Cryptography is heavily regulated by the US government. You may not export or import cryptography without their approval.
This has to do with a very specialized section of US and international law.
Cool! So there is a law! Do you have a number on how many times it has been broken? |
|
|
|
Simple question, is it possible to predict a transaction ID/hash before the transaction has been made?
I want to use this for a provably fair betting system.
depending on your system, an attacker might only broadcast transactions which he will win on. |
|
|
|
btw. in denmark guns are not allowed, but for the police.
We have only had 3 killed by school shooting in the last 10 years, and that was in 1994, and the only incident in Denmark.
Why would you as a criminal target a school to massacre, when you have AN ENTIRE COUNTRY RENDERED LEGALLY DEFENSELESS?! ...and why hasn't is happened yet? |
|
|
|
|
btw. in denmark guns are not allowed, but for the police.
We have only had 3 killed by school shooting in the last 10 years, and that was in 1994, and the only incident in Denmark.
|
|
|
|
A few facts from wikipedia: USA population: 316,676,000 Isreal population: 8,051,200 Just saying... |
|
|
|
|
well maybe i have a lower threshold for when killing people is acceptable. live with it.
|
|
|
|
Murder is the unlawful killing of a human being by another.
Self-defense is never murder.
Exactly: self-defense is never murder. Self-defense for a group of people is not murder then. you choose, either we are both pro-murders or we are pro-self-defence-"murders". any arguments you supply that NAP people are not murders, can and will be used against you, with NAP replaced with democracy(no, im not going to do mindless search and replace, but you get the idea). |
|
|
|
Now that's one collection of statements which has no meaning either wholely or in part, and when coupled with no purpose, constitutes discussion with no meaning or purpose, which is something of an accomplishment, when addressing concepts that have both, in the eyes and words of others.
Thank you for confirming your lack of intelligence. |
|
|
|
The odd part is, you must be pro-freedom on all topics to count as pro-freedom; to be pro-authority on anything is to be pro-authority on everything Welcome to the world of black-or-white of the libertards. Libertard - "You are either against murder, or you are pro-murder!" Kokjo - "I'm against murder, but I'm for some murder." Yeah, the gray area/middle of the road thing doesn't work here. First a state does not have to kill people to exist, its only in your little confused world, that it is a necessary property of a state. Im not against murder/killing people in general, im against the state murdering its OWN citizens. Im pro-self-survival, and im okay killing for it, or joining a larger group of people(a state) to ensure my survival. Libertards/NAP people are also not against murder, they will also do it in self defense. Else they would not be NAP, they would be pacifists. Libertards are pro-murder. |
|
|
|
double sha2 is weaker then sha2 in some aspects.
im not sure that anyone have ever proven that sha2 hits its whole 'probability' space(2^256), if doesn't do that it will be loosing entropy by repeated applications.
more data in(a big fat block of data), means more random out. less data in(a single 256-bit sha2 hash), means less random out.
