Hjfrf

The top ten most traded collections last week are all knockoff cryptopunks (ranked 17), which itself is bulk-generated crap from a combination of templates.

It's hard to imagine a more cynical industry.

The one exception I can think of is a bug in the mssql datetime type (but not date or datetime2) where strings in that format are assumed to be yyyy-dd-mm if the locale dateformat is dmy (e.g. British English).

Cryptocurrency projects have squandered a decade of good faith with no useful product.

They've done a great deal of harm in that period, so I can't see even the current level of mild negative sentiment as sustainable.

Maybe it would be simpler at an international level rather than for individual companies?

E.g. based on last year's co2 vs rolling 5 years average, calculated by weather satellites rather than self-reported.

I've got no idea how gdp would be taken into account though. Enclaves and disputed borders are also less clear.

It's not a debate so much as occasional attempts at grifting that get shot down immediately.

GUSD isn't FDIC insured, unless their homepage has it wrong. It's the dollar accounts in Gemini's name that are FDIC insured.

So if there's an exploit where GUSD can be stolen/duplicated, or if Gemini defaults the insurance is meaningless.

What it means is that if a bank where Gemini holds an account defaults, the government will pay Gemini up to $250k.

If the price goes higher, it only gets worse as a transactional currency. Those are in direct opposition.

Sponsorblock is a similar premise, just crowdsourced rather than ai.

Reddit.com/r/buttcoin

Excessive consumption as fashion has gone the other way for young kids.

Environmentalism seems to be "cool af",to the point where not owning a car is virtue signalling.

Banning miners would send them to the next-most corrupt country with cheap energy.

A more meaningful move would be to ban exchanges, so that miners can no longer take exit liquidity at the expense on retail "investors".

The next natural step in that direction would be banning all exchanges from banking in hard money.

It would push people to p2p, at the expense of cryptocurrency prices. Big win for the environment and people hoping to use crypto as currency. Big loss for people holding for speculative gains.

51% just doesn't feel like a meaningful threat model when governments can instead prevent exchanges offering monero pairs from accessing banking services in their country/currency.

Those could be a package manager and a web page.

Microsoft did this to themselves by not having a standard package manager installed by default.