vmception

Exactly, my favorite thing about torrents (and usenet) is the community of making requests for obscure content

Have you considered a residential IP for VPN and just using the streaming services?

Slightly more expensive than normal VPN, and less likely to be blocked by the streaming services.

People need to accept that they dont have a grand purpose. Many times, companies are just checking a box and don’t want you to do your job.

Another example of this are Compliance Officers. A case strengthened New York’s at will employment statute when a compliance officer was fired for raising a compliance issue. Employee lost at trial and on appeal.

Does IEX have any liquidity or uptake yet?

DAI is primarily backed by USDC actually, and then ETH. There is a funny argument to be made about that, but you didn't make it.

My thoughts are that the MakerDAO (DAI) community existed too early and didn't have other backing options, so gravitated towards centralized collateral for their decentralized stablecoin, despite the irony.

There are newer communities of stablecoins with a similar design to DAI that chose different decentralized collateral options, and are functioning just as well.

None of them are perfect though, usually some baggage with the founding team, or a shitty governance platform. But they're working okay.

My only point here is let's just criticize the accurate thing.

USDX is a casualty of UST implosion and bad coding. People found a way to arbitrage the low value UST for something in the USDX system.

Press F to pay respects.

There are plenty of times when I don't want to use FEDwire, SWIFT, VISA, you name it. Its all dollar centric.

I have plenty of clients that only want to use SEPA (europe and some european country colonies), because they're familiar with it and for some specifically because its not dollar centric. People fear the US will try to establish jurisdiction over them or inconvenience their ability to transact now or in the future, whether that is unfounded or not. (They're not legal experts, they just have chain letters forwarded around whatsapp)

I'm sure you only want to use things that are familiar as well and would scoff at any client trying to do commerce in a system that isn't common to you.

WISE (Transferwise) has extremely arbitrary limits, holdups, freezes, opaque issues, and a ridiculous terms of service if you've ever looked. Revolut is the same way.

Western Union is expensive, and cumbersome.

Paypal is a worse version of WISE, and is known for its international issues and patch work of countries it services. Let alone arbitrary freezes.

Crypto is fast, exposure to any crypto is as short or as long as you want (worth saying because its a common imagined issue people have with using crypto because they think it'll change value alot over the time period they need it. its a very simple understanding). And people can convert it to something more liquid in their local economy with their local offramps. For many years I've basically used crypto to circumvent using international wires, the same transaction becoming a domestic wire and therefore less room for error and less arbitrary scrutiny. There are probably zero statistics on this. Client overseas pays me, I wire to USD domestically same day.

The "two-sides" were created by Roe v Wade. There were always other sides, a 50 year false dilemma where you couldn't even bring it up because "yeah but which side are you on?" Glad that's over! Kind of sad about the inconvenience for people in areas where they expected something different, and I'm moderately annoyed at the next decade where people try to recreate the two sides at the state and congressional level. But it does force room for inspiration!

Nice, they covered their ass

Yes the dates match up with this article

Its old news by a week or week and a half

That was the impression i initially got from you

Not everything bad is the same bad thing

Yeah you need to start over if you plan to continue using social media at all

You’re stuck in a filter bubble thats irrelevant to you

If you start over, dont follow the same people, dont import your contacts, dont give it the same phone number, even for one time passcodes, dont use the same email address

Yes like that

Was this a reentrancy attack though

I don’t think it counts as one, I was thinking that needs the governance contract to either recursively call itself or call an external unrelated contract

You wouldn’t want to be an investor in one that did or looked like it was doing that

But yes there are other deterrents like not optimizing share price or returns for the other shareholders, by laws, state laws, rules from the exchange you trade on and mayyybe a regulator

you can borrow from a DEX pool for a dex arb in a different pool or for the rest Of the complex transaction

I’m asking if borrowing from the dex pools itself is cheaper than borrowing from AAVE

yes, are those swap forks cheaper than using AAVE?

There are things they could have done, out of those other possibilities, decentralized exchanges probably wouldn't give them the best price at those amounts, and different ways for others to frontrun them, ensuring they got an even worse price.

> For another example, let’s say you were an employee of a retailer with the power to set a discount on certain items. You suddenly set a 100% discount on every item in the store and then buy all the inventory for $0. Try explaining to the police that you were actually fully within your legal right to do that.

But if you were the board, or the majority shareholder, it would be fine. Which is what happened here.

They borrowed money, bought a majority of the BEAN, used that BEAN to vote on their proposal to take all the money, and it passed. They kept the money, sold the BEAN, and returned the borrowed money.

FTA?

> Such flash loans have beneficial uses, including help for traders trying to capitalize on price differences between cryptocurrencies on different exchanges. In that sense, they are much like the financing that an investment bank might provide to an investment fund to make bets on different stocks or currencies.

This is their predominant use as well.

If you bid up the price of something on Sushiswap, that also trades on Uniswap, a flash loan will be deployed pretty much in the same block, pull all available capital necessary, and fix that price imbalance to its maximum potential.

Just a form of arbitrage.

