|
As a concept, democracy calls for corruption.
No politician today, no matter how good his intentions are, can win an election without getting in bed with those that hold the money.
In fact, many countries have regulations limiting the amount of personal money a politician can use for his or her campaign, literally forcing that politician to corrupt himself.
Should that politician be elected, they'd rise to power indebted to a lot of people that have a different idea of what's "good for the country".
That said, by design, an elected official has a lot of tools (legal or not) to cover their tracks, and a lot of opportunities to do wrong for their own profit. That's a huge temptation right there.
|
|
|
|
Now I answer you, gender equality exists, just in case you did not know, but there is an imbalance in opportunities and that is what the issue is about.
And now I answer you: gender equality most certainly DOESN'T exist, and will never do. Why? Because we're NOT EQUAL, period. In fact, you are contradicting your own statement. You don't seem to understand what "equality" means. You're saying equality exists, "but there is an imbalance". Well, guess what? If there is an "imbalance", equality sure as hell does not exist. The whole concept is ridiculous. I do agree that women deserve respect, but men do also. It's actually women that minimize the importance they naturally have, by trying to compete with men. If they had a bit more pride on what they are and do, we wouldn't be needing to hear this BS. And no, I did not read the article. |
|
|
|
|
Personally, I think Satoshi Nakamoto's reluctance to come clean is ultimately a disservice to bitcoin itself. Of course, you all could argue that bitcoin is powerful enough as it is, but still it could be much bigger.
If there are 2 reasons I'm not that into bitcoin, those are, first and foremost, that Satoshi Nakamoto remains in the shadows, and second, that bitcoin's whitepaper says absolutely nothing about bitcoin. It describes the concept of the blockchain, but that's about it. You can't talk about transparency like that. For all we know, Satoshi Nakamoto could easily be Bernie Maddoff, and he's not posting because he's dead.
|
|
|
|
Thanks again for the replies.  ETFbitcoin I'll check it out. Thank you. I realize 100% security is more of an euphemism than a reality. I'm just not willing to compromise my security knowingly. When I was working as an alarm installer, one of my favorite phrases was "the security of the system is not about shielding your place, nor about catching the burglar. It's about having a reputation so a burglar with half a brain will choose the next house upon seeing our sign". I'm just trying to make it as hard for a hacker as possible. SquirrelJulietGarden Thank you, I will read up on it. Welsh: true. But the difference in entropy between a 25 character password and a 30 character password is huge. And if you use alphanumeric characters + punctuation signs (compared to a purely alphanumeric password), it's much bigger. You don't need a 251 character password (would be cool though  ) to be safe. o_e_l_e_o: as I keep on learning, my issues kinda change...  As of now, my biggest issue with Tails is that I intend to rely somewhat heavily on altcoins, and Electrum is a Bitcoin-only wallet, so I need to get another wallet. Coinomi was my first choice, based only on the number of cryptocurrencies it accepts, but I've been reading on it, and it's out now. Right now (pending a lot more research), I'm thinking Exodus. |
|
|
|
That's only a small amount to solve the world hunger, however, the intention to help is big and if It's true then I would certainly admire Elon for doing that. At least he can help a huge number of hungry people in the world and that's his way to sharing back to the world from the fruits of his labor.
so the question of whether it will solve? it will definitely not but he can be a model and other billionaires might follow.
