saikia81

That is not what people think when they buy a sandwich. At least make a fair argument. Mind you I don't live anywhere near this argument.

what about the abuse of advertisements to cause civil unrest, abusing data to control political elections, advertisements that break consumer laws. Facebook has shown it cares more for money than being a steward. Don't see how you can trust them.

incredible, how hate poisons any conversation. Digital piracy is not and has never been about stealing revenue. And it is done for personal use, not commercial use.

Mathematics is easy if you just brute force the problem domain is not what is happening here

worse than my parents

I have, after setting things up this year. Any user problems were always due to server-side or bad media files. Or on networking on the server side.

As far as I understand it Jellyfin has been improving client availability and to me seems to work well for friends.

Your point doesn't come across here? And doesn't seem to have any direct reactions to the comment above. Any proof or source for your claims would help. Also no reason to be rude.

have you read the dev mailing list? There the developers of python discuss lots.

I'm guessing you missed out on the Snowden revelations? Or the news articles about federal agents literally laughing at private dick pics.

And your second paragraph seems to go on the premise that the average person care if there is a backdoor.

I don't know why you wouldn't take security seriously, when even the US government is telling everyone to be careful where they supply their devices because of spying. Just don't trust them to point the finger the right way.

because the tech is hard to envision right (or sci-fi writers would be rich), but the consequences are clearer

In the united states the first amendment of the constitution makes it so that any public usage of camera tech cannot be controlled by the state. Except in some very specific scenarios.

The fact that every new technology has had pushback before adoption makes your claim meaningless.

And nobody should go hungry, and nobody should lack basic healthcare. But here we are balancing the scales.

If I understand you. This goes with the presupposition that crypto will replace the bank and its features exactly. You might then be right on the convergences. But sounds like a failure to understand that crypto is not a traditional bank. It can be less and more.

A few examples of differences that could save money. The protocol processes everything without human intervention. Updating and running the cryptocoin network can be done on the computational margin of the many devices that are in everyone's pockets. Third-party integrations and marketing are optional costs.

Just like those who don't think AI will replace art and employees. Replacing something with innovations is not about improving on the old system. It is about finding a new fit with more value or less cost.

That is only bitcoin. There are coins and protocols where transactions are instant