nature of low inflation being beneficial for capital investment and growth. Yes, everyone agrees that the lower the inflation is the better. I agree, you agree, everyone agrees. > If you were an intellectually honest person who I believed would change his mind based on new information I'd break it down for you I think through things. I try to explain them to others. All you can do is insult people. Its sad really. I'd have a discussion with you if you tried to discuss something, but you really just want to feel superior without actually trying to explain or teach anything. > think they know more than every economist combined How ironic that you're so arrogant you think you know what every economist thinks. Shows how little you've actually explored economics.

1

fresheneesz 1 day ago

> hoarded Please stop using [weasel words](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weasel_word). > precisely because you don't want it to appreciate in value on its own So you're saying you need price inflation because you don't want price deflation. Real solid logic there. > that encourages hoarding You haven't even tried to justify the claim that "hoarding" (aka saving) is bad. > Please don't speak if you don't understand basic econ. I could say the same to you bud. You clearly are just parroting over-simplified rhetoric. That doesn't count as understanding "basic econ". Read this: https://www.reddit.com/r/BitcoinDiscussion/comments/czdlzf/thought_experiment_minercontrolled_emission/eyzgvki/

1

IntrepidBurger redditor for 3 months 1 day ago

*sigh* I feel like I need to use really small words with you so you can understand. If you have money, and that money will grow by next year all on its own, you won't invest it in something that might make you lose it. Further, you won't invest it in something that will return less than it will grow. This is called "common sense" and it's exactly what happened before monetary policy. As it happens, that causes a shortage of free capital for investment, which in turn causes economic growth to stall. This is all literally intro econ. You don't know any of this. I'm embarrassed I've wasted my time on someone this dumb. Replies are disabled.

0

gnon86 2 days ago

God forbid we allow people to save money as they have for thousands of years throughout history. Thank god the overleveraged banks that crash the financial system every few years with deleveraging of their Ponzi schemes can print inflation generating trillions of unproductive revenues for themselves. They are the heroes in this story.

7

IntrepidBurger redditor for 3 months 1 day ago

You don't want a deflationary asset. That discourages investment which is where all the productivity gains in the past century came from.

0

gnon86 1 day ago

Hmm I thought productivity came from capital investment towards increasing productive capacity and innovation. When you devalue cash by printing money and pinning down interest rates you create malinvestment in monstrosities like WeWork. Sure you encourage people to spend fiat but that either comes through as inflation or asset bubbles. Tell me how housing bubbles increase productivity. Your best argument for inflation is that governments can use it to fund basic R&D. But they could also fund it through taxes. Think critically for a minute instead of parroting the Neokeynesian talking points that have never been empirically proven. Yes you can increase nominal GDP by inflating debts and bubbles but I wouldn't call that productivity.

2

IntrepidBurger redditor for 3 months 1 day ago

>Hmm I thought productivity came from capital investment towards increasing productive capacity and innovation Correct. Guess what happens when your currency is deflationary? People do not invest their capital. > Think critically for a minute instead of parroting If there was a Reddit Olympics award for Irony you'd win it

0

gnon86 1 day ago

Please send me your Bitcoin you are right deflationary assets are doomed to fail.

2

IntrepidBurger redditor for 3 months 1 day ago

Sure, as soon as you hit your 16th birthday.

0

Marcion_Sinope 2 days ago

Hilarious. Thanks for sharing.

5

IntrepidBurger redditor for 3 months 1 day ago

You finding basic econ funny is... pretty telling about the average person here.

1

Marcion_Sinope 1 day ago

Sorry, can't hear you over the $50 billion fake dollars being pumped every night to prop up the stock and bond market, what?

1

IntrepidBurger redditor for 3 months 1 day ago

You have no idea what you're talking about. Go look up the history of inflation and why it's necessary and get back to me. Should be able to figure it out before your 16th birthday I wager.

0

Crazy-Permission redditor for 2 days Yesterday

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The\_Great\_Deflation](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Great_Deflation) Companies would be forced to innovate and actually increase productivity through R&D and thereby lower prices of goods, in a deflationary system. Savings are the reason why accumulation of capital happens, which can be either lent out or used to start a new business. More businesses means more competition. More jobs too. Try running capitalism without capital and tell me how that works out. If you Keynesian cucks like to "stimulate" the economy so much, spend your wages as soon as you receive them and max out all your credit cards and take as many as loans as possible.

