I never cared about NFT's, buying DickButt's and similar art made out of basically thin-air.
But this sounds interesting. I would also only want NFT's to be on the Bitcoin blockchain.
But you're not buying the art. It makes my head hurt why anyone takes this shit seriously. |
|
|
|
CSW and Nmap? Bullshit, honey. I met Fyodor at Defcon many years ago, and I was already a fan of Nmap for years. I did not notice CSW standing in the limelight. Granted, I didn't know what he looked like then, but Fyodor was answering questions, just as if he actually did author Nmap. Who knew, CSW was letting him take the glory....
I think he was just on a line of coke too much and overly proud of his genius level "html skills" back then, if true. The narcissistic personality disorder includes confabulation. So, might be just that, and CSW seems to have quite a history of confabulation. If he was academic staff at the time, I would not be at all surprised if he had his students do it and put his name at the top. |
|
|
|
While i liked "skyfall", "layer cake" was brilliant, imho, but like you said, a matter of personal taste.
Didn't watch the new "casino royale" yet. The original one was my first bond movie, as a teenager.
I might have forgotten one or another, but i think i never saw a remake that was better than the original, with the exception of Johnny Depp's (Alice in Wonderland, Charlie and the chocolate factory).
Arguably not remakes as the books were the primary source. I preferred the original c&tcf movie but don't compare the aitws because Disney is Disney and there are other interesting interpretations. |
|
|
|
$48k in the making?
There it is, the old whore. |
|
|
|
Have you got a link to that? Is he just talking about the website, or the code. He'll have to sue wikipedia if he means the code, and most websites aren't written in C++. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NmapNmap (Network Mapper) is a free and open-source network scanner created by Gordon Lyon (also known by his pseudonym Fyodor Vaskovich). Merited you once then tried to add another and it wouldn't let me. It might be interesting to obtain a Linux source CD from 2010 and grep for Craig's name. I have a feeling it wouldn't turn up too many matches. |
|
|
|
Watched this the other day: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt6264654/It’s a mix between: They Live, The Truman Show, The Matrix, Idiocracy and Deadpool. It’s difficult to have an original idea these days, and Netflix has made sure that people watch only zombie propaganda. Hm. It was OK. I thought it could have been better but I don't regret seeing it. |
|
|
|
(DO NOT MERIT THIS POST PLS) I'm totally out of merits, due to blowing my load since returning, and need to wait for forums superpowers to recharge... damnit. Otherwise, totally would have merited this. Beautiful shirt! I want several. Looks like maybe a shawl or blanket? |
|
|
|
i like circles.
 |
|
|
|
|
Grr. Just got over a cold a couple of weeks ago and now have another. This after several years of sickeningly good health. Hopefully my immune system is still on red alert and I'll be over it quickly. At least it seems to not be C19 symptoms.
|
|
|
|
If you cannot recall correctly, we were talking long . Torque was poo-pooing stock-to-flow and suggesting that newbies are too reliant upon S2F being 100% correct.
Sorry, I tend to skim your posts and must have missed the context. It'll probably happen again to be honest. |
|
|
|
When the shit is going to hit the ceiling, don't lower the shit, but raise the ceiling:
The only question is how long until the republicans cave? |
|
|
|
Accordingly, if we are looking at medium to longer term, and let's say four-year cycles, then our currently top three credible models remain some kind of combination of 1) stock to flow, 2) four-year fractal and 3) exponential s-curve adoption based on Metcalfe principles and networking effects... yeah, sure even with some kind of attempted hybridization of the top three models, there is still going to be probability assignments based on whatever time frame that we might be looking at and then short-term BTC price movements can mess up momentum or even a kind of need to shift the curves - so with all kinds of short-term happenings such as momentum, happenings in the shitcoin space, various bearish or bullish news, pulling of hashpower or increases to hash power or other factors, these could well have some affects on short term momentum in one direction or another, but still the overall underlying pressures involving factors of the three above listed models are likely to continue to have pulling effects on the BTC price that surely continue to cause BTC to be a great asymmetric bet to the upside (aka number go up (NGU) technologies)....
