Bitcoin Forum

No theymos finds it easier to implement ABP blocking functions more important, you know to protect ads that slander businesses, then protecting the users.

Kind of ironic coming from Mr. Free Speech At Any Cost (referring to your opinion that blocking sub-5430 satoshi outputs by default is censorship.)  Those slandering advertisers have a right to get their message out!  Any other needs are secondary to protecting the ability of advertisers to say whatever they want and not be blocked by third parties! /sarcasm

The ads and small-output transactions are both messages, that some people think are annoying/useless and others think is their right to speak or hear unfettered.  The reference client and ABP block the respective messages by default.  When it comes to bitcoin, you support circumventing the default restrictions; but when it comes to advertising you think Theymos is in the wrong for trying to circumvent them.  When you say "you know to protect ads that slander businesses" you seem to be implying that speech one person finds useless or distasteful doesn't have a right to be protected.  This is exactly opposite your stance in the bitcoin transaction world, where you think everyone should have a right to have their transactions confirmed no matter what anyone else thinks of them.

Sure, it's not a perfect analogy, but the basic principles are similar enough that I find it ironic you would take two different positions.  I'm sure you still disagree, and that's fine.

To go more on-topic, Theymos is selling a service, the display of advertisements, and has some business obligation to do that to the best of his ability.  Argue about how he shouldn't have gotten into the ad business if you want, but the facts are that he's already in it, and it requires a certain amount of development time that could be spent on something else like 2FA, to meet that obligation.

This depends on the jurisdiction but many American states are like this:

"Defamation allows recovery for unfair damage to reputation. As a consequence, if true statements are made about a person which damage their reputation, they cannot maintain a lawsuit."

"This is a relatively recent development. One origin of libel and slander laws was a criminal cause of action by the English Crown used to silence its critics; hence, it was the truth of the alleged libel which provoked the lawsuit. However, as the right of free speech developed and gained support, the use of defamation to suppress true statements was rejected. Virtually all states today apparently require that the alleged defamatory statement be false before a defamation action may proceed."

Please give me the server source code, otherwise it's not open source and it's not slander.

OK, I understand that you do not like the policy of free speech. You're obviously trying to suppress anti Ripple advertisements because you disagree with them.

Have a good day.

TradeFortress is blatenly breaking American securities laws by offering to pay on interest bearing bitcoin contracts, he is a fool. I cannot locate a securities license for him in any state.

neither were the guys from LR

As I've stated before I strongly believe this must be put in place. I'd certainly make use of it and feel much safer.

So any chance of getting back on topic? 2FA.