To eradicate the damage to the world, this nominal is indeed very small, but at least this can help those who really need and are hungry because there are still many people who are still very difficult to even eat. I really appreciate what Elon is doing and I hope other Influenc and other billionaires do the same. Instead of getting some appreciation on what Elon had done but instead he do get out some criticism or negative feedbacks about such matter on 6 billion wouldnt be enough? Yes it is but at least he do show off some care. Dont know if this is some publicity or something like that but its really good that he had made out some considerations on making this donation even though not enough but at least lots would really be benefiting out. I do also appreciate on what Elon had done. At least he is willing to contribute to one of the world's major problems. Though it is not yet received by the organization as he said he is waiting for the breakdown on how this amount will solve this problem from responsible persons on this organization, still the idea that he is willing to share some of his stocks is for me should be appreciated. Because there are also billionaires like him, but what is their stance when it comes to poverty? We know some of them have their own nonprofit organizations but if a lot of these rich people will do the same as what Elon is willing to do, that would really be a great impact to the world, and may finally lessen the hunger crisis around the world. He's not. It's just a PR stunt. If you really want to help, you help. You don't need to broadcast it. PR stunt? You couldnt really tell because it is really just impossible that events like these wont really go to media knowing that Elon is the richest man on the world and every move you do make specially dealing off with big money and its impossible that no one would be noticing it but i do understand on your point about not telling everybody if you do really tend to make donation in silent but if that kind of fame and popularity level you do have then its less likely to happen. I disagree. Being rich and powerful actually gives you access to many more tools if you want to protect your identity. True, not everybody can donate 6 billion bucks, but if he really wanted to help he probably wouldn't need to, and a simple donation of that amount probably wouldn't make much of a difference. The problem is he's expected to do charity, and that's wrong. Lots of people feel they have a right to help others with someone else's money. Maybe they should use their own money to do that. |
|
|
|
I see. Thank you all for the replies. So a market crash is not really expected any time soon, but it's possible, so better be prepared. Makes sense. One thing I learned last night (I'm on my third course so far. and downloading another 2) is that as many as 70% of altcoins can be scams. That's a huge percentage. Takes the "do your homework" mantra to a whole new level. It also makes sense that, should there be a huge market crash, Bitcoin and the stronger altcoins (ethereum, BNB) would be the ones to survive, so it would be more of a purge than a crash. Guess that makes a strong case for sticking to the big ones, which I'm planning to do. There is, however, a small altcoin that I've been following (WOZX), mostly because their purpose is very dear to me. But, in any case, that's a project for the future. I'm gonna need to learn a whole lot more about crypto before even thinking on taking that kind of risk. |
|
|
|
All I see is free advertisement  Ok, so would you rather people didn't know that it's possible to recover their crypto from broken devices? You'd rather that they lose their crypto? As far as I know (somebody please correct me if I'm wrong), you don't need to recover the wallet when your machine (whatever it is) stops working. You just need your seed phrase. I have to agree, this looks a lot like free advertising to me... |
|
|
|
Not expecting a market crash would be surprising if you ask me unless you are a newbie cryptocurrency investor which would make complete sense.
I'm not a "newbie" cryptocurrency investor, I'm a "wannabe" cryptocurrency investor. |
|
|
|
If we pull back today for the next two years I would be surprised.
But I am prepped either way.
If we pull back for the next two weeks I'd be pretty much screwed. But I'm screwed already, so I guess it's not much of a difference...
There are (as of now) 14029 cryptocurrencies listed in coinmarketcap.com.
A case has been made (repeatedly) for the existence of a bubble in the cryptocurrency market.
Yeah, I understand cryptocurrencies are volatile, high risk investments. But, are you guys expecting a market crash anytime soon?
Yes ofcourse it will but will it remain in that zone forever? No not at all, markets are bound to run in cycles, cycles of bullishness followed by bearishness and then again bullishness and this string continues, what remains constant is the growth in the longer term bitcoin being a deflationary asset will definitely grow in the longer term. So if you are in for the short term trading better learn concepts of support resistances otherwise just bring in your money and just forget about your investment. Yeah, I'm learning. Just finished a trading course yesterday. That's why I'm asking the stupid questions... [moderator's note: consecutive posts merged] |
|
|
|
My question would be: if I don't access that virtual machine while I'm online, could it be accessed anyway, be it while I share the paper wallets with the main OS, or when I update it?
Yes it could be accessed while you're online as the filesystem will still be there on the drive. I doubt the driver for reading a vdl/ISO is that huge too that a virus couldn't pack it in itself to attack a system - especially in the future if there aren't many attacking that now. 7zip can read a lot of different archive files (I've used it on ISOs before) and it's console version is 900kb. Yeah, I'm definitely not taking that risk. Thanks for the heads up.
Not really. I already have a 16GB stick, which should be more than enough to install Fedora. I just don't want to waste drive space on things I won't use.
If you don't plan to use the stick for anything else, you can put as big a system on it as you want - I'm assuming you'd be doing live boots though too so you don't need space for files? I installed Fedora 35 last night (xfce), and it was 15.5 GiB (about 16.6 GB) right out of the box, so it wouldn't even fit in the pendrive. I'm getting the feeling I'm getting into waters that are way too deep for my skill level though. And messing things up would indeed be very expensive for me at this time. I guess that puts Tails back in the game, as it's designed to not rely on updates. Guess I'm gonna have to do some more reading...
