makeasnek

makeasnek OP , 2 days ago (edited 2 days ago)

Check the wikipedia article, pretty neutral and factual reporting on the history. TLDR he revealed the US committing war crimes, they went after him with everything they had including planning an assassination attempt (which they never went through with). They tried to apply US law internationally to somebody who wasn't a US citizen and wasn't in the US. The UN said his detainment was illegal and torture. He's been on the run, in some embassy, or jail for over 10 years for activity other news organizations regularly and legally engage in (leaking classified documents). Various US military, intelligence, etc agency heads have testified to congress that they couldn't find a single death related to the documents he leaked, he didn't put anybody at risk, in fact, Wikileaks sent every leak to the US govt before leaking it asking them for notes on what to redact. The US refused to participate in that process.

He also revealed the DNC was trying to bury Bernie, which the DNC didn't even deny, they had to let a bunch of their top people go and do a bunch of primary reforms as a result. That's when liberals started hating Wikileaks, because the DNC emails helped get Trump elected. They say the "timing" of right before the election makes his leak partisan. But wouldn't you want that information before you vote? It is the job of wikileaks, or any journalist, to maximize the impact of information they are revealing on corruption. It's not Julian's fault the DNC was corrupt AF, all they had to do to avoid that was... not be corrupt.

There were also some sex assault allegations against him, which I tend to believe have some veracity to them however the accusers explicitly did not want him charged, it was a ploy to get him to Sweden where he would be extradited to the US. He was never even charged, only "wanted to questioning" but somehow got an interpol notice for it. His lawyers offered over a dozen times for him to be interviewed but Sweden insisted on an "in-person" interview for some reason. Curious.

Oh, and he helped save Snowden's life by getting him a flight out of China.

makeasnek , 2 days ago (edited 2 days ago)

Bitcoin transactions happen at the “speed of light” (~27:00) REALITY CHECK: As Bitcoin has grown, transactions have become slow. It’s in fact why many people do not accept it for purchases anymore.

Bitcoin is the same speed it's always been. Blocks happen every 10 minutes. The transaction is transmitted at the speed of light but final settlement requires a block. Pay a high fee? Get in on the next block. Want to save on fees? Maybe it takes a few blocks for your transaction to go through. If you use Bitcoin lightning (a scaling layer built on top of Bitcoin which moves transactions off-chain but secures them on-chain), transactions take under a second for pennies in fees. Fees are much, much lower than credit card, paypal, or other similar competitors. You could send a billion dollars in a single transaction and pay $1.50 on main chain, or you could send $5 on lightning and pay <1c in fees. Lightning has been around for 5 years now, it works, I use it regularly.

Bitcoin cannot be diluted (~27:25) REALITY CHECK: Bitcoin is always being diluted until it reaches its hard limit.

The supply of Bitcoin, 21 million coins, is known and has always been known. It can't be diluted beyond that point.

Nobody controls the network (~28:25) REALITY CHECK: If someone were to own 50% or more of the network’s compute power, they could control the network.

Nobody owns 51% of the network. Even such an actor can't print extra BTC or force money to move without the appropriate private key. The best they can do is temporarily delay transactions while burning north of a trillion dollars in energy and equipment doing so. Which is why nobody has ever done it.

Bitcoin’s hard limit is likely very dangerous for the network (~29:00): Once the hard limit is reached, it is unclear if people will keep pumping computing power at it. If the creation of new Bitcoin is no longer allowed, it is possible that transaction fees will need to be raised to compensate miners.

Given that fees have continued to increase with time, this seems like not a problem. It's not "dangerous", it's part of the design. If hashrate drops, it drops, but given that fees and hashrate have continued to grow despite continually minting less coins, it's not really a problem.

Bitcoin’s lack of rules allow for massive amounts of fraud and prevents effective taxation (~29:25): While the video paints a cute picture of financial freedom, the reality is that Bitcoin allows for fraud on a world scale and does not allow for sales tax because of the way that anyone can have a cryptocurrency wallet without disclosing their identity.