1

Marcion_Sinope 1 day ago

Oh wow, we got a live one here.

1

hellomynameisfi 1 day ago

You making a fool of yourself is actually quite entertaining 😆

2

hellomynameisfi 1 day ago

You are a moron! 😂

1

InformalChain 2 days ago

Its the failing European financial institutions that are causing the fed repo craze. Just look at the coincidence of high demand for the US 10-year treasury and USD. Some major US banks have large exposure to the european derivatives market.

1

hellomynameisfi 2 days ago

This is not so simple. EU institutions have to factor in the currency risk so they have to (or rather should) hedge their US investments. This (most often) brings their true interest rate even below the negative ones in the EU. The only way to profit in this situation is to take on higher risk and not hedge those transactions at all. This strategy breaks when bull market comes and results in UUUUGE loses.

1

afksports 2 days ago

deutsche going down

2

hellomynameisfi 2 days ago

Not if they can sell all the shit they have in their books. They have at list till November 2020 to try.

2

Kerath 2 days ago

I find it hilarious how the prices of gold and silver don’t react. Almost as of the entire thing is somehow manipulated.

6

hellomynameisfi 2 days ago

Don't worry. Their time will come. Right now the price is set mostly by paper-gold prices. Wait till people realize that there is not enough gold to fulfill those obligations. It's gonna be a slaughter and the price will shoot up. Enjoy low prices.

1

AreYouAJew redditor for 3 days 1 day ago

so do you think gold is a better investment then silver?

1

hellomynameisfi 1 day ago

I have no clue. I have no real knowledge of silver's market.

1

sexyama 2 days ago

gold and silver have supply inflation too

2

mrmishmashmix 2 days ago

in tears

2

branbrandg Tin 2 days ago

These mods are rough- can anyone even see this post?

1

CryptoMods Bronze 2 days ago

Hello, your post was removed because your account is less than 50 days old or you do not have the required 500 comment karma to make post submissions.

1

CryptoMods Bronze 2 days ago

Hello, your post was removed because your account is less than 50 days old or you do not have the required 500 comment karma to make post submissions.

1

Marcion_Sinope 2 days ago

Talk about magic internet money.

21

mj2gg2ltifhegqkq redditor for 5 weeks 2 days ago

> Talk about magic internet money. Its very ironic that people see bitcoin as complex and the dollar as simple. Nothing could be further from the truth. The totality of bitcoin is a few pages of design details. Its utterly transparent and simple, possibly as simple as a money system can be. Its money reduced to the most elemental mathematical form. The fiat dollar, in comparison, is an amazingly complex scheme. It spans multiple types of media, it can wink in and out of existence, it has miles and miles of pages of rules about its function, when and where and how it can be spent or redeemed, and those rules change all the time. The dollar has no true settlement system; for things to settle, the main method is used is "wait a long, indeterminate time". Even the methods advertised as irreversible, such as cashiers checks, cash deposits, and wire transfers, can be reversed. You cannot simply create a new server or hardware device and put dollars into it; only specially blessed computers can hold dollars. The protocols for how to send dollars electronically are secretive, and require special blessings from high priests to work. If you try to send or receive dollars from your computer to other computers without those blessings, it wont work, and would land you in jail. The dollar is its own antiparticle, because a debt dollar and an earned dollar are the same. The dollar system requires a huge set of wizards bureaucrats and administrators just to keep it functioning, and if they stopped it would spin out of control. And no matter how hard they try, it eventually spins out anyway, and they have to fight to pick up the pieces and start it over again, at a great cost to the public.

40

bitsteiner 2 days ago

> only specially blessed computers can hold dollars. The protocols for how to send dollars electronically Computers don't hold Dollars and there is no way to send Dollars electronically, since there is no electronic Dollar in existence. What you mean is that claims on Dollars sitting in a bank vault are exchanged via a message: "$5 Dollars owned by costumer 1 in bank A are now owned by customer 2 in Bank B". No Dollar is exchanged, when transmitting and confirming this message, but in the end actual Dollars claimed have to be exchanged, because a bank can go bankrupt and then the claims become worthless. The banks themselves don't even hold as many Dollars in their vaults and don't exchange them physically, but keep them in an account with a central bank. Then actual Dollars sitting in the central banks are shifted from bank A's to bank B's account. They are not shifted physically, but just in the books of the central bank. If the banks are with different central banks, it gets even more complicated. One might note that central banks do not hold actual Dollars, but just claims of banks. This is true, but these "virtual Dollars" can never leave a central bank, they have to be printed on paper. If customer 2 with bank B wants to withdraw his $5 and bank B's vault is empty, then bank B has to withdraw Dollars from its account with the central bank. If the central bank has no Dollar notes left, it has to print and physically ship them to the bank, simply because there is no electronic Dollar.

