pull down to refresh
100 sats \ 0 replies \ @Scoresby OP 26m \ parent \ on: Acting head of DOJ Criminal Division weighs in on noncustodial devs bitcoin
Van Valkenburgh's whole thread gives a good sense of the speech.
We may under certain circumstances bring cases under Section 1960(b)(1)(C), which prohibits the transmission of funds that the defendant knows are derived from a criminal offense, or are intended to be used to support unlawful activity. However, going forward, consistent with principles of notice and fairness, let me make the following clear
I read this a little like they are saying Samurai was a warning and they reserve the right to change their mind, but for now good-faith actually noncustodial won't be prosecuted?
I wasn't trying to disagree with you. I usually zap a comment or reply someone makes in response to something I post as a way of saying that I read it and appreciate it.
On X, I'll often do the same with a like. But on X I can only ever like a post once, whereas on SN, I can increase the value of my like. It does change how they function a little.
But ,here on Stacker News, some of the ranking is determined by sats. Sats are really our only way of upvoting (or downvoting) posts and comments.
If you see them as different, how would you see that informing how sats get used to rank content on SN?
Great way of putting it!
I wonder if we could figure out what amount sats = 1 like as a signal of content quality.
A post with 100 sats is usually better than a post with 1 like. So maybe it's less than 100 sats, something like 10 sats?
A post with 10 likes probably is better than a post with 100 sats of zaps.
I haven't read these, but it's on my list. Do you think it's the kind of series one could read aloud to one's 8 - 10 year old children?
It's a good point (I didn't pay much attention to his commentary "data are eating men." The chart is what caught my attention).
Another person (Avi Felman) made this comment: "This is a chart of horses vs cars on the road"
These guys and their personalities.
I realize I have two contradictory beliefs about politicians:
-
they will do/say whatever they need to in order to get what they want.
-
they have huge egos and always make things about them
To some extent these would work against each other. I feel like Newsom exemplifies this, yet I'm not sure how to reconcile my contradicting views of him.
Many of the wallets make it easier to do multisig (Blue, Liana, Bitcoin Safe, Nunchuk, Keeper, Specter, Sparrow) and some of them make it easier to interact with hardware signers. But even these features are difficult to monetize, imo.
Monetizing services can lead to situations like Theya, which seems now to be going hard into selling people a bitcoin loan collateralized with their house (Horizon).
I'm hopeful that the lightning wallets find monetizing more straightforward.