Anybody can have a cash wallet without disclosing their identity, yet they still pay taxes. Bitcoin's rules prevent the kind of fraud where the value of your money is printed away via supply inflation of central banks or "currency restructuring" on the global scale by the the world bank. People pay taxes because they think it's the right thing to do and/or because the government has guns and makes them. Either way, if you run a company, if you are providing goods and services, you have a place you can send somebody with a gun and enforce those rules. All the companies currently paying taxes would keep paying taxes if they used Bitcoin.

makeasnek , 8 days ago (edited 7 days ago)

They want to ban porn in the entire country, it's all a part of #project2025. They also want to ban abortions. And being gay in public. And completely break the separation of church and state. Don't sit this election out. https://defeatproject2025.org/

makeasnek , 4 months ago

Hardware signing devices have lots of utility because they keep the key from ever being on the machine (which is more likely to be compomised). Think ledger or trezor for your Bitcoin. Hardware encryption devices are just really expensive and black-box ways to avoid Veracrypt.

If your encryption algorithm is secure, you have no use for automatic lock-out. If it's not, automatic lockout won't do much against an attacker with physical access to the device. Unless they are dumb enough to trigger the lockout AND the internal memory wipes itself sufficiently well AND/OR the attacker doesn't have the resources to reverse engineer the device.

makeasnek OP , 4 months ago

This is exactly why I won’t use Nostr. What you’re describing here isn’t ideal for many folk that are part of marginalised groups. When each individual has to individually block every bigot only after being exposed to their bigotry, then the vulnerable folk don’t hang around. This is doubly the case when there is nothing stopping the bigots from just creating another account after burning their first one.

In Nostr, each relay can set its own policies. Relays can and do establish policies for acceptable behaviours. If you want a strict content policy, connect to relays with strict policies. You won't have to individually block any users or relays/instances. This is essentially the same as mastodon. The difference with nostr is that you normally connect to multiple relays, so a single relay, where your identity is tied to, cannot block you from following who you want and seeing whatever content you choose. Let's say Relay A blocks a user you want to follow. No problem, you are connected to relay B and C that don't. And, of course, if for some reason you only want to connect to a single relay, you can.

This is also something that activitypub communities do better, because they are communities not relays.

"Hope our commmunity of users donate" didn't work out well for the previous iteration of P2P discussion spaces: forums. The fact is, hosting online discussion forums gets costly quickly, especially if you want them to be reliable. Hell, even IRC servers which serve only text can get expensive to host. I'm not saying there's no way to convince users to donate to valuable instances, just saying that as a general strategy for FOSS it hasn't worked particularly well.

makeasnek OP , 4 months ago

The default setup for snort (most popular nostr portal) blocks all crypto-related discussion by default. The crypto bro problem was apparently worse back in the early launch days, but it's gotten much better.

makeasnek OP , 4 months ago

But user have to be technically minded enough, and willing, to set up a crypto wallet to do this.

True. That would be true of any platform which allows tips, you'd have to connect to some source of money whether it be paypal or crypto. Paypal's fees would be prohibitively expensive but it would be theoretically doable. Either way, it's a <5 minute setup process if they care to do it.

Interesting I didn't know AP supported E2E. I guess it's Mastodon that doesn't support that element of the AP protocol then?

makeasnek OP , 4 months ago

But people already have Paypal and understand how to use it. Most people don’t understand cryptocurrency, and don’t want anything to do with it because of its association with scams.

At one point they didn't, and they had to sign up and learn how to use it. But your critique is fair. It's an optional feature, you don't have to use it. The benefit from the platform perspective is that the fees are stupid low so micropayments can work well. Like 1c on $5 low. And it makes it easier to do the payments internationally. Microtransaction tips really couldn't be done with Paypal or really any other competitive non-crypto system.

Also, I looked in to Nostr a bit for this and do you seriously think profile links like this will catch on with people?

The nostr username schema isn't great. There's a couple protocol proposals to simplify them, they will look a lot more like [email protected] in the future. AP currently is doing way better at this. I'll add this to the list in the post of places where AP is better.

makeasnek OP , 4 months ago

You don't have to do anything with crypto, it just supports crypto integration if you want to tip other users. Just like reddit did. It's an optional feature.

makeasnek Mod , 7 months ago

I'm working on !boinc and !gridcoin . BOINC is a tool used by scientists to distribute computational workloads to the computers of volunteers, Gridcoin is a cryptocurrency which issues rewards for people who use BOINC (like mining crypto but for science instead of hashes). I'm not a direct dev on either project, but I code tools which make those projects easier to use, write documentation, etc.