In order to receive their payments for their moderation services, I understand that moderators are required to have a bitcoin address in their forum profile. If you want to donate to staff, you can use this information to send a bitcoin transaction accordingly.
I suggested this feature not only for staff but also for other valuable members making quality posts here. Like if you see some detailed and informative post from some user, you can donate to him. I know that currently merits are there to reward them but some people might not be after ranks. Many forum members have a bitcoin address listed in their Bitcoin address section of their profile. While this is not a requirement for non-moderator users, many experienced users who are most likely to make such posts do have an address listed. If you look at my profile, you will see a bitcoin address listed. As someone who makes many very informative and valuable posts with over 1200 merit, I would encourage you to send coin if you want to see how well having a bitcoin address listed in a user's profile works. |
|
|
|
If people are displaying LN invoices as a means to receive payment, there should not be a major de-anonymization issue, as it is not trivial to get a lot of information about transaction history from a LN invoice, and is even more difficult if you are not actively monitoring a channel. Assuming that they are only going to allow you display Lightning invoices. I'd be very surprised if there was no option to display a standard Bitcoin address, especially if the information about allowing users to display Ethereum addresses is accurate. When Twitter was hacked last year, they prevented users (it might have only been verified users) from tweeting anything with a bitcoin address. Displaying a bitcoin address gives you the same amount of privacy as posting an address here. Tweets are generally not indexed by search engines, so tweeting an address might give slightly more privacy than posting one here. Displaying an address in your profile probably gives about the same amount of privacy as having an address on your profile here. It has the potential to be even worse than what you describe. Accounts can get hijacked, and new addresses/invoices can be changed in a profile without someone creating even a single fraudulent tweet.
I never even thought of that. How often will the average Twitter user visit their own profile to double check the address/invoice hasn't been changed. Even worse considering a hacker could have days to generate a look-alike address using a vanity generator so it is not immediately obvious. Most people don’t tweet every day, so even if you checked to ensure your address/invoice has not changed every time you visit Twitter, it could still be changed for days. One solution might be to make changing an address to be a “security event” which results in an email being sent to the user and/or requiring a delay before the changes address/invoice is displayed. |
|
|
|
As has already been said here, many users have a reference to their own BTC address in their profile or signature. And the staff member (the one we are talking about here) has 100% a BTC address in their profile  I think an option for donations like Twitter now adds is not planned for epochtalk either. Some tipbot would be cool though, like on Reddit. Theymos has previously said that the forum will not ever hold money for users. Tipbots, by their nature need to hold user funds. Also, anything that posts that a tip has been made is going to be annoying. |
|
|
|
|
In order to receive their payments for their moderation services, I understand that moderators are required to have a bitcoin address in their forum profile. If you want to donate to staff, you can use this information to send a bitcoin transaction accordingly.
|
|
|
|
It appears that it was bought by Chainalysis in secret and transformed this into a honeypot.
I'm confused here, didn't we already know walletexplorer belongs to chainanalysis? I didn't know that chainanalysis had any specific information from the walletexplorer website, but walletexplorer has advertised for years that its creator was hired by chainanalysis. I am not sure how much useful information someone could gain from the data described in the OP. A site like walletexplorer is likely to be used to look at transactions unrelated to yourself. In other words, if you are looking at a transaction on walletexplorer, you are most likely not looking at your own transaction, or a transaction related to you. |
|
|
|
What if someone abducted both of them and tortured and killed them on different places so that the actual criminal can escape with no doubt since both the people who are involved in this scene may died, just a different perspective.  This is very unlikely. Brian voluntarily went to the Carlton Reserve, and it is unlikely that any criminal that you describe would have the forethought to attack him there. Further, Brian would have known about any abduction by any third party prior to returning to FL, and would have been able to act accordingly, instead he lawyered up and declined to speak on the matter of Gabby. It’s looking very likely that the bf is the killer. Why would he return home to his parents house & then go missing, becoming uncontactable? Problem is he is very good at living on the road so it may be difficult to track him down. If he is guilty, I sincerely hope he is brought to justice.