1

hellomynameisfi 2 days ago

>Computers don't hold Dollars ... well actually, quite opposite to Bitcoin, those machines do actually hold dollars. The amount of dollars held in those machines is unverifiable. There is no way other machine can verify the amount of dollars on other dollar-holding-machine. It has to be reported. Those reports have to be trusted (hence the auditors). How valuable is that trust? I dunno, but I remember Enron 🤷‍♂️

1

bitsteiner 1 day ago

Only the Federal Reserve computers can hold Dollars, but this is irrelevant to the economy, because they are not in circulation. They can get in circulation only, if they are printed on paper.

1

hellomynameisfi 1 day ago

No. That's wrong. Ever heard of fractional reserve banking?

0

bitsteiner 1 day ago

Private banks' liabilities (which are claims by their customers) are a multiple of their reserves (either cash in vaults or reserves redeemable for cash held with the central bank = actual Dollars). This is what fractional reserve means, please look it up in the financial literature. Banks store these liabilities in their books, today electronically in computers. Since these liabilities are a multiple of the Dollars they have and are in existence (fractional reserve), these liabilities stored in computers can by no means be Dollars, they can be claims on Dollars only.

1

hellomynameisfi 1 day ago

You do you man 🤷‍♂️

0

fresheneesz 2 days ago

Learn how to use paragraphs please.

0

bitsteiner 1 day ago

Better you learn that.

0

fresheneesz 1 day ago

Um, what?

0

mj2gg2ltifhegqkq redditor for 5 weeks 2 days ago

> since there is no electronic Dollar in existence. The dollar is mostly electronic. > Dollars sitting in a bank vault Can be shredded without affecting anything, and regularly are.

2

bitsteiner 2 days ago

There is simply now law that defines an electronic Dollar in one form or another as money. Only physical Dollar notes is money, everything else is claims on money. If a private or a bank shreds Dollars they lose actual money. Central banks do shred Dollars, but they can reprint them anytime if needed (e.g. a banks needs cash from its reserves with the central bank).

0

hellomynameisfi 2 days ago

>Only physical Dollar notes is money Have you ever used a credit card?

2

bitsteiner 1 day ago

It has the function of money as long as the merchant trusts it (counter party risk). It doesn't have all the features money has nor is it defined by law as money.

0

hellomynameisfi 1 day ago

Wut? Are you trolling or having a stroke right now?

1

bitsteiner 1 day ago

You can't service debt with a credit card. You can do it with money only, read a Dollar bill. Just one example, plain and simple.

0

hellomynameisfi 1 day ago

You can't service debt with a credit card?????????????? Wut??????? 🤨😆🤣😂

0

PRMan99 2 days ago

> The protocols for how to send dollars electronically are secretive ACH is far from secretive. It's old and pretty dumb, but it's not secretive. Source: I've written ACH software more than once for different companies.

2

wasawasawasuup redditor for 3 months 2 days ago

>ACH is far from secretive. Cool. Where do I connect? Public IP I assume? Where's the protocol documentation? Anyone can participate, right? Right...?

7

mj2gg2ltifhegqkq redditor for 5 weeks 2 days ago

> ACH is far from secretive. It's old and pretty dumb, but it's not secretive. The part that is secretive is the network topology, and how to connect and identify your node. The average person will not be able to participate in the in the ACH network or send natcha messages. With bitcoin, you can fire up a node and it all autoconfigures. To make a new node on the ACH network requires an elaborate ceremony, and those select few who are allowed to participate gain the title "processor" .

6

d3vrandom 2 days ago

paper money is even more magical! you can print as much of it as you like!

3

Mark_Bear redditor for 3 months 2 days ago

Hooray for Bitcoin.