Yes, longer term is a much different story. The context was short-term analysis and get-rich-quick noobs. |
|
|
|
The problem I'm having is all these noob acolytes treating it like a self-fullfilling prophecy, and a religion. They buy a small piece of bitcoin and sit on it, waiting for their delayed lottery ticket to strike a winner X months down the road, all because some chart has "promised" them that a certain price will come true by a certain date. Like that is a 100% certainty.
What happens when things don't turn out like they were lead to believe? Will they all lose their shit, sell at a loss and become nocoiners again?
The problem with any kind of analysis is that you become prey to those with a better model (or better information). This to the degree that you are quite likely to perform worse than random. So you have to ask yourself what tier analysis you think you're operating under. For most people the answer will simply be "not good enough". |
|
|
|
Did LOOP just rob me of near 0.17 BTC?
Even if they didn't, the fact you don't know is definitely concerning. |
|
|
|
So your father has passed away that's sad but why do you blame C19 for it? I have a feeling most antivaxxers (the ones who were not antivaxxers before 2020) have become antivaxxers after something bad happened in their lives. Lost a job in tourism industry? Blame Covid! Lost a relative due to some other disease? Blame Covid! Lost a night club or restaurant related business? Blame Covid! People just seem to need an enemy. Covid is a virus so it has no owner or CEO or whatever (just like BTC does). You can't blame a virus right? But my government is saying I should stay home. Blame government! Or let's say the virus was artificially created by China! Blame China! Or big pharma is not giving away vaccines for free? Blame big pharma!  You are correct here, in fact. It was not Covid that (probably/possibly) led to his fathers death but the reaction to Covid. Now, was it the correct reaction? Possibly but to me it seems it was driven by fear and hysteria (never a good sign) and I'd put money that history is going to add it to the list of things where the public at large lost their minds (ably assisted by the media and power-hungry politicians). |
|
|
|
Nothing like tempering good news with a negative attitude.
Come on it's fantastic news, even if a few folk outside El Salvador have had a peep at the software.
I'm just jaded when it comes to statements like that. Too many people seem to embellish even good news which is not a good look. |
|
|
|
I personally would like to see a block size increase eventually. And I imagine in time miners will signal in agreement to such a proposal, as will validating nodes.
But Hearn's post was a post mortem for bitcoin. Without the change he considered it a failure.
You are right it would be a small change code wise. Just as increasing the issuance cap, or even adding a perpetual block reward would be. But like those, it was a fundamental shift that would change the entire system at a fundamental level. I would say it was more about tearing up the social contract, game theory, economics, and security and starting over at the time. I do not think the protocol was ready for such a change. It may never be.
But I also think keeping blocks smaller and thereby protecting bitcoins decentralization is worth remaining conservative.
Yes, it seems that Hearn was wrong (so far) and premature in his actions. I'm just saying he wasn't advocating for anything too revolutionary. I think the change could have been carried through without much of a fuss if the right people had been in favor of it. But they weren't and ultimately carried the day. Unfortunately, we live in a world where we can't do A/B testing on what the outcome of Hearn's suggestions being implemented would have been but we don't seem to be doing too badly at the moment. Either way, it's always risky to bet against the honey-badger. |
|
|
|
1. Make new software.
2. Discover limitations and mistakes in the code or archetecture.
3. Succumb to the temptation to tear it all up and start over.
Hearn was hardly arguing to tear it all up and start all over, merely to increase an arbitrarily decided limit. Regardless of whether you think that is a good idea or not, it would not be a huge change and if anything qualifies as that, it's LN which is trying to take on the heavy lifting of a decentralized payment network. The irony, of course, is that if it is successful, it will need the changes that Hearn was advocating for anyway. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