My understanding is that Brian lived with his parents along with Gabby before they took their cross-country trip. Gabby ran a travel vlog that documented both of their travels, but I don't think either of them had previously traveled for extended periods of time. For example, I understand that Gabby's van was modified over the summer in order to make their cross-county trip easier.
The FBI has issued an arrest warrant for Brian Laundy, and has charged him with bank fraud related to charges made using a debit card between August 30 and September 1 for amounts exceeding $1000. This means there is probably evidence that Gabby was deceased prior to August 30. Laundry returned to FL on September 1, and likely knew that Gabby was dead prior to leaving WY. If Brian was responsible for Gabby's death, he should be held fully responsible for her death via a capital murder charge. If Brian was not responsible for Gabby's death, I think the evidence and circumstances of their relationship show that Gabby would have wanted that Brian is able to return home safely, and even if Brian was responsible for Gabby's death, there is a decent chance that Gabby would have wanted Brian to be able to return home safely. The DOJ should drop the Bank Fraud charges, and bring murder charges if there is evidence to support them. |
|
|
|
I understand how hard it can be for a couple traveling months on end in a camper might be stressful for any relationship. I am not sure when they started dating, however, they had known each other for at least 4 years and had become close enough to live together in Brian's parents' home. I would assume they had gone on vacations together (maybe with family) in the past, although maybe not for a month at a time. I think it's highly probable, especially with the eye witness in USA of her fiance hitting her, that he is the killer but I do not want to jump to any conclusions without further evidence.
Law enforcement appears to be operating under the assumption that Brian is dead. Or at least they are considering this as a possibility. See the fact they are searching underwater for him. There have been rumors that he is feared to have harmed himself. If Brian is dead, it would lead me to believe the chances he killed Gabby are lower. As of this writing, details of how she died are unknown to the public, and until these details are made public, it will be difficult to conclude what happened to her. As I noted above, I think the evidence is fairly clear that Brian knew Gabby was dead as of when he returned home to Florida. I think it is most likely that Brian is dead. If Brian is in the Carlton Reserve alive, it would not make much sense to me. What would his plans be? To hide in the wild for the rest of his life? It is possible he took some amount of money and has fled the country, but even this is unlikely in my eyes. This kid is in his early 20's and still lives with his parents. I just can't see someone going from living with their parents to living on their own in a foreign country and being able to stay under the radar from anyone who might recognize him. |
|
|
|
Why was using stainless steel even a thought for the engraved plates, instead of, as o_e_l_e_o said and using titanium or other stronger metals. It's a trade off between durability and cost. Stainless steel isn't quite as good as titanium, but it is more than enough for almost everything we care about and it is significantly cheaper. All common alloys of stainless steel have melting points >1400 Celsius, while titanium is around 1650 Celsius. Building fires are generally in the range of around 800-1100 Celsius, so both will hold up fine. Titanium is only a couple of places below 304 stainless steel on the galvanic scale (the lower it is the less reactive it is), so in terms of corrosion although Titanium is slightly better the difference will again be negligible for our purposes. The difference in yield strength equates to something like 13 tons of pressure per square inch for stainless steel and 16 tons of pressure per square inch for titanium, both which will withstand almost all building collapses or similar. So yeah, if you can afford titanium then go for it, but you'll also be fine using a thick enough piece of stainless steel. I think you are making a strong argument against titanium. There are very few scenarios in which a titanium seed backup will survive when a stainless steel backup plate will not. You control the location of where the backup plate will be stored, so you can simply keep your backup in a location in which for all intents and purposes, the backup is not going to be subject to conditions that would cause the plates to be unreadable. Sure, there might be a situation in which you are incarcerated for an extended period, the conditions of the subject location change in a way that results in a fire melting a stainless steel plate that would not melt a titanium plate, but the odds of all of these happening are really effectively zero. I would also repeat my argument that budgets are finite. If you can "afford" titanium, you should buy stainless steel and use the difference in cost to invest in additional/other security measures. If you insist on having something in place that alerts you of a potential compromise, I would suggest something that alerts you right away. I think a tamper evident bag is really not much more than a false sense of security. Given enough time, an adversary may even be able to replace the bag, making it appear there was no compromise.
