philsquared_

With or without training they would have gotten eaten.

Bonus points put cryptocurrency private key on their server as bounty.

It's risk assessment, nothing more. Some weighed the risk high and paused their site. Nothing wrong with that and not hysteria or FUD.

I disagree... while those are definitely better art-wise, they are not better marketing-wise. I imagine this is why the ai one won because the others do nothing to actually sell the fair.

There is no "trillions that go into SpaceX". You and others seem to have a massive misunderstanding about how the stock market works... they could have sold 10 shares at $50 and still have a valuation in the trillions... Market cap does not mean they have that money in hand or even that it is being taken from someone else...

They literally sold less than 5% of the total shares in the ipo by the way...

$1000 would return $1010. The money comes from people who want to close their trades early rather than wait for the market to settle. Often times no one actually takes these offers and then it just sits in the order book.

Clickbait. Leak has irrelevant and useless data. Why anyone would bother to "steal" this data I have no clue. Almost all of it could be collected if you scraped the site over time.

I am assuming its different for everyone. I have had digital delivery products (think cd keys) that were absolutely pointless to fight.

I have also had service products and at least 50% of those are rejected even with concrete proof of the customer literally saying they received the product as advertised.

Heres what I ended up realizing. Your dispute isn't with the cc's or with stripe its with the customers bank. The bank has basically no incentive to side with your business over their customer.

I never saw that table before but that is absolutely pathetic. The best case scenario (5 stars) is a 60% chance of winning a dispute?

Depending on the amount of money I would write off disputes. Sometimes we take to small claims court and present literally the exact same evidence we do to the bank and we have won 100% of those.

I have found it is better to try and vet the customer before doing business with them but depending on the business this isn't always possible.

The system is rigged to be honest. Friendly fraud is multi billion dollar problem that banks have no motivation to solve.

You have hit the nail on the head but it doesn't even need to be wifi and it also doesn't have to be that complicated. They see that two devices are in the same area for a long period of time so they serve ads for other peoples web history. Jarringly enough ever since I had this realization I sometimes see ads for things that reveal something meant to be private of those I had just spent time with. Also, seeing peoples ads when they make desktop recordings of their screen can be extremely telling..

Agreed. We have many "old" people that use our website and I can tell you for a fact that the "click here" is less confusing than some random blue link (which at this point has lost it's meaning because of seo keyword stuffing).

Not to mention "click here" is a call to action and a random blue link is not. Call to actions are important.

It is Adam Back.

Who is more likely to build ontop of some obscure code base called "Hash Cash"? Some random people that trolled the same forums or the original creator of it?

Imo this "secret" is known by many people as I have seen so many censorship and misdirection campaigns throughout the years if people mention Adam being the one.

Him being Satoshi also makes bitcoin core seem more legitimate. He can guide his creation without being formally known as satoshi.

It is obvious. Especially if you have ever been a solo dev for an extended period of time (like adam was)

There is a ton more evidence but seems like no one really wants to dig into Adam.

Adam literally stopped updating hash cash and a year later Bitcoin is released... check his website on archive.org.

Its ok. I like that there is still conversation as to who it is. It gives protection to him since there likely wont be anything concrete (if hopefully he was slick enough)

+1 to Adam Back. Who is more likely to build ontop of some obscure code base called "Hash Cash"? Some random people that trolled the same forums or the original creator of it?

Imo this "secret" is known by many people as I have seen so many censorship and misdirection campaigns throughout the years if people mention Adam being the one.

Him being Satoshi also makes bitcoin core seem more legitimate. He can guide his creation without being formally known as satoshi.

It is obvious. Especially if you have ever been a solo dev for an extended period of time (like adam was)

There is a ton more evidence but seems like no one really wants to dig into Adam.

Adam literally stopped updating hash cash and a year later Bitcoin is released... check his website on archive.org.

Its ok. I like that there is still conversation as to who it is. It gives protection to him since there likely wont be anything concrete (if hopefully he was slick enough)

Adam Back. Ever notice how anytime anyone mentions his name as possibly being satoshi they get buried? Not a coincidence. Plus Adam had no work history during the dates that Bitcoin was created. Had created the system that bitcoin is based on and never produced the emails of him and Satoshi that supposedly existed. Remember the first email from Satoshi mentions he got "your email from Adam Back". Google also manipulated the search engine results for "Satoshi is Adam Back" for years and basically censored the results for that query.. The list goes on. He is the most obvious candidate and likely the reason he was chosen to head core (I mean he literally wrote hash cash which is basically Bitcoin version 1)