justonenote

Does Firefox route WebRTC through a socks proxy? Does it leak your locally configured IP when WebRTC is initiated?

Even if the specific case of Firefox can be configured correctly and you have the source to verify that's it only sending traffic over the socks proxy, manually configuring every app to use a socks proxy is brittle and error pone, and for some apps just won't work.

Much more straightforward to just have a system wide VPN as the only available route for outbound traffic so that all apps use it transparently.

Bots will "snipe" hyped up releases of NFTs or tokens, using various techniques depending on the chain. On ethereum and most others the miners participate in this in exchange for a tip (usually an open market where people can bid to be first in line). Since miners produce the blocks they can order the transactions however they want and put the highest tipper first.

The goal is just the same as ticket scalping. The botters/snipers will just list the the asset on the market immediately at anywhere from 2x-10x the original sale price.

At its peak during NFT mania there were tips of millions of dollars being paid in tips to miners to buy up 75% of the supply of an extremely anticipated NFT collection for another couple of million dollars ( the sale price ) and still coming out in profit.

I agree. I can imagine a future where default internet access is highly curated by some local trusted group (at whatever scale, with whatever trust model, maybe state maybe community). While the open internet would be still accessible, access is not the default and perhaps you need some kind of approval or license to go into the wasteland of the open public internet.

Downvoted comment but it's not completely wrong.

While NFT sales and token releases on ethereum and other chains with smart contracts are absolutely botted and scalped/sniped very aggressively, there has been a lot experimentation on how to avoid this. Whitelists are one (bad, IMO) solution, various type of auctions are a fairer solution that aren't that popular in crypto because people are mostly interested in flipping the asset rather than obtaining it at a fair market price.

For things like tickets to a concert or things that people actually want to keep/consume, auctions make a lot of sense.

What something bottom up, transparent in rules and reward structure and able to iterate quickly instead of something top down?

Also agree with the GP.

Specifically I am talking about the inaccurate model that there is no sex differences and the idea of male and female genders are socially constructed.

If you accept a couple of other facts its even worse.

Presuming you accept iq or related tests of cognitive ability as useful, (even if not capturing the entirety of human qualities) and you accept that males have higher variance in cognitive abilities, more around the extremes of low and high cognitive abilities, whereas women on average fall closer to the mean, then if higher education was based on ability you would expect to see more men in higher education.

This is if course, verboten speak. I think as a society we have a lot to unpack.

I think there is a lot of evidence that using terms like "cis men" is the more poisonous attitude in the current day.

GNC folks are not the norm. The clue is in the name. It's all well and good to let people choose things for themselves but young people need guidance, not a divisive and inaccurate model of the world pushed on them.

Regardless of the specific case of the laptop, it is beyond naive to think that every incidence of corruption that is known about is pursued in court.

Even non-political figures who are known to be corrupt will not be prosecuted or pursued because of the difficulty of securing a conviction or simply priorities and limited resources.

When it comes to people to with powerful political connections, you are talking a different level of 'difficulty pursing this case'.

Regardless of how outlandish this seems, this idea and the similar idea of uploading yourself into an exact digital copy to live forever don't seem too appealing to me, for the obvious reason that it's a copy of you, you (the original) would still exist, and die, so what's the benefit to you?

I don't think I'd like knowing that that there was an exact copy of me living on while I (the original) dies. And it seems incredibly egotistical that you would think this is a net good for anybody, that it's worth having a clone of yourself (no matter how exact) living on, and taking up resources etc.

Do we really have to go over the history of ideas that were once considered falsehoods but are now accepted as truth?

Your argument rests on the presumption that we have some kind of Oracle that can divine true information from false.

> rooted out and treated like the cancer you're choosing to be

It's cool that you think humans have changed in nature significantly from the time of the Inquisitions, but when you speak like this about people it's pretty clear we haven't.

> it means you need to accept that you don't control people.

This is absolutely the correct take, but also an idea that is unconscionable to the majority of people in government and other institutions involved in setting policies today.

> 700 000 individuals in Finland

That would be a very large amount of 'local areas' with the contaminant no?

You could also argue that it could be that it's a quasar pointing at them which is causing it, at some point you have to use Occam's razor and say that the correlation and causation are, in fact, related.

Seems to be a bit of cope in the comments because of what these results would imply for certain demographics. Otoh, contagion of ideas like scientology, other cults and other maladaptive behaviours are completely accepted.

That is the choice that is given to them. Despite all the technology we have for direct communication, data analysis etc, you cannot vote for issues individually, only personalities who if your lucky might follow through on one of their promises about an issue you care about but mostly just politick and look out for their party, themselves and their backers interest. You can't really blame people for not getting involved when that is the state of play. Politics is essentially a game show on the surface and nepotism and self-interest underneath.

What about the people further down the chain getting less and less? Presumably that doesn't bother you either.

It seems like you weren't really asking an objective question of 'why this is happening' but rather a subjective one of 'why should I care, I'm doing fine'

It's a valid question, why should you care, if you are doing well in this moment. I can't answer it for you.

You may be getting richer in dollar denominated value, and you may even be getting richer in purchasing power for assets right now, but if asset prices (say housing) are increasing 10%-15% year on year can you maintain that 'getting richer'?

Also from the sounds of it, and the fact you are both on HN and doing well in the market right now, implies you are in a pretty good position, compared to the general population.

To answer your question more directly, the market is doing well because both the metrics and mechanics of markets are heavily heavily gamed. The 1 trillion dollars that is being added to the US debt is going _somewhere_. You happen to be getting a piece of it which you think is great (understandably), but you can be assured that there are many people above you in the chain getting much bigger pieces, and people lower in the chain getting less and less.

A dog hanging around the table of warlords will be a lot better fed than the dogs whos owners just got their harvest taken from them.

Of course you need a trust anchor. How would would it work otherwise?!

If you can come up with a system where we could just all imagine up the same blockchain code, parameters, and have the code magically appear on our machines to run, that would be cool, but seems not really possible to me?

OTOH, what you can do with bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies, is download the code, review it, see if you agree to the rules laid out in the code, and if so, run it, and participate.

If you don't have the technical knowledge to do this, like 99.99% of people, you can delegate that trust of verifying and explaining it, to someone of your choosing.

No-one is expecting on-chain ledgers to solve off-chain trust. What they can do is make the process more transperant, more decentralized, and give people a much wider choice. You might look at this as competition. Alternatively you might sit on hn and hope to get a job in ad-tech.

Of course its very different than normal entities being in debt, since the government is ostensibly an arm of the people, who's income comes from taxing the populace.

But it _is_ still debt right? It is still money owed. It is still money that was spent by the government by taking loans and promising to pay back those loans, again on behalf of the people.

Once in a while, might be worth questioning who they borrowed the money from, what they spent it on, and who they chose to spend it with. Rather than just blindly repeat the pithy line, "but its not the same as regulars people's debt".

The fact the gov can go 34 trillion in debt and a normal Joes Garage can't is actually pretty obvious to people already.