d110af5ccf

I don't think you need to. With cryptocurrencies there's a need to obtain global consensus regarding where a coin is transferred from and to in order to prevent double spend. With communications you only need the ability to cryptographically verify the authenticity of the data and who published it. There's no double spend problem.

Looking at email, there is an issue with people tending towards a few large providers and with some providers refusing to federate with other ones for various reasons. The former probably isn't possible to solve directly via technical means. The latter is addressed by the described "self-authenticating" aspect. Peer to peer data transfer coupled with cryptographically based identities means an identity isn't tied to a particular provider.

> Unless you want to keep your identities separate, there is no point in having multiple accounts.

Until an instance goes down either temporarily or permanently and it was your only account. Then you'll wish you'd had a few extras. How many email addresses do you have? From how many independent providers?

Accounts aren't portable but there's no inherent reason that accounts need to map 1:1 to identities. In fact they already don't, a single identity already commonly has multiple accounts. The software just isn't aware of this fact and has no standardized way to communicate it.

> Twitter's discovery is massively better

Do you mean recommendation algorithms, or just the number of users ie network effects?

> My "identity" was not portable between instances

Your identity isn't portable between email servers either. Or between HN and Reddit. Isn't that part of what Keybase is about?

I can imagine a couple ways of achieving this but it runs into a number of thorny issues regarding namespaces. Regardless of the approach taken truly portable identities would require lots of refactoring of lots of software in a FOSS ecosystem with fairly limited developer resources available.

Merely linking identities should be much easier but still each piece of software has to support it. Simpler just to link to your other accounts in your bio the same as on any other website.

> because firms, that is to say top-down organizations can push features quickly

I'm not convinced that's the case. I think it's more an issue of resource investment. Firms are capable of funding things. Twitter at a low level barely has more "features" than email if you stop and list off what you actually need in order to do what it does. But it has reams of UX stuff built on top of the base functionality, recommendation algorithms, moderation tools, lots of servers, technicians to maintain those servers, etc, etc.

FOSS stuff is continually at a resource disadvantage in most domains.

> The problem is even greater on sites like Facebook and Twitter. There are regular news of them shutting down thousands of bot accounts.

I don't think I would ever be willing to use or recommend a service that could ban people for life in such a manner. Even with hashed biometrics, the difference between "doesn't currently have any accounts" and "not on our list of banned hashes" is minuscule.

> decrepit government infrastructure

This is a common misconception. It's a political battle regarding the extent to which the government is permitted to tabulate and link the various details of people's lives.

> could start sending money to resident citizens’ bank accounts tomorrow

That ability implies keeping and regularly querying detailed information about individuals that many here aren't comfortable with.

> Paper checks and other American-style 19th century banking relics are simply not a thing.

The system isn't as bad as you seem to be making out. Using a credit card without a chip is effectively the same thing. It's simply a claim that a numbered account has agreed to transfer you funds. Lying about that is fraud and your financial institution will have identifying details about you.

> people claiming when ineligible

Proof of personhood doesn't solve that.

> claiming on others behalf (obvious ID theft/fraud)

Proof of personhood doesn't solve that. A government assigned wallet is merely a different target than a bank account number.

> Doesn't really seem to work

What are you talking about? Multiple large businesses in the US accept crypto. You can pay Newegg for a new computer using crypto. You can transfer currency between countries using crypto as the intermediate method of exchange. What about crypto "doesn't really seem to work"?

> going through an accusation audit

"People here dislike this" or "this will probably get downvoted" is not an accusation audit. "I realize that the following objections to this idea have been raised previously" is entirely different.

> and loans without collateral

Here's my US passport, a drivers license, a picture of my home, some tax records, and you can verify all of this beyond a reasonable doubt via the various credit reporting agencies. Now hand my my $100k please. Oh BTW I don't actually have any money in the bank and I have no income and etc so you're never going to see me again and good luck collecting anything.

> Will probably end up with some people holding most of the value anyway

Yes, exactly. It's an entirely pointless exercise because it doesn't take place in a vacuum. A "great reset" is pointless regardless of your particular aims because the world is the way it is for a reason.

Presumably you trust the authors or you wouldn't be downloading it to begin with. The primary concern isn't "what if the authors are out to get me" it's "what if someone impersonates or compromises the authors".

That's pushing the analogy past where it breaks and missing the point. Take someone who has only ever written C-like code. Hand them a Scheme, maybe Racket. You expect them to initially have difficulty regardless of the quality of documentation. It's a different way of thinking about and doing things and there's a lot of it to deal with.

I actively dislike this project even though I've never used it because Common Lisp asdf is a de facto standard that's been around since forever. There's no way you fail to notice the name clash with even a cursory search. They're both software projects and they're both build tools it's scummy behavior in my view to say the least.