Can't disagree with that. You know these doomsday preppers with hidden bunkers have CCTV or cameras... So they know if anyone has been in the area or tried to get in (or actually got in.) You could have something solar powered that pings you all the time and if it either losses power or the door to your little container has been opened you'll know within a minute. (your device would need to have mobile data or internet or something maybe, or at least ability to send some sort of message.) I was thinking something along the lines of storing your backup in a safety deposit box that contains a device that detects light that has the ability to alert you if light is detected. The device could have a long battery life and may be attached to the back of the container inside the safety deposit box. My ideal location with be some bunker with a relatively long corridor that they must go through and you have something watching that path. You're also making some assumptions that nothing is going to dig in from the sides or from underneath it, but you can probably have sensors for that too.
I understand you live in a very different part of the world than where I live. I think it would be interesting to one day visit your country as a private citizen in possession of a modest amount of cash. I also understand you are in a unique position for people in your country and might be able to protect private keys better than most other people in your country because of your unique situation. |
|
|
|
]You should also be able to automate successive posts, excessive bumps, and bumping a thread without deleting the previous post.
I am currently considering how to best enforce the above rules, and if it is possible to enforce additional rules via automation. Some modern forums have an auto-merge feature, where your newer replies are merged into the prior if it is a consecutive post. As for excessive bumps, that's more of a threshold issue: unless you have a rigorous idea of the borders, it would probably be better left to a case-by-case solution. I'm not certain about the volume of bot bumping activity, but since we haven't expanded the bump limit/feature to more boards, it seems like it's contained for now. Also consider the additional friction of updating your values/restrictions after the fact: one could imagine workarounds like alt accounts (to bypass account-based throttles), dynamic word length, and other 'borderline bumping' workarounds. The bump issue is easy -- you simply monitor new posts, and if someone makes a new post at "x" time, subsequently makes an additional post a "y" time, if "y" time is <24 hours after "x" time AND there were no posts made by other users in the thread in question between the post in question, then an excessive bump was made. The bumping threads without deleting old bumps is also easy -- you monitor threads, if a thread has their last two posts (or more) that was written by the OP of a thread, AND there is at least one post that needs to be removed due to duplicate bumps/consecutive posts made. This logic could even be extended to posts not made by the OP of a thread. Using alt accounts to bump threads would bypass initial logic, but someone monitoring closely should be able to detect this, and report accordingly. |
|
|
|
Fully-automated reporting seldom works except in the case of malware/spam/advert links,
You should also be able to automate successive posts, excessive bumps, and bumping a thread without deleting the previous post. I am currently considering how to best enforce the above rules, and if it is possible to enforce additional rules via automation. |
|
|
|
Giving someone the choice to get an abortion is one thing. It is very different when people encourage others to get an abortion, to end a life that would not otherwise have ended.
A mother should have all the relevant facts when deciding if she wants an abortion.
An abortion is ending a human life for the convince of another. To encourage an abortion is comparable to ending a human life for no reason, or perhaps for fun.
For fun? I think you might be exaggerating a bit. It is a tough decision. No doubt. Most women don't want to do it because it is very taxing on the body, or the pregnancies might interfere with their school or work. Can you blame them? It is not just for convenience like you say. They want to get ahead in life. Get a better education or get a promotion at work. That is why they might not want to have a baby at that time in their life. I think women should be the ones deciding it, at least until the fetus becomes viable. At that point, I agree, it is kind of cruel to kill that life. There is nothing special about terminating a non-viable human (or any other) life; you can make another one in no time. No big deal. Humans are not some special or endangered species. We are just slightly smarter than chimpanzees. I would describe someone terminating a pregnancy because it will interfere with school and/or work as being for "convenience". I don't judge them, that is not my place. I also won't sugarcoat what is happening. Both school and job opportunities will still be here after a pregnancy (they will also still be around if the mother decides to take some time off to raise the child, and will still be around for the father if the father decides to take some time off to raise the child). I doubt that any living being that depends on you for support would appreciate it if you suggested that you could just "make another one" if their lives were to end. This would apply to your dog just as much as it would apply to your child. |
|
|
|
Note: Ideally we’d add an overview by reason (i.e plagiarism, low value, etc.), but since reasons are not typified, I figure the latter would not be feasible.
