wickedlogic

Please dont do this... I even clicked on the follow through link, then you want me to sso... still no price. Save us all some time, it is in short supply.

Maybe starting with: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ab463aw0AWM

If I launch a new tab in the background and tell it go establish some set of factors for me, or locate price points and details for me, or buy something for me (and right now as me)... or just have it let me browser and interactively direct it but have it block ads as I go.

I know the law, and lawmakers, are looking at this from a fraudulent content perspective, but they are going to be hard pressed to do anything in long run to quell this.

To render and provide interactions as you deem fit...

"hand-waive" seems inaccurate here, a lot of Ross's supporters flat out disagree with these charges in particular.

This is true over http and browsers, as well as internal servers, sockets, and cross frame communication. There are no such things as trusted internal services, just services that have not yet been breached (looking at you hardware vendors).

To clarify, the network would basically be agreeing to honor the possibly already spent coins... and that isn't really going to happen at this point.

`If it keeps growing, it'll be so expensive, it can't possibly work.` Also assumes bitcoin as we know it today is fully immutable, but that isn't the case, and neither is energy production, or technology used to run the whole thing.

But you know what gets tricky, rewriting history in bitcoin's blockchain. `You'd almost have to spin up an alternate time line, and those alternate time lines are expensive, and use a lot of energy, it cant possibly work.`

The value in the future of bitcoin may be that it has a long and very public chain... and that alone is probably enough to hold reasonable utility in the future. Just like silver/gold and other scares things provided utility for quite a while. Only now of course, if it gets too expensive, another slightly different public fork will persist (or several of them).

Trademark infringement is not what took down this service (or so motivated these people to take down the service). I have yet to read an "IP" compliance request that was accurate, truthful, or aligned with achieving a correct legal understanding between parties. This is not an accident. The use of that term creates an artificial whole, which is then used to imply greater authority over the sum of the parts.

My comment is on the prior comment, which is about the concept... not this specific instance, even though it is still applicable.

With gold for example, stealing the physical assets takes effort, resources, time, equipment, etc.

With digital assets, that is not the case... and our current level of system security is not adequate in the slightest. It is a challenge we are still largely ignoring today, but crypto currencies will require it be fixed, or better-risk-managed at any rate.

(not advocating gold over digital, but people continue to hand wave the actual risks)

- "based on the instance rental fee" - "Tell us what you think about this page and win $10 credit! " - "Instance Fee, Storage fee and Public Traffic fee"