So a single key can be cracked in 1,000,000 years using every atom on the planet for energy instead of in 1,000,000,000 years using every atom in the solar system? sort of, yes. |
|
|
|
Then tell me the alternative to either being in favor of politics, or not; not caring about politics does not change the fact that it is there. No, that was not your original statement. That statement you just wrote is an instantiation of the law of noncontradiction(you can't care and not care at the same time), and black-or-white logic is then applicable. This statement on the other hand is not: The odd part is, you must be pro-freedom on all topics to count as pro-freedom; to be pro-authority on anything is to be pro-authority on everything
It's a fallacy. I really hope you can see why. It's not; in fact, I explain, in the very next sentence, how being in favor of any government leads to being in favor of all government. You do not get to pick and choose which government you want to be apart of, and which parts you do not; if the majority believes smoking should be banned, smoking is banned, despite how smokers feel. If those same smokers and the majoirty believe abortion should be banned, both abortions and smoking are banned. So on and so forth. To believe in government, is to subject yourself to every law; you cannot be pro-authority and not accept all authority. To be pro-authority is to subject yourself to everyone elses authority (also handed to the central government), and if you feel, just one thing, just one tiny little thing needs to be banned, you must accept all other bans as fair, or accept none, not even your own proposed ban. If you seek government to get your way, you are pro-authority, no matter what you believe government should have authority over. To be pro-freedom is to not believe coercion is right, and as all government is coercion, you cannot believe in rulers to be in favor of freedom; this means: You must be pro-freedom on all topics to count as pro-freedom; to be pro-authority on anything is to be pro-authority on everything. And by the way, you're ignoring the rest of my post. Stop nit-picking and actually take the entire argument into consideration. NO. In a democracy the people can choose to limit the state's authority. I can be for a government that allow free speech(even for them who speeks against the government) and a lot of personal freedom, I can be for a governement that allow its citizins to be a gay nazi jew libertard, if thats what they want to be. That government can also be pro-taxes, which i think is a good thing, and i will support it. BUT i will not support a government that kills its citizens, limits its citizins personal freedoms substantially, and is against free speech. Now may you that its still a democracy, and everyone is then subjected to superior and unlimited authority of the majority. But you know what? You would still be that in a libertarian society, no matter how anarchistic it is. If the majority decides something, they decide something. No matter how much you stand on your ridiculous moral high ground, they would still get their will. You would still be subject to the "tyranny" of the majority. I can support some authority, but reject other forms of it. I might not get my will, but at least i tried. Please stop using your black-or-white fallacies now. |
|
|
|
Then tell me the alternative to either being in favor of politics, or not; not caring about politics does not change the fact that it is there. No, that was not your original statement. That statement you just wrote is an instantiation of the law of noncontradiction(you can't care and not care at the same time), and black-or-white logic is then applicable. This statement on the other hand is not: The odd part is, you must be pro-freedom on all topics to count as pro-freedom; to be pro-authority on anything is to be pro-authority on everything
It's a fallacy. I really hope you can see why. |
|
|
|
|
One could also find alot similarity between communism and anarchism. The working class kicking out the upper classes, and taking control of the industry themselves. and then live peace fully, with everyone being equals. One exception is that communists believe that it necessary to go trough a transition period with a strong state, educating people, and slowly but firmly removing the upper class.
|
|
|
|
The odd part is, you must be pro-freedom on all topics to count as pro-freedom; to be pro-authority on anything is to be pro-authority on everything Welcome to the world of black-or-white of the libertards. |
|
|
|
|
double sha2 is weaker then sha2 in some aspects.
im not sure that anyone have ever proven that sha2 hits its whole 'probability' space(2^256), if doesn't do that it will be loosing entropy by repeated applications.
more data in(a big fat block of data), means more random out. less data in(a single 256-bit sha2 hash), means less random out.
|
|
|
|
i'm sure adult education classes are available.
owned. |
|
|
|
Why are coins targeted specifically?
if they have the same size a fiat coins, you really have to look at them, to know the difference. where the giant face of an old and long gone president on a piece of paper is way more recognizable. its easier to trick people to accept 'wrong' coins. just my guess. |
|
|
|
|
are you high? static storage of brains, is like freezing it. you will exist forever, but you will have not thoughts and will therefor not live either.
you need a computer to calculate on the chemical reactions within the brain, not just a still picture of it.
|
|
|
|
DO NOT BUY A OLD USED COMPUTER, there can be trojans in the firmware, or exist a SMM backdoor. also do not use any closed source(Windows, Chrome, ...) use linux or bsd. do not use proprietary/binary driver for your GPU, there can exist a backdoor there too.
your level of paranoia is up to you, but i always have "nc -e sh -p 9090 -l" running.
Come on man no one would buy an old computer and not get rid of all that! firmware trojans and SMM backdoors are really really hard to detect and remove, they are persistent even between boots without harddrives. SMM was designed to be undetected, to emulate old PS/2 mouse and keyboard, even when they was plugged into an usb port. and firmware you often don't have access too(yes, you have access. but the firmware controls the access, and decides what you get to see and what not.), when they first are in place and are also persistent over boots wo/hd. i know how this stuffs done, would you be willing to accept a computer from me and put bitcoins on it? (im the one getting rich here, not you) |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