If the text of reports were made public, or if the text of reports was given to a select group of people to prepare a report, or if the text was tokenized and made public, it should not be difficult to classify each report. If particular rules could be cited by moderators when taking moderation actions, this information could potentially be used to make improvements to the forum. |
|
|
|
|
I am surprised to not see multiple threads about this.
Gabby Petito went on a road trip with her fiance, Brian Laundry to the Western United States earlier this year.
On August 12, a third party unrelated to Gabby or Brian called the police, and Police in Utah meet with Brian and Gabby, who appear to have been having some kind of fight, but there was no evidence of a crime, and the police leave after they agree to spend the night away from each other.
On August 25, Gabby's mother has the last audio/facetime conversation with Gabby. Gabby may have sent text messages to her mother up to approximately 5 days after this date, but it is unclear if Gabby actually sent these messages.
On September 1, Brian returned home to FL in Gabby's van without Gabby. This is one day after Gabby's mother last received a text message from Gabby's phone.
On September 11, Gabby is reported missing by her parents in New York (Gabby lives with Brian and his parents in FL).
On Septemer 14, Brian appearently went into the Carlton Reserve in FL, and never returned. He was reported missing by his parents on Septemer 17. The Carlton Reserve is over 25,000 acres and has over 80 miles of hiking trails. It has been speculated that Brian may have hurt himself in the Carlton Reserve.
On September 19, a body is found that authorities appear to belive is that of Gabby near the area Gabby is believed to have been late in her trip.
It is unclear when Brian retained a lawyer, however he appearently already retained a lawyer as of when Gabby was reported missing, and already had received advice to not speak to the police. Brian has not helped with locating Gabby, and is likely the last person to see her alive.
Being that Gabby has been missing for weeks, and that the tempetures frequently are below freezing during the night where Gabby is last known to be, it is likely that she is now deceased, even if the body found is not that of Gabby. Gabby has an unusual tattoo on her arm, so the authorities would likely have been able to match the tattoo on her arm with the tattoo in her pictures.
Being that Brian returned home without Gabby, nearly immediately retained a criminal attorney, and has not helped with the investigation, IMO it is likely that Brian knew that Gabby is deceased as of when he left Wyoming.
Both Brian and Gabby appearently have some mental health issues that it appears they were not receiving any kind of treatment for, it is possible that either Gabby or Brian could have harmed Gabby. It is also possible that Gabby fell of some kind of ledge, killing her. Being that Brian retained a lawyer immediately, I believe it is more likely that Gabby's death was the result of either Brian or Gabby intentionally doing something to Gabby.
Obviously social media "lens" is very narrow, but I think it is unlikely that Brian did anything that was intended to kill Gabby. Although he could have hit her in a way that did more harm to her than he intended. He also could have given her illegal drugs in a dose that was enough for her to OD (knowingly or otherwise). Gabby could also have done something to herself that ended up making it appear that Brian killed Gabby.
What do you think?
|
|
|
|
|
Giving someone the choice to get an abortion is one thing. It is very different when people encourage others to get an abortion, to end a life that would not otherwise have ended.
A mother should have all the relevant facts when deciding if she wants an abortion.
An abortion is ending a human life for the convince of another. To encourage an abortion is comparable to ending a human life for no reason, or perhaps for fun.
|
|
|
|
If DeFi ever becomes big they will also be eliminated - they aren't even the first mover in this space.
Coinbase makes its money by being able to allow people to buy crypto via their bank accounts. DeFi does not allow for this. I don’t think CB is going anywhere. It is very difficult for DeFi to offer margins trading. For this reason, centralized exchanges will be able to survive. |
|
|
|
Humans say it is a human right not to be excluded from medical procedures based on sex. Not allowing women access to medical procedures is discrimination.
Science says when a fetus is viable based on the study of human developmental biology.
