pull down to refresh
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @CruncherDefi 10h \ on: You are not true Bitcoiners bitcoin
I don't care about bitcoin PRICE (price meaning base_asset_value/quote_asset_value ratio, where quote_asset usually is fiat USD). I care about bitcoin VALUE which grows with adoption.
And since bitcoin VALUE is highly correlated with it various prices over various quote assets you might argue that I indirectly partially care about its fiat price too. Caring about this indirect proxy metric to bitcoin value has some merit and don't blindly deter it.
Did you actually checked what the fines are about?
The ones I checked are really reasonable and I would actually highly prefer for those tech companies to comply instead of eating the fine and not comply.
More likely "Because of competition pressure OpenAI released their internal model to the outside world"
Mempool filters are subsidies to miners who ignore them
Its much more than that. For a filtered-transaction sender its:
-
additional transaction cost, because filtered-transactions-demand competes for smaller blockspace supply (not filtering miners only).
-
finality time cost. If only 10% of miners accepts my transaction, my finality times goes 10x on average.
So filters create free-market incentive to use some transaction types over others.
The entire premise of Ark scaling is the insinuation that people will defer these costs forever and do trusted receives forever.
The same as with lightning. In lightning you don't open/close channel every transaction.
I don't get you FUD on ARK. It's a legitimate method of scaling that complements LN very elegantly.
Imagine social graph of users transacting. LN is good for creating highways in this graph - ideally between huge clusters/cliques of users. ARK is good for connecting users in those cliques. LN/Ark are scaling in different dimension and we need both for proper bitcoin scaling.
Every money is a bubble. And what 'normies' consider money is just a biggest bubble that doesn't burst.
and they contract the supply in response to purchasing power being too low
Yeaaah, not so sure about that one. Why contract the supply if instead you could try some creative bookkeeping?
Yes, but only if robot work in offline mode. Ideally with open source software that I can play with myself.
I could point at the the flaws in your thinking here and there but it would probably result in back and forth discussion that I don't want to waste my time on.
So here is different take - how good are your 'rationalizations' when each individual is better off choosing fixed-supply money like bitcoin over inflating-supply money like dollar? System that requires most/all individuals to act against their own interest is bound to not be stable.
Your whining here won't change the fact that increasing amount of individuals each year is choosing fixed-supply money over inflating-supply-money. There is nothing you can do about it.
Or just they optimized their model for 'user engagement' too much.
Their models always had different hooks for further conversation. Perhaps this objective was optimized too heavily in the training.
I noticed this pattern recently a lot
Me: Solve problem X
ChatGPT: I did Y, would you me to also do Z (which Z is obviously the reasonable thing to do in the first place as part of solution to X)
Me: Don't ask me. Just do complete the task and Z is part of solution.
What does it mean that 'water is consumed'? Is it getting vented into space? Or do they use fusion reactor for AI that converts water particles into other particles?
Water cycles in the ecosystem. And its okay. When water evaporates in the process of cooling it goes back into ecosystem.
While reading a bible is a powerful think that could help us (as it was long-developed over thousands of years and it encapsulates a lot of cultural knowledge/archetypes in it), why would you claim that some human-invented idea like God is a refuge and strength? What does it even mean?
0 seconds. Time lock strictly decrease security.
If there is security slip-up at any time, with timelock I cannot immediately migrate my UTXOs. So adversaries have some guaranteed time window to figure out and exploit the security slip-up.
The only (afaik) reasonable use-case for timelocking is having additional time-locked spend-condition for inheritance/recovery. But still main spend-condition is not time-locked in that scenario.
what incentive do (major) governments have to adapt Bitcoin as their currency
Related question would be "What incentive do (major) governments have to obey the democratic decisions?".
Assuming that most individuals chose bitcoin, the answer to both is "Because that's what individuals want, and if you go against their choice, you are out."
Why does the Dust limit filter work so well?
Because this filters is aligned with the actual logic the miners use to decide "What to include in the block".
Are you fucking kidding me? The most important commodity that takes part in the all the transactions (money) is centrally planned. How could you possibly call the market 'free' in that scenario?
It could be good for humanity to popularize some kind of sovereign kill-switch software. Something you install on your PC (so you don't need to trust some 3rd party) that would send an email to press/friends/social_media (with secret data you held because of threats) after few days inactivity.
If Kirk knew his at a risk of assassination, he could put all the threats/proofs in the kill-switch-message effectively punishing the assassinators post-mortem.
If every high-profile person did that, every government would think twice before taking down someone.
The question in the title is incorrect. It should have been "Why are so many young people getting diagnosed cancer?"
We don't have access to underlying true data. We only have access to proxy observable data.