Not surprised. I'm thinking of using an entirely separate browser for casually browsing news sites and other ad-based social media platforms on an environment with nothing installed, while using my main browser (with all it's extensions) for sites I trust more. VPNs are also good for IP masking and Firefox generally has good privacy features (although it's poor market share does decrease privacy in a way).

Mainly the noise and energy expense. I don't know how well a sound enclosure would help. For the energy, with a small plot of land covered in solar panel, I'm not sure it would be enough to justify the costs of the panels.

Nice. I expect to see a lot more threads comparing lightning wallets on how easy they are to integrate with StackerNews

I sympathize with you and am sorry for your loss.

I don't think the federal government will be as effective as you might think. I would avoid going through the crypto asset recovery site so you can use that money to stack more.

The best thing you can do to get back at the scammers and the ineffective government that has failed you is to withhold your tax money whenever possible. Also vote for politicians that want to disassemble all the useless structures we have today and advocate for more eyes to be set on problems like these. Maybe a little vigilantism is the real solution.

If you decide to ignore this and proceed anyway, I wish you the best. I'm not trying to be a preachy ideologue, I just want to prevent you from losing more money.

I'll make sure to balance my lightning channels before visiting 😃 😂

Who was saying it 4x'ed? lol

There is no purpose in a statement like this except to make people mad 😂. Your post came off a lot stronger than his lmao🪞

The nature of life its such that everyone will have their own definition of moral. The powerful majority forcing their values on the weaker minority will always happen. I wouldn’t reserve that phenomenon to only happening under a democracy.

Democracy I reserve for the governance system whereby we try to convince the minority the wishes of the majority to convey they’d lose in a violent disagreement.

Good in theory but the majority don’t always represent the most powerful, and the participants don’t always know what’s being voted on. Most don’t have the time to understand the existing system of laws made before them and the unintended interactions between new laws.

The US also doesn’t have a true democracy, it’s a republic, which makes an even more convoluted system for which people must navigate to make changes to.

No, legacy wallets are fine. What’s more important is which software he used to generate his keys. If it was Bitcoin-QT/Bitcoin Core he’s fine

One thing I think gets forgotten is the fact that the internet started out distributed. Distributed computing and peer to peer long predate Bitcoin and laid the foundation for being able to build a monetary system like this. I don't think it means they had a similar vision for Bitcoin and the Bitcoin ecosystem is starting to naturally (and unfortunately) lean towards centralization with all these wallets connected to the same company node, the lack of interest of node-running, the inaccessibility of mining, etc.

I think the network is sufficiently decentralized today but work still needs to be put in to maintain this status. Either we make stronger cases for decentralization, or better incentives to be self-sovereign. In some ways I see Bitcoin as a do-over for a network setup that prioritizes decentralization and p2p technologies.

I’d things go offline (meaning no one has internet), we’d go back to other proxies for payment. We’d also have non-trivial long distance communication problems (since I treat any telegram connections as being online) and would need to form local coalitions to find an appropriate currency to use in the meantime such that enough people will think is fair enough to adopt

This was a waste of time skimming. It reads like someone just now starting to pay attention to AI.

Your question of robustness vs exactness frames the 2 as if they're at odds with each other, you can have both robustness and exactness. The UX problem encountered by your user wasn't about robustness, it was about how you decided to engineer your experience.

If you were going to force an extension for a specific output type, why allow the user to specify an extension at all? Doing it this way is setting them up for failure. It's like if I asked you for advice on something I've already made a decision on.

If you're building on libraries that have this problem, make sure as many inputs that would lead to inconsistent states in the library are disallowed at the user input generated from your code. Never correct things for the user implicitly if you can help it.

Best case is you never allow them to make a mistake in the first place, but if that's not possible, you can catch inputs that would potentially lead to errors and inform the user to take action on a proposed fix. And if you need to implicitly correct input as a last resort, although I can't imagine a scenario where this would be needed right now, then you should absolutely notify the user that this correction happened so that they don't get confused on how they got their output.

Are there any designs we can follow while carrying out the UI work?

I think he made a typo and meant decentralized in the last sentence of the quoted paragraph. Having no federal government and more state rights would not lead to more centralization.

Actually, from a technical perspective I do enjoy trying to figure it out. From a user perspective, I'd like for there to be no money at all and wish I could get anything I want delivered instantly. Obviously this can't be realized because the real world has costs, so I have to pick and choose what I want based on what I can access and afford.

Just like every decision in my everyday life, Bitcoin has made tradeoffs. It isn't the fastest way to purchase most products (lightning network aside), but it is the fastest way to do so in a decentralized manner that is near impossible to reverse given enough confirmations. That is a metric important to me.

I think AJ is like an anti-darthcoin. Both can have irrationally passionate takes lol.

Any digital currency can have a "better blockchains in certain aspects" when compared to Bitcoin. Someone can make the argument that Dogecoin is better because it's built with a funnier theme in mind. Someone else can say Ethereum is better because it allows smart contracts. "Better" only has meaning for a given metric. And in all the metrics I find important, Bitcoin still beats everything else.

Someone woke up firey today 😂

Something doesn't have to provide 0 value for it to be a scam. For example, you can sell me on the idea of an umbrella being extra unique and charge double price for it. Once I realize it's a regular umbrella I'm calling it a scam, even though it provides protection from the rain. Why? Because I'm not getting adequate value for the cost charged to me. Taxes in a lot of ways are like this. There are a lot of middle men.