11

mathaiser 2 days ago

My fiat is in the stock market so I ride the wave of maintaining my capital. Sorry poor fuck working wages. I wish one day bitcoin can save you. “One labor unit is worth “x”” That can’t be inflated. Wait... yes it can... 600,000,000 Indians looking for work? They will do it for less? FUCK!” bitcoin can’t save you from that. Find a plot of land in Canada and be self sufficient. Only long game you can play.

4

Admirral 2 days ago

This is actually so true. Im so baffled at how everyone is competing for jobs, yet noone thinks to get onto the recruiting side of things instead... Now’s the time to be an entrepreneur and take advantage of this transitioning economy. There are planets worth of wealth to be made, but the majority of people continue to think in the old ways of “go to work, have boss yell at you, go home, have wife yell at you, go sleep”. But ehh, so be it. It just means I get to be picky now and pick out the cheap talent.

1

Mark_Bear redditor for 3 months 2 days ago

Meanwhile, negative interest rates, more "money printing" to solve problems created by too much "money printing", the biggest pile of debt (relative to GDP) the world has ever seen, along with a huge and still widening wealth gap, leverage, front running, stock buy-backs, government debt, government unfunded liabilities, a demographic cliff approaching with baby boomer retirement, countries working hard to get out from under USD hegemony... I could go on. Oh yeah, the SYSTEM is working just fine... if you're central banker or crony thereof. Some little plot of land is not a viable option except for a very, very few.

3

InformalChain 2 days ago

Are you kidding? a plot of land is Canada will probably cost you 100x your wage. that large fcking country has been inflated to stratosphere by cheap credit and chinese laundering.

5

efadd 2 days ago

I think Canadian property inflation is largely limited to the cities. I doubt that dude was talking about buying a plot of land in downtown Vancouver. Canada has a ton of rural land that I imagine you can still get pretty cheap.

1

InformalChain 2 days ago

Sure you can die cheap in those refrigerator from brutal weather and poor infrastructure.

0

xtal_00 2 days ago

Land in Canada outside of the Major cities is stupid cheap. You can die if you’re stupid. Don’t be stupid.

0

InformalChain 2 days ago

fo sho, will keep that in mind. Been there seen that. There are no jobs and no life in those small rural shithole. Best.

1

xtal_00 2 days ago

I have gigabit Ethernet and live in a small rural shithole. (Comparatively) There is some irony with you being in a Bitcoin forum, but suffice to say all you need to make a lot of money is a really good internet connection and skills.

1

branbrandg 2 days ago

Feels like we need it more and more every day

6

Mark_Bear redditor for 3 months 2 days ago

If you like Freedom, buy Bitcoin.

6

10 2

gingertrees 1 week ago

Eh, we already know that pregnancy changes the brain's structure - it makes some sense that oral contraceptives could also affect it. (There are many articles about this, here's one that is not behind a paywall.)

12

AmericanLich 1 week ago

I shall now inoculate myself with every known germ to gain all immunities

3

1Delos1 1 week ago

Can't wait for the man pill to come out.

0

boraca 1 week ago

Vasectomy and freeze some for later.

0

_Ambarussa_ 1 week ago

Men will never be expected to put up with the side effects women have. Although on the other hand, they wouldn't be the ones getting pregnant (pregnancy is probably way worse than the pill for most women).

4

AlexTheGreat 1 week ago

Many women also derive other benefits from the pill which would be unlikely to be present for a male contraceptive.

5

pj3lly 1 week ago

What are the other benefits besides the primary one?

1

LopsidedSupermarket 1 week ago

For some women it makes their boobs bigger.

2

BetterThanICould 1 week ago

It can help manage PMS, period pain, acne, and endometriosis. There may be other things too that I don’t know about or have forgotten.

4

pj3lly 1 week ago

Thanks for the insightful reply!

1

richardpway 1 week ago

Normally women are attracted to individuals who have different immunity genes than themselves. It is thought that they can smell the difference, and by doing so increase the chance their children will be healthier. But women taking 'The Pill' have been shown to be attracted to individuals with the same immunity genes. This could explain why. When women stop taking the Pill they change back their non pill attraction after a few months.

15

mgtowboy_29 1 month ago

TLDR - Women who take birth control pills have 6% smaller size of Hypothalamus.

This brain part works on involuntary functions, body temperature, appetite and emotions.

