Warmer... but not quite. Governments are defined by a monopoly on force. Whoever distinguishes "murder" from "homicide" is the government, and that government's territory stretches as far as those definitions are in effect.
I don't wish you ill, but I wish you and your ideas had no effect on me. Which is more to the point - you are focusing on the wrong part of the problem. Trust and disinformation isn't the problem, the problem is the second order effects. It would be easier to reduce the potential damage that useful idiots and victims of propaganda can do to everyone else, than it would be to pull off the impossible trust+anonymity+benevolentFed scheme.
> I'm not here to advocate either way for anonymity
Is trust and anonymity somehow disconnected in your mind? Before you answer that, I'll point out that I didn't say pseudo-anonymity.
> No problems with my CAC, despite OPM's failure.
So you're either a post breach boot or you haven't yet noticed a personal impact. While I've never had the desire, due to the contents of my OPM file, I could never do any business in China under my own name without drawing a disruptive amount of attention. That may or may not be a problem in the future, nobody can say. But it can be said it should have never happened in the first place, as there was ample well reasoned warning and precedent. Anybody else remember the clipper chip? What about that "golden key" stupidity?
Whatever policy Facebook has at the moment is completely beside the point. What you are talking about would require the force of law. This proposal has been floated numerous times, tying online activity to a federally issued identifier.
So the death of anonymity. I already hear the defenders of such a proposal: "If you don't want to give Facebook your federally issued ID then you still have the darkweb!" Followed by an endless stream of hit pieces equating everyone fleeing to non-privacy invasive platforms as nazis/pedos, and mobs of idiots demanding that infrastructure providers null-route wrong-thinkers.
Are you sure that really want a CAC? The OPM gave my biometrics and SSB to China, as well as every other military/gov employee. Except the CIA - the only one who managed to fight off the administrative record merge. If only they didn't draw so heavily from the veteran pool...
The "diversity and inclusion" pundits seem to be aware of the fact that Asians are on the outs with the grievance crowd. We can't even be sure who they're talking about here, are the Asians in question able to legally show up for work in California? It seems silly to have to ask, but that is how silly things are right now - the DoJ is currently going after SpaceX because a guy complained that he wasn't hired due to the fact that he isn't a lawful permanent resident.
They definitely don't, and it is no accident that they've maintained a state of uncertainty. After the B-cash hardfork created a potential taxable event, the IRS refused to release any kind of guidance or warning for how they'd classify things - and there is a massive difference between short and long term capital gains tax. But they can't outright ban it, because development would continue outside the country. It would be a crippling self inflicted wound, because there will be a strong need in the near future for what bitcoin provides. In a world of autonomous software agents (short of self aware AI), meat space money won't work - due to clawbacks and human deceit. They'll eventually try a push for some kind of Fedcoin, but that will turn out the same way it did when the Canadians tried it. Until then they'll continue mounting their resistance at the fiat interface points.
Marketers aren't trying to match you up with products that meet some unfulfilled need you have, they are trying to get you to buy anything in the very limited window available to them. You seem to be under the impression that they'll maximize that opportunity by presenting you with something you'd find useful. There are more effective ways to sell, with an enormous amount of research dedicated to perfecting the process. Unsurprisingly, the result of such efforts - unbounded by any sense of morality, are pretty disgusting. Depression. Depressed people make the best consumers. That is what they are looking for when they're tracking your off-site activity. Do you imagine they are above trying to induce depression?
Oops, that is the other one - "digital gold". The litecoin people really latched onto that one, declaring themselves to be silver. There was already a digital gold a few year before bitcoin (something about an eagle, or the Liberty Bell...), it was a gold backed paypal that was quickly destroyed by the feds. So no, bitcoin isn't "digital gold".
> It's closer to digital beanie babies than any sort of serious currency.
And then he flushed any possibility for a good faith argument away. What, are keeping your powder dry on the tulip mania line? I'm long past the evangelical phase on bitcoin, but back when I was doing that (when it was trading in the double digits) - I heard the exact same thing. Merchants would adopt and then quickly abandon, money transmitters would welcome and then ban... and banks would just ban. I was de-banked before it was cool. I mourn the opening of crypto trade desks at the likes of Goldman Sachs more than most, because my first exposure to bitcoin was on the cypherpunks mailing list, but that doesn't mean that bitcoin failed. The comparison to beanie babies is laughably moronic.
I've been hearing plenty of accusations of pump and dump, with no further examination. So I don't think that opinion is underrepresented. It is effectively noise anyway, because the same can be said of any investment.
Because it isn't an either or scenario. I'm sure they are concerned about not having a chair when the music stops. But their relationship with Citadel (who has been fined for thing like frontrunning) can't be ignored. All their incentives go in the opposite direction from their users.