You probably still need to find an operating system you're happy using though too... You're probably going to want to update your OS every so often too, even if you just put a months' old version on and keep going that way every few months (providing there aren't critical updates). Well, I'm an Openbox user, and Tails seemed pretty slim. and my needs are actually pretty simple: I just want the OS to get out of the way while I'm working. Shouldn't have much problem... right? |
|
|
|
Sorry you consider my question not to be decent.  There's no agenda behind it. I'm learning, I'm asking questions. Several people have said (understandably) that there are way too many cryptocurrencies today, and in a world with less than 200 fiat currencies, it kinda makes sense, at least to me. |
|
|
|
Per 100,000. Lol! In other words, no problem. Yep, that's nothing. Then, of course, when you realize the US population is over 300 million people, those 3.5 people per 100000 become more than 10500, or over 3 times the people that died in 9/11/2001. That kinda makes it a problem, doesn't it? |
|
|
|
|
There are (as of now) 14029 cryptocurrencies listed in coinmarketcap.com.
A case has been made (repeatedly) for the existence of a bubble in the cryptocurrency market.
Yeah, I understand cryptocurrencies are volatile, high risk investments. But, are you guys expecting a market crash anytime soon?
|
|
|
|
|
o_e_l_e_o: that's absolutely true. However, if there was a way for you to completely anonymize the very fact that you own cryptocurrency, or even a crypto wallet, you'd arguably be safe(ish), right?
|
|
|
|
Thank you all. hatshepsut93: true. but I'm worried about my OS eventually quitting on me if I fail to update it. It did happen to me when I started with Linux, and I don't want it to happen again, especially not when there's money involved. About the paper wallets, initially I wanted to use them offline as a means to transport the funds between my wallet and my main OS (Fedora), but since I posted I read about coinomi's "issues", and other wallets' false claims and whatnot, and that got me seriously thinking about using the paper wallets also as my main wallets inside Porteus. Fact is, open or closed source, you can't really trust that "somebody" in the developing team may not have a different agenda than your security, and a number of problems I've been having with Fedora 34 and 35 (not related to security) are proof of that. o_e_l_e_o: yeah, I chose Porteus mostly because of its size. I didn't know about Qubes. I'll read on it. I just don't want to deal with Debian's BS anymore, and, to be honest, Fedora is also starting to piss me off, so Porteus being based on Slackware seemed like a good option. Yeah, the idea is to create the paper wallets offline, and keep them strictly offline, always. dkbit98: yeah, I imagined something like that. So virtualbox is not gonna happen. I read about coinomi after I posted. There's a thread in the forum about it, and about other wallets as well. That's why I'm thinking about using paper wallets offline. No hidden code to deal with. Hardware wallets are very expensive in my country (everything is), so they're not an option. The reason I got turned off with Tails is it won't even let me install the extra wallet (without jumping through hoops to do it). Now, I understand you can't shortcut security, but I'm not a computer guru, and Tails is definitely too complicated for me. ETFbitcoin: well, one malware is one too many... The reason I was considering to use virtualbox is mostly for convenience, as I could open a virtual machine in my computer if needed. But if there's any chance it may be less than 100% safe, it's out. I guess that puts Tails back in the game, as it's designed to not rely on updates. Guess I'm gonna have to do some more reading... |
|
|
|
The security of a virtualbox depends on the security of the computer that hosts it. It's Filesystem is just another Filesystem in your machine and if you mount it often enough, most attack types will probably still be able to find your wallet - there would be ways to make this harder but it still would not be too hard to attack. My question would be: if I don't access that virtual machine while I'm online, could it be accessed anyway, be it while I share the paper wallets with the main OS, or when I update it? The pendrive method would be what I'd go with, you can pick up big USB sticks for quite cheap now though - is there a reason you couldn't buy one for mounting fedora or something you're more used to (or was the minimalism security consciousness over fedora's dependencies/software that comes with it)?
Not really. I already have a 16GB stick, which should be more than enough to install Fedora. I just don't want to waste drive space on things I won't use. |
|
|
|
Ok, I tried to use Tails as a vehicle for a cold(ish) wallet, but the thing is so horribly inconvenient I ended up discarding the idea. So here's another question for you, more knowledgeable guys: I'm thinking about installing Porteus on a pendrive, and Coinomi in it, and use it strictly offline to store my coins, using paper wallets to transfer money in and out the software wallets as needed. So, to be more clear: I'd only connect Porteus to the internet to update it, say once a week, for example. Any crypto trading would be made directly to the corresponding paper wallet on a different OS (Fedora, which I'm currently using), and then the paper wallet would be moved into Porteus offline, and the funds will be transferred to Coinomi. I'm on the fence whether to use Porteus on a pendrive or it or another light distro on Virtualbox for Coinomi, as I don't know how safe Virtualbox is. So, the questions are: 1. Is either method suitable as an alternative to a hardware wallet? I know they're not as convenient, but that's not a problem. 2. Which method is better, from a "strictly security" standpoint? 3. The virtualbox method is more convenient, as I can have it (and the wallet) in my computer all the time. How secure would it be? Thank you all for the replies. |
|
|
|
But it's also true that only 2 countries in the world (the US and Yemen) give their citizens a "right to bear arms", and one of them has one of the highest rates of homicide by firearm in the world, while the other one is in the middle of a civil war.