The university researchers say birth control pills are not the exact reason why it’s so small. But they just see it’s small for women who take the pills.

3

YosonLongwood 1 month ago

Holy shit Borat was right!

1

thesoupissewsew 1 month ago

Some excerpts from the article:

On average, the women taking the pill had a hypothalamus that was about 6% smaller than it was in women not taking the pill, the study found. For a brain region, "that's a pretty sizable difference," Lipton said.

...exactly what the effects of a smaller hypothalamus might be are not entirely clear, Lipton said. The study shows that women taking the pill do not have smaller brains overall and that their mental abilities are not affected. However, the researchers did find that a smaller hypothalamus is associated with increased anger and symptoms of depression.

But Lipton cautions that these are preliminary findings from a small study and don't prove cause and effect. In other words, the researchers cannot prove that birth control pills directly cause a smaller hypothalamus.

It's still too early to conclude how oral contraceptives affect the brain, if at all, Lipton said. "We're not saying that people should run out and throw away their birth control pills," he said. If anything, the results may simply point to a question that warrants more research, he added.

3

Jailbreaker2133 1 month ago

What is the connection to Islam?

4

Ken_Mishima_450 1 month ago

This is interesting, but why have you posted this here?

5

resipisence 1 month ago

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0941950018301763

Mood lability was less severe in oral contraceptive (OC) users compared to non-users (d = .30).

Non-users reported more frequent mood lability occurrences than OC users (d = .41).

OC users reported higher relationship satisfaction levels than non-users (d = .31).

Mood instability mediated the OC-relationship satisfaction association.

Mood instability accounted for 44% of the variance in relationship satisfaction.

7

Inductivist 1 month ago

So assuming the two studies are correct, women using contraceptives are angrier and more depressed but in a steady fashion, so it appears the men can handle reliable bitchiness over being bi-polar.

1

pene_grande_ghost 1 month ago

Ah that explains what's wrong with the women in my life.

1

katakanbr 1 month ago

Whores BTFO

3

HotelMohelHolidayInn 1 month ago

Maybe it's not getting around (putting it lightly) that make women lose the ability to bond with men & children but birth control pills?

For me, I believe it could be both.

6

Ynlinga 1 month ago

Probably both.

3

8 1 2

telios87 1 day ago

This is what multiple identities are for.

7

TheImpossible1 Materially Incompatible 1 day ago

Never wanted to book with them anyway.

7

lhturbo 2 weeks ago

Shit I only have reddit... guess I’ll be banned

1

DasKapitalist 2 weeks ago

If you arent milquetoast, you're engaging in wrongthink and cant be trusted!

2

thought_first 2 weeks ago

This assumes that people have social media accounts.

Cynicism tells me that you won't be allowed to use online services without evidence of an approved social media account in the near future.

24

outrunningman 2 weeks ago

Paranoids have been saying that for years. Any little story comes out and they start conflating the US with a communist regime. It's absurd. If you think the US is 99% the same as China then go live there for awhile. Let us know how similar it is.

0

thought_first 2 weeks ago

Not sure who you're replying to. I haven't mentioned China. Nothing conflated here, just taking a logical walk through requisites for this tech to be implemented or useful.

10

skeyer 2 weeks ago

> This assumes that people have social media accounts. > > presumably the same if your account is non-public?

7

idreamaboutaliens 2 weeks ago

1984 is quickly upon us.

7

Albion_Tourgee 2 weeks ago

In China, whether you can book a flight depends on your social credit score, measuring your degree of social compliance. In the Airbnb world, whether you can book a room is about to depend on some unnamed measure of your degree of social noncomplaince.

One calls its standard civic virtue, the other calls its standard likelihood you're a psychopath, or even, neurotic.

Welcome to the future, and don't think it's not yours.

17

MermanFromMars 2 weeks ago

Am I supposed to be concerned that someone may be vetting public information for people they are letting into their homes? These aren't hotels that have 75 rooms where if some party trashes one it's not an extreme burden on the hotel to replace generic mass ordered furniture as they work through the legal process to charge them. Many of these units are people's homes and if they're destroyed by bad actors they can be placed in significant hardship having to deal with it.