Projects have to do system design that accounts for this. Beanstalk did not seem to account for the idea that the liquidity pool would have more than 50% of the BEAN supply eventually. But aside from that, having proposals passable in one block of deposit is the primary vector. Teams and communities like this model though because it basically comes down to "imagine how rich we would be if an attacker actually tried to buy all the tokens, I hope state actors get involved to really test that theory" because then it wouldn't matter if one block or many blocks was used if an actual organization was determined to pass something, this mentality is just not compatible with flash loans when all the liquidity is purchaseable already.

and leave it on their desk until the session ends? I think there is a time limit and then the legislature can try again with a higher majority.

I analyzed this transaction when it happened back in April

There was enough liquidity in Uniswap V2. A lot of projects incentivize community organized trading liquidity these days. Larger and larger traders are more willing to buy into projects when the liquidity is large enough to support them, but in the past (and simultaenously now in the present, for projects that bother), providing liquidity had a major challenge of both expense and regulatory issues (promising liquidity to potential buyers and actively courting exchanges has been a prong in being designated as a security, but communities expected funds to be used this way anyway, exchanges know this and extort project founders). So now with AMM technology like Uniswap, this has all been solved. Nobody ever has to deal with crypto exchanges again, and communities don't have to worry about liquidity. This has allowed rapid flourishing of some kinds of projects.

Anyway, there are 71,000,000 BEAN tokens in existence. And if you look at the Uniswap liquidity pool, it has risen to around 30,000,000 BEAN slowly over time.[0] And the day the amount got high enough, the person did a flash loan of $1,000,000,000 in stablecoins and bought everything from the liquidity pool, they got 6,000,000 additional BEAN from another source, deposited 36,000,000 BEAN into Beanstalk to get immediate majority vote of their proposal, which gave them all the funds locked up in Beanstalk to themselves (the $80,000,000 or so), withdrew the bean, sold it back into the liquidity pool (resetting the price to what it was before), returned the $1,000,000,000 and kept the $80,000,000 to themselves. ($250,000 to Ukraine Relief to fulfill the promise of their proposal, but they deposited it all into Tornado cash to never have to figure out if that was good enough like in a court) [1]

[0] https://etherscan.io/token/0xdc59ac4fefa32293a95889dc3966828...

[1] https://etherscan.io/tx/0xcd314668aaa9bbfebaf1a0bd2b6553d01d...

basically at its core its about paths of upwards mobility, so people have agreed that women should be exploiting themselves for corporations as well. specifically now the more influential and lucrative roles in those corporations.

this is why other trades with heavy sex imbalances are ignored.

solve the core of additional paths to upwards mobility and all of these contrived abstractions dissipate. since of course, many men don't want to be exploiting themselves for corporations either but nobody will subsidize their life as there's no market of people willing to do that (well, the market of anyone willing to do that is men). if there was, the sex representation remaining within corporations would probably equalize itself - since the men would drop out - the distribution of choices that people are willing to take probably are close to evenly distributed across all sexes. one sex just lacks a choice therefore corralling them into the corporate sphere at all levels, while the other sex has mass dilution of representation in the corporate sphere due to their variety of choices (not suggesting any of those choices are structured perfectly, but there is dilution).

in that case, I would want another additional path for judicial review without waiting for someone to be hurt. I wonder how other countries do this efficiently (without reviewing the same law a bunch of times from all angles)

We need a way to the governor/head of state to immediately punt something up for judicial review, as an additional option aside from signing or vetoing. The most inspired things I've seen from activists in the US is "line item veto", but I'm thinking of direct constitutional court review without waiting for someone with deep pockets/connections to be hurt by the law.

Some developed countries have this. Seems like a better check and balance than the one from 1792. Passing a law can potentially involve all three branches of the government.

Alright. Fine, I'll concede its fine to be skeptical of their actions, I just don't care enough because of the other bigger ways that it doesn't make a difference for the burned user.

Okay, people are out for blood from someone they trusted that did a bunch of dumb things extremely transparently while undiscerning users chose to ignore that. So they want to find a bad opaque thing now to justify their anger and legal or extrajudicial retaliation, which won't help any recovery of assets whether the opaque thing was bad or done properly.

Interesting season arc. I guess. It would be way more interesting if it was used to bailout whales or pocket for himself.

> argued that the use of taxpayer funds to enforce diversity quotas is illegal under California’s constitution

always a sure fire bet to find a public funding angle, it makes any action inherit the whole constitution, even if only private sector participants are involved

another way to pass this law would be to create incentives, benefits as opposed to penalties

> the defense offered the testimony of stereotypical virtues of women such as ‘consensus builders’ and ‘less risky behavior in investments,” the judge wrote in the 23-page opinion. “The court is unpersuaded by this offer of stereotypes for a justification” of the law.

amusing problematic behavior from the defense

> a conservative legal advocacy group that challenged the measure as reverse discrimination.

amusing phrasing from the challenger. conversatives: its just discrimination. don't worry about how academics redefine words to rationalize their own prejudiced behavior, you won't be cancelled for just calling it discrimination

The blockchain removes the need for trust when the blockchain is involved completely and without obfuscation

The need for trust doesnt stay removed magically because someone in the blockchain space was involved

1) Not everything bad is the same bad thing

2) Try stepping outside of your filter bubble. There are some websites that let you browse the internet within a different filter bubble to see how different it is