Yeah, law abiding citizens carrying guns are (or can be) great. But the fact is that everyone is a law abiding citizen until they are proven to have broken the law (notice I didn't say "until they break the law"), and most mass shootings are carried by guys with no prior record.
Just to make things clear: I'm not against people carrying firearms. I'm against people treating me like I'm an idiot.
Gun control doesn't mean "banning guns": it means allowing those that can be sane and responsible enough to wield that kind of power to wield it legally, while at least attempting to keep others from getting access to them.
The U.S. doesn't give its citizens any rights. Our Bill of Rights merely acknowledges that we're born with certain rights and prohibits the government from infringing them. As far as gun control is concerned, I'm finally unequivocally against it. Reasonable measures sound reasonable to normal people. The "activists" who are really pushing for gun control are only going to be content when the only remaining armed Americans are employed by the government. That's semantics, so let me fix that for you: in only 2 countries in the world their citizens have an unrestricted right to own and bear firearms, and in both of them a good percentage of people seem to think most problems can be solved with one. Meanwhile, 95% of the world's population lead full, happy(ish) lives without having that right, and you don't hear or read about some bozo taking a firearm to a school and opening fire on kids because he can. But then again, nobody is talking (as far as I know) about banning guns (which is the argument the pro-gun crowd has been pushing forever), but about allowing access to those that are qualified to use them, same way you do with cars, and many other things. The whole "pro-gun" argument makes no sense whatsoever, but it's backed by a lot of money and a lot of lobbying power, and the results are clear. Lots of people are gonna keep on dying, and nobody's gonna give a damn about it. |
|
|
|
That's only a small amount to solve the world hunger, however, the intention to help is big and if It's true then I would certainly admire Elon for doing that. At least he can help a huge number of hungry people in the world and that's his way to sharing back to the world from the fruits of his labor.
so the question of whether it will solve? it will definitely not but he can be a model and other billionaires might follow.
To eradicate the damage to the world, this nominal is indeed very small, but at least this can help those who really need and are hungry because there are still many people who are still very difficult to even eat. I really appreciate what Elon is doing and I hope other Influenc and other billionaires do the same. Instead of getting some appreciation on what Elon had done but instead he do get out some criticism or negative feedbacks about such matter on 6 billion wouldnt be enough? Yes it is but at least he do show off some care. Dont know if this is some publicity or something like that but its really good that he had made out some considerations on making this donation even though not enough but at least lots would really be benefiting out. I do also appreciate on what Elon had done. At least he is willing to contribute to one of the world's major problems. Though it is not yet received by the organization as he said he is waiting for the breakdown on how this amount will solve this problem from responsible persons on this organization, still the idea that he is willing to share some of his stocks is for me should be appreciated. Because there are also billionaires like him, but what is their stance when it comes to poverty? We know some of them have their own nonprofit organizations but if a lot of these rich people will do the same as what Elon is willing to do, that would really be a great impact to the world, and may finally lessen the hunger crisis around the world. He's not. It's just a PR stunt. If you really want to help, you help. You don't need to broadcast it. |
|
|
|
|
As an Argentinian, having lived in Miami for almost 13 years, I've had the opportunity to know literally thousands of both Cubans and Venezuelans, and in both cases they're very peculiar people.
I've had endless arguments with both, because I fail to understand how an entire country can be dominated by a handful of thugs, and people won't move a finger to change that.
That said, I think any help that can be sent to oppressed people is a good thing. Unfortunately, in my experience, most of that help will end up in the hands of the oppressors, and the victims will see very little (if any) of it.
Either way, I think you have to earn your help. Cubans have been basically enslaved for half a century, Venezuelans for about 2 decades, and they basically do nothing to force a change in their situation. I got my hopes up in 2004, when Venezuelans started to show signs of rebellion against Chavez's abuses, and finally nothing happened. That's the big problem with Latin America as a whole: everybody talks, but nobody does anything. That's not a suitable way to solve any problem.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