> > a bunch of existing code actively holds and uses multiple mutable references

> if a pure function (or block) regards all previously existing memory as one immutable region

Yes, but existing code doesn't do that. So you couldn't leverage this against existing code which is intentionally mutating shared memory. Outside of a rewrite it must continue to do so in order to function.

Unless you meant that new functions could be annotated as pure in order to avoid future errors in code not yet written?

I'm not so sure a mandatory system would go over well for C++ since many who use it want shared mutability. I'd be fine with an opt-in system of the sort D seems to be headed towards but I'm not really interested in the tight constraints imposed by Rust. I'm not writing OS kernels or crypto routines over here.

> there's basically no wheel in nature

Agreed, but V-ATPase is worth mentioning as it has a rotor and is very highly conserved. I guess it all depends on scale.

> You shouldn't read so much into a single sentence

I disagree. That sentence is unambiguous. Either that sentence is blatantly incorrect or an EDR does imply life or death. The two possibilities are mutually exclusive.

Also it's fencepost security. Doing the exact same thing because "more is better" without a concrete reason why the additional copies would change the outcome. If the outer sandbox is the same as the inner one, why wouldn't the malware break through immediately? If it's different in some way, why not apply those additional mitigations to the inner one?

I really hate this meme. The federal reserve is very much under the purview of the legislature. If the legislature isn't choosing to act in the way you would like, well, then that's a completely separate complaint. Implying that the federal reserve is somehow independent from the government is dishonest.

> How the fuck is the primary method of judging student admission to University not a government run service?

Because it's only de facto the primary method, as evidenced by MIT dropping it for a while there. They didn't need government permission to do that. Even public universities here generally have a high degree of autonomy regarding such things.

Have you seen fedi? Mastodon, Pleroma, PixelFed, ...

If you wanted to collect and publish the "top" 100 posts from a set of instances each day you could do that. I'm not sure how you would rank the posts but then I'm not sure how you would do that with a chan either.

Wait I thought distros ran one X server per logged in user account and put them on different ttys. Out of the box on Ubuntu I can log in as two separate users simultaneously and switch between those unlocked sessions as well as the login screen by changing the tty.

If you pass the GPU device node through to an LXC container I believe you can run an X or Wayland server fully inside of it but I'm not sure if changing ttys will work correctly because you might need access to more than just the GPU to handle the handoff with the kernel correctly.

Particularly given the Project Zero KVM vulnerability published a couple of days ago. It was suitable to achieve a full VM escape. https://googleprojectzero.blogspot.com/2021/06/an-epyc-escap...

Electricity plus some small premium should be tenable under any market condition. At least it works for public clouds so far even as hardware prices have fluctuated over time. There will likely always be someone who'd rather briefly rent than buy.

I do wonder if what's charged for electricity and premium can be competitive with large data centers in the long run. Amazon already has spot pricing. I expect it would be favorable for consumers with cheap electricity or who are already paying to heat their house.

I also wonder what effect renewables increasing electricity spot price volatility might have on this market in the future.

I also made the move to 100% Linux rather than move to Windows 8. Initially some games had issues but things gradually improved over time.

setjmp and longjmp are jumps, not exceptions. But sure, you can use them as part of an error handling strategy that resembles exceptions. It's lower level though. Similarly, goto isn't the same thing as a function call but you can certainly use it to that end.

Signals are similarly not exceptions, plus don't they vary significantly between POSIX and other platforms? I don't think Windows (for example) supports user space (ie non-cooperative) preemption. I recall that this caused issues for Go because the authors implement their own lightweight threads in user space.

> managing the phone in COBO or COPE mode with Android Enterprise

Better solution IMO is flash Lineage, preferably a variant with signature spoofing, and refuse to use proprietary garbage that pins certificates. If that means no streaming services or whatever it is then fine, I'll just pirate instead thank you very much. Why should I put money towards supporting things that erode my rights?

The simple(ish) solution is to install a firewall on your network and configure it to MITM all the HTTPS traffic and simply deny anything it can't MITM. I understand this to be standard practice in many corporate environments. The device/app/whatever either trusts your CA or the traffic gets blocked. I don't bother to do so myself but I think it's a good position to take. My network is mine.

"Just fork it" is dismissive and misses the point. The criticism remains valid even if the maintainers refuse to act on it for whatever reason. Even if I were to invest the time to fork the project, the criticism would _still_ remain valid as long as upstream didn't take steps to fix the problem.

> 1ns

Microsecond, perhaps. Likely millisecond. Nanosecond is faster than a single CPU instruction.