There are many abortions performed when the fetus would have been able to survive if it had been delivered rather than aborted. These abortions are the most clearly wrong. With advancements in medical technology, viability outside the womb has become increasingly earlier in pregnancy over time. Restrictions on abortion are not prohibiting women from receiving abortions based on their sex. Abortions until viability is a decision only the mother should be taking. Science tells us that viability is around 22-24 weeks. If you want to be on the side of caution, make the laws allowing all abortions until 16 weeks, or thereabouts. Restrictions on abortions implicitly discriminate against women. Imagine if states had different laws against receiving cancer treatments based on the size of your prostate. Some states would allow treatments as soon as the cancer is detected, others will say that your prostate has to be larger than 4 inches. Most men with prostate cancer will be prevented from receiving their treatment in that state. The laws would discriminate against them without explicitly stating that men are prevented from receiving their cancer treatment. I would not compare an abortion to cancer treatments. One is a life saving treatment and one is, what I don’t think anyone would disagree with is an elective procedure. I would also describe an abortion as not medically necessary. (If there is serious, credible medical evidence that the mothers life is in serious danger, she should have the right to decide if she wants an abortion). There is perhaps a valid argument regarding viability. However if you make this argument. However anyone who makes this argument has their credibility go away when they advocate for abortions up until the baby is delivered. I would counter however that it is illegal to take actions that induce someone to harm or kill themselves. I will admit that 6 weeks pregnant is probably earlier than appropriate to limit abortions due to the time it takes a women to realize they are pregnant. However, viability is well past the time it takes a women to realize they are pregnant and make the decision to get an abortion (or not). I would also say that it is not uncommon for men to pressure women to get an abortion of an unwanted baby. I don’t have data, but I think an outsized percentage of abortions in late stages of pregnancy are the result of this pressure. Does it matter if the procedure is medically necessary? How would you feel if the government passed a law to ban hair transplantations for men or breast augmentations for women? BTW, I did not try to imply that babies are cancer (although many parents would probably agree that they can suck the life out of you, especially during the first five years, lol). The point of the example was that both growing fetus and cancer cells multiply rapidly inside one's body. One should have a choice to be able to get the necessary medical procedure done to stop that growth. I would be ok with an abortion ban after 16 weeks, but until then women should have a choice of what to do with their medical issues. I think it does matter if something is medically necessary and it matters that cancer treatment is potentially life saving. Greater consideration should be given when restricting a life saving procedure. There are a lot of restrictions on procedures that are not medically necessary, for example it is illegal to sell your organs. I am not a fan of breast implants, and really don’t understand why people get them. I am sure there restrictions on hair implants. Both are cosmetic procedures and I would be okay, and even support restrictions on extreme procedures of either. When restricting a medically necessary and life saving procedure, especially those that do not harm other lives, you are potentially killing a person. An abortion is something that ends a life, while providing convenience to another. Arguments about viability are fair as are the morals of abortion before and after viability.
This is not an argument you are making personally, however I find it particularly distasteful when some pro abortion advocates almost encourage mothers to get abortions. |
|
|
|
OK, much of that article is blah blah blah, but after reading OP's post I was left wondering "What the hell does Coinbase need $2 billion for?" and after looking at the article the only thing it says is: Coinbase, a crypto brokerage and exchange, is earmarking its greater proceeds for general corporate purposes, potentially including product development and takeovers. "General corporate purposes", eh? This particular language was used by Coinbase itself. The "general corporate purposes" is fairly "standard" language that many companies use when raising money for unspecific purposes, often due to favorable market conditions. I think there is probably a fairly good chance that Coinbase will use some of this money to fund one or more acquisitions in the near term. They have not yet agreed to terms with a specific company, and probably not even have a specific company in mind yet. |
|
|
|
Same question…. Would anyone adjust there price range if they had a chance and why or reason?