0

Albion_Tourgee 2 weeks ago

I agree, screening is important. The article isn't about that, it's about how Airbnb is planning to do it. For example, internet users who "have “authored online content with negative language” will be marked down." I'm sure this predicts negative reviews about Airbnb much better than it predicts likelihood of trashing a rental.

5

damnthistrafficjam 2 weeks ago

Does that mean I’m going to have to take down the picture of my needlepoint that says “Fuck this Shit”?

2

MermanFromMars 2 weeks ago

The article is about that, Airbnb is a company for placing temporary renters into people’s homes to stay. Destructive parties and whatnot have become an immense problem for the service as unit owners don’t have the resources of a major hotel to deal with it and it commonly involves their personal belongings and home.

1

tencentismydaddy 2 weeks ago

google your name... there are already tons of sites that assign you a social score.

2

safebrowseatwork 2 weeks ago

China gets social credit systems backed by the state. The west gets social credit systems backed by capitalism and established by corporations.

Is this really that different from what China is doing? We’re not far away.

4

TurdlyBobbit 2 weeks ago

Yes, because a competing company could be allowed to do business a different way than Air BnB.

6

jackattack729 2 weeks ago

Barriers to entry can prevent competition. Just see the Uber and Lyft share of the ridesharing industry and both of them have a rating system for drivers and passengers.

6

7 3

8 2

dylanstacey05 2 days ago

Oh god https://www.imperial.ac.uk/news/194815/coronavirus-outbreak-china-have-infected-thousands

2

dylanstacey05 2 days ago

He wasn’t even in Wuhan when he got it, and it took him quite a while for him to show symptoms, he was just smart enough to report it to authorities once he started to show similar symptoms. I’m very worried about the incubation period, as we may have ticking time bombs globally currently.

5

borgchupacabras 2 days ago

They don't mention what city...

3

pflanz 2 days ago

The patient is now in Providence Hospital in Everett.

11

thepolishpen 2 days ago

Yeah, not much info.

2

Joshru 2 days ago

Why aren’t they screening SeaTac arrivals from China? Ridiculous.

4

pflanz 2 days ago

They are now.

1

borgchupacabras 2 days ago

Do they even have screening parameters? I haven't been keeping track of this news.

2

thepolishpen 2 days ago

They’ve just been scanning passengers with thermal scanners.

1

Joshru 2 days ago

They’re screening at airports in California, NYC, Atlanta, and others. I do not know why they are not doing that at SeaTac, which is very close to China and has a lot of Asian traffic...

3

pflanz 2 days ago

They literally ARE screening at SeaTac. Multiple articles point this out. This fellow just got in before the screening was deployed. China is, yet again, not being transparent about this outbreak. That makes getting containment countermeasures in place a bit harder but they’re in place now.

1

tovarish22 2 days ago

Beat me to submitting, haha. good catch! Should be an interesting case to follow

3

Mstolly 2 days ago

I think this is going to be a much more significant event than SARS. With the number of countries reporting patients and the report of one patient infecting 14 healthcare workers, it sounds like it’s easily transmitted. I hope I’m wrong!

2

gnu6969 2 days ago

Super-spreaders are known from SARS as well though, also involving healthcare workers, so this means nothing. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super-spreader#SARS\_outbreak\_2003](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super-spreader#SARS_outbreak_2003) "Despite his symptoms, he traveled to Hong Kong to attend a family wedding. He stayed on the ninth floor of the Metropole Hotel in [Kowloon](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kowloon), infecting 16 other hotel guests also staying on that floor (pictured above). The guests then traveled to Canada, Singapore, Taiwan, and Vietnam, spreading SARS to those locations and transmitting what became a global epidemic.[\[16\]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super-spreader#cite_note-16) In another case during this same outbreak, a 54-year-old male was admitted to a hospital with coronary heart disease, chronic renal failure and type two diabetes. He had been in contact with a patient known to have SARS. Shortly after his admission he developed fever, cough, myalgia and sore throat. The admitting physician suspected SARS. The patient was transferred to another hospital for treatment of his coronary artery disease. While there, his SARS symptoms became more pronounced. Later, it was discovered he had transmitted SARS to 33 other patients in just two days. He was transferred back to the original hospital where he died of SARS." [https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/10/2/03-0732\_article](https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/10/2/03-0732_article) "Superspreading was defined as transmission of SARS to at least eight contacts. An index patient with onset of SARS 2 months after hospital admission was the source of four generations of transmission to 76 case-patients, including 12 healthcare workers and several hospital visitors. Four (5%) case circumstances met the superspreading definition." There's a lot more out there.

