245400+ entries in 1.885s
JorgePasada: Bitcoin doesn’t eliminate fraudulent transactions; it only eliminates counterfeit payments. This can, of course, save many tens or hundreds of billions of dollars
a year globally and translate to more efficiency in commerce. But removing the intermediary also removes recourse outside of courts, and the cost and nature of that can’t be determined.
JorgePasada: Because
a Bitcoin transaction can’t be reversed, it means that the party transferring value has no recourse within the Bitcoin system to reverse or dispute
a transaction. Thus, someone who wants their money back has to go to court, and companies that accept Bitcoin as payment aren’t above the law. This will move chargebacks from intermediary mediated settlements to small-claims court and higher civil courts
moiety: having
a read at your link now JorgePasada
JorgePasada: So I'm reading this article
a friend wrote
benkay: his identity (in the sense of
a thing that persists past each scam) is only relevant to other scammers. the con man must burn his identity for each con.
benkay: the only identity
a con man can sustain is with other thieves.
JorgePasada: Wait
a minute, all of these people are way way less knowledgable about this stuff than I am, they're just more confident
JorgePasada: benkay: Step two is still all question marks... so in theory
a lot
benkay: but at
a rough approximation: my own biz, some other biz, -assets, and my personal wot.
JorgePasada: benkay: Yeah, I mean we need more of that for sure. But hell,
a lot of my very close friends I only interact with online
benkay: mind you, JorgePasada, i'm talking about
a real community of humans who get together and derp on
a patch of dirt for potatoes or tomatoes during the day and sing and drink at night
JorgePasada: although, that being said, actually curating
a good community and good content
moiety: i don't mind children with ears and half
a brain
benkay: wouldn't you prefer
a cane?
mircea_popescu: and i thought to myself... here's
a crow, that has no friends, but through the use of technology will make itself
a profile, and put it online
mircea_popescu: it was just him and the crows, which were also playing with sticks and items in
a similar figety manner
mircea_popescu: what triggered for me was that i was walking through
a park yest, and there was this lonely kinda strange tall lanky black haired guy
JorgePasada: I'd like to say it's because I'm taking
a principled stand against online dating
donpillou: i'm
a random guy from the internets
benkay: <mircea_popescu> on one hand, having
a third party involved in any bitcoin transaction, in any way, is breaking the protocol. << not
a fan of multisig?
punkman: fluffypony: well yeah I guess, or make
a bot that goes and approves the IP before it tries to do anything
fluffypony: punkman: proxy requests through
a box with
a fixed IP?
mircea_popescu: maybe "how to use
a battery to light
a bulb, wearethepremieretechandblablainstitutionintheworld" ?
punkman: so I was making
a little cli interface for Namecheap, and they want me to login on the website and approve my IP address for API access every time it changes
kakobrekla: this is "we decided to make this half
a million into nothing"
fluffypony: I like parts of the US and
a handful of the people there, but not enough to move there
mrstickball: put in some injection moulding machines and start
a company
kakobrekla: that thing is no longer up, was
a fake i guess
fluffypony: won't help me unless he gets
a warehouse in South Africa :-P
fluffypony: kakobrekla: $95/month for
a E3-1270 V2 @ 3.50GHz, 8gb RAM, 2x 1tb eSATA drives, and 1tb of traffic
pankkake: I wonder if there's
a request on what.cd
bounce: there's
a baseline guaranteed brokenness courtesy php, though
fluffypony: mircea_popescu: because WP is so badly written...I wrote
a plugin for it years ago, and that was honestly the most painful experience in shitty PHP coding
mircea_popescu: <pankkake> I really want to start
a movement of anti-web things << join the queue!
mircea_popescu: <fluffypony> pankkake: I wouldn't consider WP
a lesser evil than Disqus << why not ?!
fluffypony: kakobrekla: the server it's hosted on hosts
a bunch of our local sites that are heavily trafficked, so I keep it purposely low-impact
pankkake: I really want to start
a movement of anti-web things
fluffypony: pankkake: I wouldn't consider WP
a lesser evil than Disqus
pankkake: I'll eventually switch to
a static blog with (automated) comments by mail
kakobrekla: mike_c it was
a private /notice so you only shamed yourself now :p
mrstickball: I gotta give him
a rating shortly. For some reason, he never bothered with garnering
a lot of trust via OTC
ThickAsThieves: i'd give him
a point for his diligence and seemingly running
a Havelock asset better than most, but the more recent terms of his 3POs and such kinda make me hesitant
mircea_popescu: seemsmore reasonable this way. if someone judges it prudent to wait
a month, or six or sixty, they can
thestringpuller: mircea_popescu: i wish you had
a tag on trilema for articles about being so stupid you don't know how stupid you are
ThickAsThieves: white house logic: "Disclosing
a vulnerability can mean that we forego an opportunity to collect crucial intelligence that could thwart
a terrorist attack, stop the theft of our nation’s intellectual property, or even discover more dangerous vulnerabilities that are being used by hackers or other adversaries to exploit our networks,"
pankkake: still, you would have to wait for
a block for the result
pankkake: though, I was thinking of tweaking it: you have
a secret server key still, and the key used to compute the bet result would be secret+lastblock
pankkake: yes, but it has
a cost. miners would have to discard their own blocks to win
pankkake: you would need
a secret that can not be known in advance by anyone (bettors and investors), but that would be revealed shortly after the bets. so far I only see future block hashes
mircea_popescu: but you're saying server has
a hash for each guy rather than one for all guys
mike_c: ok, you get the hash for server secret. you want
a new server secret? click
a button and it generates
a new one, shows you the new hash, and shows you the old secret.
ThickAsThieves: design
a provably fair casino that cant steal from anyone
mike_c: the point is that you can verify at will (instead of having to wait
a day)
mike_c: you can 'randomize' and get
a new server secret anytime
mircea_popescu: he'd have to crack yours to make
a self-serving secret
dignork: ThickAsThieves: when dooglus places
a long list of winning bets, who is the loosing side?
ThickAsThieves: the topic is whether provably fair is provably
a fiat gambling killer
mircea_popescu: ThickAsThieves actually that's
a valid approach, mike_c's. i'd just like to explore the provably fair angle, from bettors prespective
pankkake: I was thinking of
a gambling system where the key is the next block hash
BCB: pankkake, are you
a troll for hire
ThickAsThieves: explain to me what structure prevents dooglus from rolling
a win at will?
ThickAsThieves: SEC probly got
a complaint, and now they probly also wanna know if Voorhees is still running it
BCB: ThickAsThieves, that was
a hoot. I was shocked someone so stupid was so successful at his scam
mircea_popescu: "Like you say, this has manipulation written all over it. That is the only way to make it work - there is no chance
a freely operating system like this would make it past
a few weeks before going bankrupt. "
punkman: ah there's
a bunch on ebay