I originally predicted the price will fall due to the removal of QE that will stop and reverse speculative bets on various asset classes. I continue to believe that QE will need to be removed fairly soon and that doing so will result in speculative bets being reversed. It is unclear if this will happen (and see the effects) by the December 7 deadline. Inflation continues to be very high, and the fed may end up needing to tighten swiftly if it continues to get out of hand. QE ending and/or Q-tightening has the potential to negatively affect the price of bitcoin, and will almost certainly negatively affect the price of most altcoins and the NFT market. One part of Democrats' $3.5 trillion (sticker price) spending plan is to force banks to report to the IRS sums of inflows and outflows of bank accounts exceeding $600 per year in order to increase tax "compliance". If this is something that becomes law, I would expect people to move money into the crypto market, and conduct more transactions via crypto. I am not sure how much this will affect the price by early December, but long term, it will be something that is net positive for bitcoin. The pending US government debt ceiling limit and associated drama have the potential to throw a wrench in the financial markets. I strategically place my prediction in order to have the lowest price in order to take advantage of the negative effects of the removal of QE. I think this is probably still a strategy that gives me the best chance to win the contest. Given the above analysis, I might say that bitcoin has a good chance of ending up at a higher price than my prediction, even potentially higher than it is today, however as I am sure everyone knows, when bitcoin's price moves, it can MOVE. If the price were to end at say $75k in early December, the price could easily be 5 or 10% different in either direction a few hours before or after the deadline. This means I may have the price exactly right 6 hours before the deadline, but at the deadline, there might be 5 people who have bets closer to the actual price than my revised bet. This leaves me with the choice between making a guess of about $200k, $250k, $380k, or $430k. I don't see the price going up ~4x by December if the above tax law is implemented, and I am doubtful the price will go up ~8x by early December, absent something crazy happening that causes the fed to increase QE. Given that a bet that the price will end at $430k results in a prize >~35x more valuable than the prize with my current bet, the EV of a revised bet to $430k is probably greater than my current bet if it was guaranteed that no one could place a bet above mine. |
|
|
|
Humans say it is a human right not to be excluded from medical procedures based on sex. Not allowing women access to medical procedures is discrimination.
Science says when a fetus is viable based on the study of human developmental biology.
There are many abortions performed when the fetus would have been able to survive if it had been delivered rather than aborted. These abortions are the most clearly wrong. With advancements in medical technology, viability outside the womb has become increasingly earlier in pregnancy over time. Restrictions on abortion are not prohibiting women from receiving abortions based on their sex. Abortions until viability is a decision only the mother should be taking. Science tells us that viability is around 22-24 weeks. If you want to be on the side of caution, make the laws allowing all abortions until 16 weeks, or thereabouts. Restrictions on abortions implicitly discriminate against women. Imagine if states had different laws against receiving cancer treatments based on the size of your prostate. Some states would allow treatments as soon as the cancer is detected, others will say that your prostate has to be larger than 4 inches. Most men with prostate cancer will be prevented from receiving their treatment in that state. The laws would discriminate against them without explicitly stating that men are prevented from receiving their cancer treatment. I would not compare an abortion to cancer treatments. One is a life saving treatment and one is, what I don’t think anyone would disagree with is an elective procedure. I would also describe an abortion as not medically necessary. (If there is serious, credible medical evidence that the mothers life is in serious danger, she should have the right to decide if she wants an abortion). There is perhaps a valid argument regarding viability. However if you make this argument. However anyone who makes this argument has their credibility go away when they advocate for abortions up until the baby is delivered. I would counter however that it is illegal to take actions that induce someone to harm or kill themselves. I will admit that 6 weeks pregnant is probably earlier than appropriate to limit abortions due to the time it takes a women to realize they are pregnant. However, viability is well past the time it takes a women to realize they are pregnant and make the decision to get an abortion (or not). I would also say that it is not uncommon for men to pressure women to get an abortion of an unwanted baby. I don’t have data, but I think an outsized percentage of abortions in late stages of pregnancy are the result of this pressure. |
|
|
|
To get back on topic to BADecker here, I'm unclear as to why you are defending someone who any rational person would agree is spreading incorrect and dangerous information.
Well I firmly believe that people are entitled to say what they believe, or what they say they believe. I would also disagree that “any rational person” would agree that what he posts is “dangerous”. He is certainly promoting unproven treatments. There is also very little data on the treatments he is promoting. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