2

Mstolly 2 days ago

Good point, super-spreaders did create significant clusters during the SARS outbreak but they are the anomaly. I think of probabilities. What is the likelihood that one of the first 100 people infected is a super-spreader? It’s too early to tell but the fact that this has already proven highly contagious doesn’t mean nothing.

1

tovarish22 2 days ago

Yeah, I definitely want more into on the patient who they say infected 14 HCWs. Admittedly, I haven't had time in the last week to read any literature coming out about it from the reporting agencies, but 14 contact infections seems awfully high. Not good.

3

Tremolat 2 days ago

"A Chinese Hoax!" - Trump, probably

0

TurdlyBobbit 2 days ago

“It’s Trumps fault!” - Reddit, always

1

Modeerfina 2 days ago

A person in Washington State is infected with a new respiratory virus. The outbreak began at a market in China and now has spread to at least four other countries.

2

AutoModerator BOT 2 days ago

Hi Modeerfina. Your submission from nytimes.com is behind a metered paywall. A metered paywall allows users to view a specific number of articles before requiring paid subscription. Articles posted to /r/worldnews should be accessible to everyone. While your submission was not removed, it has been flaired and users are discouraged from upvoting it or commenting on it. For more information see our wiki page on paywalls. Please try to find another source. If there is no other news site reporting on the story, contact the moderators.

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

2

7 2

Crypto_Today Redditor for 10 months 2 days ago

Hell yea! XRP is here to stay 💪

1

mksm1228 2 days ago

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/b7e8hq/psa_do_not_use_bitpay_under_any_circumstances

Even the bitcoin community hates bitpay.

0

canthinkof123 Redditor for 7 months 2 days ago

Do you pay taxes on profit if you buy a gift card directly with XRP without changing to fiat first?

0

mrjadez 2 days ago

Yes. Of course.

0

mrjadez 1 day ago

Those downvoting me care to elaborate what country you from where it is not taxed, crypto to fiat (gift card of fiat value or any item of fiat value bought via gains)?

1

LoafieCat 1 ~ 2 years account age. 50 - 80 comment karma. 2 days ago

Tiff Hayden is on a terror read her posts you have to question if XRP ever goes up (even though she says she is long) caveat she has been around since 2015, so should be well off.

0

fireeeebg 2 ~ 3 years account age. 150 - 250 comment karma. 2 days ago

So fuckin what? What is the big deal? I can buy now Amazon gift card with xrp but the big question remains albeit what is the incentive to do so!

0

onetimeonly1zwo3 2 days ago

Isn't it saver to pay with e.g. XRP than to use your credit card?

0

misterscorp Redditor for 11 months 2 days ago

Why are you here then? I truly believe some join here just to start and talk shit about XRP and everything associated with it.

3

Paulbearraw Redditor for 27 days 2 days ago

Awesome!

2

Self_illusion 2 days ago

This is huge

19

FBryant87 1 day ago

Can we get a good answer as to why it's huge?

5

Self_illusion 1 day ago

I've bought flights with bitpay and even a laptop. Good mobile hot wallet

2

mksm1228 2 days ago

Why would u purchase giftcards using xrp over using fiat? This isnt what xrp was designed for. Not sure why its huge.

0

XRPMetal Redditor for 4 months 2 days ago

Its huge because when xrp is worth $100, a gift card would cost you 1XRP ;).. its HUGE if your invested.. if not, not so much!

1

trueblueozguy 2 days ago

[https://ripple.com/insights/how-blockchain-and-crypto-meet-growing-sme-demand/](https://ripple.com/insights/how-blockchain-and-crypto-meet-growing-sme-demand/)

1

mksm1228 2 days ago

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/b7e8hq/psa_do_not_use_bitpay_under_any_circumstances

0

hakuna_m4t4t4 Redditor for 5 months 2 days ago

Is it though?

0

trueblueozguy 2 days ago

Yes, that's another argument in favour of XRP being a commodity; one of the two advisors of Bitpay is ex-SEC chairman. XRP would have gone through rigorous compliance procedures.

20

TheCruzKing 2 days ago

Is it?

0