sayurichick

simple. I give a shit about yours.org BECAUSE they didn't create their own token to build a service.

Using bitcoin cash is another positive in my books, since it costs < $0.01 per transaction, versus $7~ per transaction on Bitcoin legacy.

you don't NEED to manage a new wallet.

you could create an account, post content, get paid, and technically pay for things by "cashing out" of "yours" to the receiving address for the thing you're trying to buy.

of course, there'll be a point where you DO want to load your account to be able to view content. That's likely in the long term when there are more users and higher quality content.

i work in react, so i just create a <componentname>.css file in the same directory and `import componentname.css` in my component.

I get the advantage of using either Sass or less or postcss with webpack and I get all the features as expected from this workflow.

The only thing I don't have is that unused class feature with my workflow, but I can probably find a postcss plugin which handles that.

I don't see any advantage of this library for me?

I agree. Having used both on small projects I was able to get started and finish quicker on Vue.

That being said, I use React more because of the larger community, (easier to find answers, and components) as well as more jobs for React vs Vue.

Also, Fiber introduces better animation performance, which i'll eventually use.

decentralization _does_ solve useful problems. The hard part is how do you get rich off of keeping data out of centralized servers, or having financial privacy, or creating platforms for USERS to get rich.

I'm a bitcoin maximalist but there is an upcoming ICO that i have to plug. I bought some to use, not to speculate on, but in hindsight I didn't realize there was an opportunity to make some profit.

It's a lending platform. P2P lending w/o the need of banks. You don't need credit for a loan because you put up collateral in the form of Bitcoin (or probably Ethereum as well).

I've seen all the pump/dump tokens, and i'm not interested in those. I'd actually use and benefit from this platform. I hold a pretty significant amount of BTC and I learned after selling some btc to never sell again. However, If there is a time when I need $USD, I can put up my BTC as collateral, have USD deposited to my bank account, pay interest on it, and once I've paid it all I get my BTC back as well.

It's so easy to be cynical this early, and I don't blame you but we're still 3-8 years from the "Facebook" era of crypto... you're upset because we don't have the ecosystem now, but that's also because people are still coming out with use cases.

lot of biased (or to be blunt, incorrect) information from a quick glance.

There is a lack of protocol depth understanding from the author. Most of the recommendations seem to serve as market "advice" if you want to call it that.

It's like Brexit but for Bitcoin.

For years the market wanted to increase the arbitrary 1mb blocksize limit. They finally got fed up with the stalling/lies and forked off.

people were misled into thinking Hard forks and >1mb blocksize was "dangerous". Bitcoin cash proves these to be false.

simple. The cost of pulling it off.

Even if I had a million dollars in funding, that would buy me mining power for oh so long. All the meanwhile, If I change the rules too much no one would even attempt to join my fork.

Even If I had another million dollars to pay developers to build services on my new fork, there'd be no users and no economic activity. The fork would die.

There SHOULD be a lot of hard forks. Why? Because they're voluntary and most will fail without doing harm (they require consensus to matter). The good ones will survive on merit and act as protocol upgrades.

the rift controllers are nicer, at least until Vive releases their new ones.

Tracking is less of a hassle on the vive. Fewer cables, easier.

rift has their own ecosystem which can also play almost every game on the steam library.

vive primarily has steam, but with some hackery (revive), you can play some rift games.

Hardware-wise, they're practically the same. Comfort-wise, Rift takes it.

Development-wise? tough, but I think Rift takes it as well. You get a free license for unity or unreal4 i forget which. And they've improved the developer documentation greatly recently.

The good thing is most multiplayer games support both.