stdcli

I don't think you understand. Congestion pricing explicitly exposes the costs of the streets. Price spikes due to congestion create market signals for competition to come in and make it cheaper.

Right now, you have no clue where your taxes go, nor do you get a cent by cent breakdown of how much went to each cost.

There is an enormous amount of economic waste in state and federal budgets before considering 10yr government contracts where incumbents almost always win because of the exorbitant amount of one off acomodations made during the previous decade, but most u.s. government contract bids by law require to entertain 3 bidders before most of the time choosing the same one.

Also, by the way, uber works this way. The price will go up for 5 drivers when 100 people need the same 5 drivers as opposed to if 3 or 5 people need them. Alot of economic incentives are made here:

1. More drivers will come to the space because the pay is good.

2. People who can't afford it arent going to pay this congestion price making it possible for drivers to even attempt to prioritise etc. It also helps drivers prioritise. Do they really need to drive. It also helps competition come in and make up this economic gap if there is one.

Also, NY energy pricing market, as well as California, Texas and MISO region all operate on real time energy markets using "congestion costs" as one of the frameworks to expose pricing based on demand.

The only difference is:

1. You actually get to see an objective algorithmic breakdown of WHY the cost is what is. Try asking the government for that now for street costs....ha

2. The transparent pricing exposes market signals for competition to come compete, for a lower price, making a more economic system

both which over time

1. lower prices for consumers (in this case people who use the streets)

2. Create a more efficient system (if a road system is inefficient, and that is the root cause) as a result of 1.

In the long run, this is a positive move in the right direction towards governments being more transparent about where costs are allocated. It's a far cry from being able to vote by knowing where your tax money actually goes, but it's a step in the right direction and it doesnt completely divorce government from competition to keep exorbitant costs in check on the government side.

"the average user doesn't want to be empowered when it comes to data harvesting"

I think this is an extremely presumptuous statement that writes off how little empowerement the average user has by conflating the ignorance about data privacy and ownership, and the lack of user friendly options they have around understanding their data and how it can be owned/migrated and who has access to what, with carelessness or otherwise now in tech known as "consent" or "accept and agree with the fineprint or don't use this platform required for work, modern day life, etc" or "allow this app that is in no way shape or form related to pictures, social networks or social communication access to your pictures, phonecalls, all stored data on your phone and access to your contact otherwise don't download"

I think the news shows it's pretty clear most people are not happy about how companies like facebook and others are using it, now that they know. They have not known for a while, and furthermore what alternatives do they have?

This idea is very similar to telling a person because they never knew this was being done to them, and that because also in addition they have no other options currently if they do know about it, that this equates to consent or carelessness/lack of wanting to be empowered. This is just false, and furthermore, a dangerous trajectory of thought to apply to any situation.

Drobo looks cool. That is the idea with gaia. Right now our master branch allows you to docker-compose-up and use the admin api calls to configure "disk" to however you want.

The main motivation here was regardless of what images were deployed on optional cloud host providers, the default was set to local disk to support users actually owning this data locally.

Additionally, we support a variety of other drivers, like azure blobs, etc.

It is nice that the hubs are set up to interact with an API where developers by default are storing data in this decentralized way.

I will check out Drobo more.

"Slowly, but it worked!" making things work is important! haha

I absolutely agree. This is my number one push on our Gaia team and we are working on that.

First, thank you for the first implementation when the app was just 1.1.1.1 Ive been using it for a while.

Not sure if you can answer this question, but are the performance benefits still there in conjunction with utilizing the VPN google uses to encrypt traffic with google fi? This announcement mentions they have 2x the latency in comparison to WARP, but did not mention specifically which google VPN technology (not sure if they have multiple) but I assume something mobile related since this is a mobile application.

If I use the WARP app in conjunction with google fi, am I layering this VPN on top of the 2x latency of google fi, thus slowing down WARP VPN to gain then the other performance benefits of optimized network switching of google fi?

Neither project is open source (that I know of) so it is hard to understand how the implementations overlap or not with one another. I also am not an expert in VPNs so maybe this is not a good question, but I find myself reading Cloudflare's blogs alot and couldn't help but ask.

you don't have to do it in the street...but yes this is true for many exchanges if you are wanting to take an existing currency and turn it into another one, or if exchanges are how you are looking to transfer money, you can also receive btc without ever having bought it, and send it to addresses and never use an exchange.

Regardless, your point only further proves that the bottleneck for onboarding users to lightening en masse is, if a problem at all, not one unique to that network, or any other payment system we currently use.

Compared to what kind of payment onboarding system? Outside of free cash, anything related to setting up a bank account, or a credit card can take up to 7-10 business days if not more, post an application to do so. Do you know of any onboarding system of payment that is faster? It seems like this is just a random statement by itself that is not in the context of all the other onboarding mechanisms of every payment system currently used. Care to calibrate Lightening onboarding with any other mass payment system? Even if you use square, paypal, venmo etc, they need to be linked to real checking accounts, credit card, other verified (with long onbaording) payment systems etc.

Furthermore, 2-3% of all transactions on many of these systems are fraudulent, but the payment systems ACCEPT This as an acceptable level of fraud and cover the expenses, in order for faster transactions.

Square knows for example it won't be used in coffee shops over another competitor if Square on average takes 20 seconds longer to process metadata in conjunction with the transaction itself to see if its an attempt/fraudulent charge, so they consciously cut corners here and accept this liability so we can all get coffee 8x a day.

This is why bitcoin has industry standard confirmation blocks so the network can address and blacklist attempts at doubles spends and keep a master chain.

This is basic blockchain 101 compared to standard knowledge of onboarding to every en masse payment system we all anecdotally have experience with layered digital transaction technology and the losses associated with that.

The lightening network is as mentioned above with links, rapidly evolving to expediate this while still maintaining the underlying benefits of transaction consensus that avoids fraud.

You may deal with fraudulent exchanges as you will do with fraud around any new technology (heard of the internet before? there were lots of sites for fraud, and much worse when it came out, and still are, we just all get smarter about what we click, and hopefully in this case, who we throw our money at, which you should be doing anyways for any new technology...) but the fraud here is associated with like top ranked comment said, not the protocol but the flurry of business activity around it, and is really null and void to the technical conversation itself, which is really what evolves communities like this past these handwavy statements...

I really don't mind constructive criticism of blockchain based technologies, but the issue is the conversation rarely evolved because of cargo culting statements like this that ignorethe very benefits of moving to a blockchain based payment system.

which is why I'm confused about all of the top ranking comments complaining that android will change their API for this. Will this require a change for android app developers if this is the case? Regardless, this seems like a more fundamental layer of improvement.