I'm not Satoshi, you are ¬.¬
No you are! Fine, you caught me... Just a sec, someone is knocking on my do |
|
|
|
|
I'm not Satoshi, you are ¬.¬
|
|
|
|
|
Accepting ads that are anything more than a picture, alt text and a URL doesn't seem all that safe; specially considering how tempting of a target users of the forum are...
|
|
|
|
Except when the guest says "you can download software onto your desktop to mine bitcoins." This isnt 2009.
Or that the he thinks through mining on your desktop you will receive 50 BTC. Or that they don't understand how the blockchain works. Or that the lady in the red dress is completely clueless and the other two are not far ahead of her. Or the fact that all three are under the impression that it can simply be made illegal. If there was a feasible approach as simple and thoughtless as making decentralized virtual currencies illegal, regulators and agencies wouldn't be having discussions. It would probably just be done. It would be nice if one of the largest media outlets in the world had a deep understanding of what they are talking about. For being Fox News they actually did quite a good job... |
|
|
|
|
That was surprisingly positive and accurate, relatively speaking.
|
|
|
|
|
Government is just the most powerful corporation in the territory.
|
|
|
|
|
Certain drugs are more dangerous than others; and some of them due to their (side)effects can impair your judgement to the point of making you do things you wouldn't think you would do. So there can't be a general statement about the feasibility of safely using all drugs; the safety needs to be evaluated in a case by case basis.
|
|
|
|
|
The size of the QR code depends not only on the size of the data stored but also on the strength of the error protection.
|
|
|
|
Given that you have to use someone's key to encrypt a message, it would be safe to assume they had software to generate and handle said key.
But how would you know if they have a key in the first place? You'd have to negotiate that beforehand. Isn't there something like OTR but for email?
With a diffie-heilman agreement specifically? Or are you talking about GPG/PGP? I mean something where the two ends negotiate an encryption over unsecure lines in a secure manner; while providing the option to fall back to plain text if the other side refuses to go secure. Yea for email GPG/PGP. For IM OTR, for VOIP ZRTP. With GPG/PGP the email client has no clue whether the receiver has or hasn't means to read encrypted data until the user tells it... Okay I see what you mean. Unfortunately building a system like you mentioned requires a 'failsafe' for decrypting the messege then sending plaintext if encrypted message can't be decrypted by the receiving party, an inherently insecure action. OTR cannot do this either, so curious as to why you 'said similar to OTR for email' but then responded as you did? Last i checked (not recently) OTR did indeed allow you the option of using plain-text if the other party didn't had OTR |
|
|
|
Given that you have to use someone's key to encrypt a message, it would be safe to assume they had software to generate and handle said key.
But how would you know if they have a key in the first place? |
|
|
|
And wouldn't that expose data encrypted by other apps to similar security issues?
No. The issue has nothing to do with exposing encrypted data but with signatures exposing private keys. Encryption isn't weakened when the random number generator is bad like this? |
|
|
|
Isn't there something like OTR but for email?
With a diffie-heilman agreement specifically? Or are you talking about GPG/PGP? I mean something where the two ends negotiate an encryption over unsecure lines in a secure manner; while providing the option to fall back to plain text if the other side refuses to go secure. Yea for email GPG/PGP. For IM OTR, for VOIP ZRTP. With GPG/PGP the email client has no clue whether the receiver has or hasn't means to read encrypted data until the user tells it... |
|
|
|
Isn't there something like OTR but for email?
With a diffie-heilman agreement specifically? Or are you talking about GPG/PGP? I mean something where the two ends negotiate an encryption over unsecure lines in a secure manner; while providing the option to fall back to plain text if the other side refuses to go secure. |
|
|
|
|
Isn't there something like OTR but for email?
|
|
|
|
|
One of the problems with switching to new or small email companies is it is much less likely they will still be around in the future; for many people nowadays if they loose their email address, they are locked out of huge chunks of their online life.
|
|
|
|
|
What is your prediction about the accuracy of your predictions about the price?
|
|
|
|
|
And wouldn't that expose data encrypted by other apps to similar security issues?
|
|
|
|
|
It doesn't affect anything other than Bitcoin?
|
|
|
|
|
Given the recent NSA leaks, is it possible the flaw was put there on purpose to make it easier for them to spy on people?
|
|
|
|
lol well that's not quite the story you led us to believe there was it...
That's nothing, awhile back I order 200 hard drives and I got honey. The funny thing is that the honey had UPS labels going to different destination, I contact the seller and he contact UPS. UPS called me and asked me for more info, I told about the honey, which I think the didn't believe me either. When they finish asking all the stupid questions, I asked them about the Honey, they told me to keep it, being that it was allot I gave it away to the family, 2 days later they call me that if I still had the honey, I only had two left. (they came and took my last 2 boxes) Also 1 year ago order some computer speaker, so when FedEx came it hand me a box, I sign for then he left. I open the box, it was an Brand New HP Laser Printer, so I figure WTF!. Around 30mins later the same FedEx truck comes back (im thinking he came for the box he gave me) and tells that he forgot to give my other 2 boxes, so gave me the other boxes (which were the speakers). So I kept the HP Printer sold it on eBay for $800. You are admitting to fraud on here? There goes your trust. And you are now on my ignore list so I never do business with you, ever. Didn't someone just pointed out the law says you can keep stuff you get from mail even if it wasn't meant for you? |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
