flashdance
Joined 10 years ago
Karma
372
Submissions
102
Member since
Aug 9
Recent submissions
Comment · 6 years ago
Comment · 6 years ago
That's exactly what it is. If you recall, these image based captchas were originally in 2007 for digitizing books. [1]
In 2012, Google started using captchas to identify house numbers from google street view. [2]
Now, users are identifying cars, bikes, traffic lights, and crosswalks most of the time. While Google/Alphabet has been mum on what specifically they're using the data for, it is speculated by engineers at competing firms that they are using this data to help Alphabet's subsidiary, Waymo, with its self-driving car program. [3] This data is either used as training data or to validate outputs that were already classified by their system.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ReCAPTCHA
[2] https://techcrunch.com/2012/03/29/google-now-using-recaptcha...
[3] https://www.ceros.com/originals/recaptcha-waymo-future-of-se...
Comment · 7 years ago
Well, I'll be damned. It looks like there's going to be a general strike primarily organized by the US Government. I guess horseshoe theory is real after all.
Seriously though, it'll be interesting to see how much disruption is necessary to force the hand of the legislative and executive branch to finally fund the government.
Comment · 8 years ago
I think that's because nothing on wikipedia links to that page.
I managed to go from spud gun -> great depression -> dissolution of the soviet union -> soviet union -> sputnik, but I couldn't get the last step!
Comment · 8 years ago
Oh, I see what you mean.
Comment · 8 years ago
You can premine chain splits. See bitcoin gold, which had a premine of 100k coins, or the very coin this thread is about, with a premine of millions.
Comment · 9 years ago
One public key contains 1.8B USD, but take a look at the address again:
3D2oetdNuZUqQHPJmcMDDHYoqkyNVsFk9r
See how it starts with a 3? Most normal bitcoin addresses start with a 1. The 3 means that it's a pay to script hash address, which means that its likely a multisignature address.
Multisig addresses require multiple signatures to send funds. This could be two out of three possible signatures, seven out of seven possible signatures, fifty out of one hundred possible signatures, it all depends how it is configured.
In short though it kind of works like nuclear weapons where you need multiple keys help by different people to authenticate a transaction.
Comment · 9 years ago
Yes, maybe, kind of?
With quantum computing it's expected that the ECDSA public-key cryptography used in bitcoin addresses will be broken. However, the ECDSA public key is only exposed when your first transaction out of the address is signed. If you only use addresses once (recommended practice), an attacker would have to break your private key faster than it takes for your transaction to propagate to the entire network in order to steal your coins. It would take a long time between the first cracking of ECDSA to nearly instantly being able to crack it. For example, the first publicly-disclosed attack on SHA1 took 110 GPU-years.
If the accounts listed by the OP have sent transactions in the past and reused addresses (which was common back in 2010/11), it's possible the private keys can be bruteforced in the future.
If not, we don't know the ECDSA public key for the address. Bruteforcing it gets a LOT harder--but never say never.
Comment · 9 years ago
Your source uses poor methodology to calculate inequality, and is really outdated.
The 2014 article you're citing uses this 2013 article [1] as a source. This uses data from bitcoinrichlist.com, which contains balances for all active bitcoin addresses at the time.
This sort of blockchain analysis isn't super useful, especially in 2017, because some extremely-rich people have funds in multiple addresses and some extremely-rich addresses contain funds for multiple people.
The richest bitcoin address in 2017 has 1.8B worth of bitcoin, but it's the cold storage address for hundreds of thousands of bitfinex users [2]. It's possible that many of the other addresses on the richlist are coinbase vault addresses or cold storage addresses for other custodial wallets. The important part is that, with some publicly disclosed exceptions, we don't know if a rich address belongs to a single person or an organization.
Meanwhile, the poorest addresses contain UTXOs worth pennies that cost more in fees to send than they're worth. These addresses have been completely abandoned by their users and have no practical owner.
Even addresses with a spendable balance don't correspond to one user ever since Hierarchical Deterministic address generation has become the standard. HD wallets generate a new address for every incoming transaction for greater privacy [3]. A typical user may have their funds spread over dozens of addresses.
That being said, I'm sure wealth is highly concentrated in the bitcoin ecosystem: it's just very hard to quantify to what degree it is.
Disclaimer: I hold bitcoin and some other cryptocurrencies.
[1] http://www.businessinsider.com/927-people-own-half-of-the-bi...
[2] https://bitinfocharts.com/bitcoin/address/3D2oetdNuZUqQHPJmc...
[3] https://support.mycelium.com/hc/en-us/articles/207045475-Wha...
Comment · 9 years ago
> It pays dividends
It doesn't pay dividends in ETH, it pays dividends in more kitties. Is that really a dividend?
If apple shares could only pay dividends in more apple shares instead of USD would they have any value?
> This is ethereum we are talking about. If the ether was bought 1 year ago today, it would have cost $1,557.1. Someone could have made a $1.5k investment 1 year ago which is now paying for itself weekly.
Ethereum at least has a purpose, cryptokitties do not seem to have one. Besides, you can't just say that the price of one crypto asset will go up because a different one has gone up in the past!
Comment · 9 years ago
That's an MMORPG for kids. You can go on quests, enter contests, chat with friends, post on their forums, make guilds, do battle against other pets, solve puzzles, trade on the NEODAQ, and make a little home. Pets cost a few bucks. Honestly from googling neopets it sounds an awful lot like a better version of club penguin.
With cryptokitties we're talking about 100K for a picture of cat. From what I've read the platform is dedicated only to buying and selling these cats.
Comment · 9 years ago
> The game's top cat brought in $117,712.12 (£87,686.11) when it sold on Saturday, 2 December.
Is it weird that I think that the cat that was sold for 100K was a wash trade (someone trading with themself)? Who would honestly pay 100K for a 'rare' digital cat? Just because something's rare doesn't mean it's valuable.
I think it's interesting foreshadowing that the developers are calling these "breedable Beanie Babies".
http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/science/201...
Comment · 9 years ago
Fair enough, I just figured others may find the exceptions interesting.
And to be fair, both of those cryptocurrencies have been around for ~3 years now, which is practically ancient history in this field.
Comment · 9 years ago
Monero and dash both have fairly good privacy built into the protocol [1] [2], although monero suffers from large transaction sizes and dash suffers from centralization as a result of this.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monero_(cryptocurrency)#Privac...
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dash_(cryptocurrency)#PrivateS...
Disclaimer: I have no monero or dash, but I do have various other cryptocurrencies.
Yes, I think those people want to see homelessness end. Why else would you want a career in that field?
Climate scientists also want action to be taken to fight climate change, even if it might put them out of a job. Folks who work for the UN to tackle world hunger want world hunger to end, even if it puts them out of a job.
I don't think rank-and-file workers are psychopaths.