PeanutCurry

That doesn't negate the damage though. Requiring a grey or black market to use the currency in a nation of economic significance restricts bitcoin's utility. This will be a value hit when competing against any potential currency that can overcome those hurdles.

Practice is important and when coupled with introspection/self-reflection can help a lot in identifying areas where easy improvement can be developed. However, of equal importance is targeted study. If you want to tell better jokes, study successful comedians and their jokes. If you want to write, read stories by successful writers. Meanwhile, as you do these things always try to understand why the audiences for these things liked them so much.

I don't think they're ignoring the issue, I think you're pushing an issue that they've already explained in parts of their statement that you chose not to quote.

> st3fan: Because that library is there does not mean that we are giving data to Google. It does not even mean that it is active or that it is sending anything.

Having gone through the comment chain in other places it seems like your entire position in the debate between you and st3fan is based on ignoring what he's actually saying in general. In response to their request for evidence your responded

>That's pretty simple. Don't use proprietary software.

which sidesteps the query entirely and does nothing to lend credibility to your original position.

I don't expect to change your mind and frankly I don't have a reason to, but if your goal is to have productive or persuasive conversations then you may want to evaluate your current communication strategy.

I'm not entirely sure I understand your metaphor in this case. I appreciate that it had something to do with efficiency but then I got lost because a 20:1 farmer-to-other feeding ratio seems incredibly unrealistic and made it hard to understand whether the ratio was relevant to the metaphor's point or was just an off the cuff sort of detail.

I think computing limitations is the big one but also software limitations in terms of how much software a company might need to develop for itself to compete with a big player. Right now there's a lot of innovation going on. Not that there won't always be innovation, but in the grand scheme of time I'd argue web-tech will one day reach a state of the art that progresses more incrementally in the way that fields like physics, biology, etc. tend to with of waves of small insights rather than the few decades of rapid evolution they underwent in their infancy.

It's at that point of incremental innovation for web-tech where I think little guys become competitive because that's where they can start smaller businesses running cheap but 'good enough' hardware and premade open-source software to provide similar services to the big players albeit at smaller margins to provide comparable but less comprehensive products for cheaper. These smaller businesses are where I imagine the decentralization manifesting. Especially if some of those businesses are things like "Join our regional hardware co-op and contribute your unused processing power to our service in exchange for a share of the profit". That would be huge on its own for de-centralization, if a profitable service could bring anybody and everybody a worthwhile amount of money for simply running their web-service software during downtime.

I may have phrased that poorly, I didn't mean that you would be searchable for being in the area. I meant that you would be searchable for being witnessed picking or carrying mushrooms in the area which is very different from your example of simply walking through a high crime area.

I agree with your addendum, I actually paused for about a minute while I was writing my reply to contemplate the right word to use for current oversight. Originally I was going to say insufficient/weak oversight but that seemed too much like it implied that the solution would simply be stronger/more oversight.

This doesn't sounds like an issue of too much money though, it sounds like a combination of baseline compensation not yielding a high enough return, inadequate oversight agencies to catch this sort of behavior, and the consequences of being caught not being strict enough. It could even be argued that just paying more would discourage the corrupt behavior in your hypothetical examples because the doctors are taking those actions to simply make more money.

Except for the part where you completely ignored their point that you and anyone else with security concerns can conduct their own audit of the code and verify whether or not the telemetry functionality is performing in the manner described.

Definitely relevant but it seems like this would probably be argued as a case of probable cause. If the local police are aware that people have been picking mushrooms in the region because some of them contain psilocybin then it wouldn't be unreasonable to consider foraging for mushrooms probable cause in their jurisdiction.

Could you expand on this a little? I'm confused because the ACLU is not a government organization, they're not part of the infrastructure.

I realize I'm risking downvotes with this one, but I think it's worth acknowledging. While Charlottesville was a tragedy, and the time is not right imo to discuss it with the public at large precisely because it was a tragedy and people are still mourning, the event was overall as peaceful as any severely political protest ever is. The deaths and injuries that occurred should not be simply discounted as if the people are simply disposable, but the majority of activists on both sides did not cause those deaths and injuries. Unless there is a major point of information that I am ignorant of, the driver who has catapulted the event into the national spotlight acted essentially in isolation even if his ideology was not held in isolation at the event. He acted heinously, and now is not the time for taking easy solace, but I think there's some merit in the reality that by and large people on both sides were able to demonstrate with the -relative- peacefulness of a generic controversial American protest with orbital counter protests.

My issue with the whole article is that I don't understand the use-case here barring personal interest because that's a universal use-case. If I'm legitimately poor I'm going to buy the shittiest tablet I can for content consumption. This will run me between $30-$60 dollars and let me have my own personal machine to use with the library's wifi. If I have my own internet, I probably have enough income that within a year I could save up enough for a shitty tablet w/ attachable keyboard or a cheap used laptop. After that, computing power doesn't really matter because I'm just using the thing to go to community college while I either: a.) Pursue the scholarships that will get me into a 4-year college or b.) Pursue a sufficiently lucrative 2-year certification.

If neither of those things are attainable I should be sticking with just using the library's computers to try and manage to produce some form of profit I can put towards eventually getting into community college.

If I'm not dirt broke, this entire article is sort've pointless from a practical standpoint unless you just really enjoy this sort of cost-saving exercise. But if you don't and you're making enough for a real computer then you may as well just get the real computer.

Why would it be better for it to be more expensive to prosecute someone? The point of laws is that we'd like to see them enforced. If the people don't like the laws they should change them not try to cripple their government's ability to do its job.

That's a very low bar for an essay... at least in terms of length. I'd be surprised if this took long to write which isn't a criticism so much an expression of confusion as to why you called it an essay. It's also a little weird to call it inexcusable they didn't acknowledge Hanlon's Razor because it's hardly a common reference. Even the wikipedia page only gives two instances of Hanlon's razor being used and one of them is an acknowledgement that the general idea is very likely much older than the Jargon File glossary entry.