Well we could continue stacking assumption upon assumption, with regard to conspiracy, but it looks a little goofy. But who knows, maybe this will be one time Wall Street wasn't the one conspiring, and it was in fact a shadowy flash mob puppet master who executed an uncoordinated attack through emergent behavior. And then we'll finally find the Russian hooker piss tapes.
That is a weird assumption to make about wsb types, who have a sizable overlap with the crypto-currency folks - who are keenly aware of counterparty risk and the function of clearinghouses.
Nope, the narrative has been building for the last two days that this was all perpetrated by fascist white supremacist deplorables... so it is no mystery which side Democrats will pick. Republicans will do the same for more classically stereotypical reasons.
Well those private companies wouldn't be seen as "supporting" anybody, if they behaved with any level of consistency and transparency. It is a problem of their own making, with every virtue signal further compounding expectations. I suspect that the majority of people you hate probably have phone numbers and receive mail, but I don't believe that AT&T and UPS "support" them - because those companies don't pull these stupid stunts. Debanking is starting to get normalized... and the new liberal battle cry is "private companies!"
> zstd is now standard and the default on openzfs 2.0, replacing lz4.
Are you sure? The default compression level has always been "off", but when switched on - the default has been lz4 for about 5 years. Zstd support was added less than a year ago and there are still a lot of things that need to be fixed before one could even suggest that it might be a sane default. I like zstd, but I like my uncorrupted data more. I know that compatibility between compressor versions and pools is a concern, and there are also the compression performance problems with the way zstd handles zfs block sizes. Thankfully lz4 works great for zfs and has for many years now.
A phrase made meaningless by its universal applicability. Blizzard management was upset about their inability to control everyone associated with them? Play stupid games...
Don't appreciate someone pointing out the fact that "Play stupid games" is mouth noise? Play stupid games...
The Allen Brack letter wasn't that long ago, have we already forgotten our prizings? I wonder how that fiasco would have gone down if it was a 10% stake, instead of 5%. It would be pretty hard to top getting an American CEO to claim Chinese copy as his own in a publicity crisis management letter... addressing a Chinese censorship publicity crisis.
Maybe it is because I've never worked in the valley, but I can't think of a positive 401k plan experience. I do remember a lot of onboarding powerpoint with regards to penalties and limitations. The whole thing feels coercive, having to participate in the market when you aren't interested in managing the position - simply to protect your savings from intentionally set inflation rates. All those "unsophisticated investors" (no joke, that is what they call you) are arguably the cause of the dot-com bubble as well, not because people were daytrading pets.com, but because fund managers had to put that surge of disinterested capital somewhere. I imagine that if powerpoint was around back in the day, the guys managing company store credit schemes would have functioned much like today's HR reps.
My formal education isn't even close to CS, zero overlap, but I've been paid to write software for the majority of my work history. I'm an autodidact, and I wouldn't change the path I took to get where I am, but I am keenly aware of one major point of weakness: it is what Donald Rumsfeld would describe as "unknown unknowns". Yes, I initially saved a lot of time by skipping the breadth and diving right into the depth, but I'm not so sure about the time savings in the long run. I remember one conversation I had with a well lettered friend (working on his second doctorate at the time), I was bragging about a predictive algorithm I'd spent a week or two on - and its remarkable accuracy. After he listened to me describe it in detail, he asked "... so, Poisson regression?"
While I was relieved to find that my implementation still outperformed the off the shell variety, simply being aware of its existence would have saved me a lot of time.
Or Madagascar, or Iceland! Having the foresight to occupy an isolated location with a small population is really paying dividends. All those incompetent countries, with their highly interconnected economies and lack of natural barriers... Real 4d chess, keeping their GDPs low all these years - but they won, not just internet points - but maybe a monopoly on the world's supply of elderly!
That would be a little difficult to pull off at the municipal level. The federal government doesn't even fully implement that strategy, which is why we are unlikely to ever see systemic fixes for consumer data protection at the Federal level (that doesn't involve barriers to entry that favor established industry).
"...police are strongly addictive personalities... Surveillance & control are drugs, ones that they are not capable of putting down."
That is insightful, when you acknowledge the fact that it is actually part of the human condition? Okey-dokey. If you mean "equality under the law" then I have good news: no need to wait for robotization - we are already have that equality (unless you want to marry a tree, sue a massive corporation, or some other edge case). True equality would be the end of us all, the death of art, the halt of social progress. Any action that could yield a change to one's circumstances would need to be coordinated and executed with every other human at the same time. I can't think of a scenario where that could happen that doesn't involve a complete loss of personal identity.
Well yeah, that is the solution that was arrived upon hundreds of years ago, and has been the norm ever since. Like Churchill said, democracy is the worst form of government - except for all the others. Declaring cops to be inherently powermad junkies is not an expression of accountability, it is a flawed value judgement that can only serve to justify very bad policy decisions (defund the police!).