177tcca

But...what if they don't know how? Hiring for things you don't know how to do, or why you would, is very difficult.

How do you imagine money in 50, 500, 5000 years?

Riskier only because of the lack of experience of the people involved, and the UX gaps still being filled in - cryptocurrency is a very early-stage success(?) story of what will be a 1,000+ year journey.

See my other comment which can be summarized for this response as: technical/fundamental superiority has never been, and is currently not, a silver bullet to proliferation of a technology, or the success of a company. That is at an all time low, I believe.

Coinbase ≠ the Bitcoin network.

Ask the fees it would cost if years you were buying from someone, 1:1, privately.

Historically, I am not long cryptocurrency, for the record.

But I disagree. What makes "Bitcoin", or, if you'll allow, cryptocurrency keep becoming more popular isn't just hype. There's a lot, but I feel like there'd be more.

No, it's because everyone has their own reason for using it. Some people want to hedge against x, and use Bitcoin. Some want to get paid but not subject their users to ads, and use BAT.

Some want to exchange small amounts with friends on the net, or for food, and use Bitcoin Cash, or Litecoin, or whatever's currently got a stable-ish price, because it's that easy to swap in and out of cryptocurrencies.

Cardano, for all of its technical flaws, has sentiment behind it to stand stable. Perhaps like Bitcoin this will come at the dismay of the technical community - or perhaps more people will realize with the current speed of information proliferation, we truly do live in a partially post-truth world. Sentiment is ALL that matters for these matters.

That he's riden one or more waves.

And inconsistent.

Think about the thousands of humans with bias involved in those decisions one by one.

> the sheer amount of tech in a modern missile

"Old", reliable tech is prevalent there, too.

Sqlite in missiles is a good example.

Following this thread.

There's no upstream firmware being patched by Google. The phone is effectively unpatched once the hardware manufacturer gives up on maintaining its security.

This is a fundamental misunderstanding for, I'd guess, well over half of the custom ROM/custom phone OS community. ie: Lineage is customizable, and helps certain activity be more private - but it shatters security.

> the web slides further into irrelevance

This borders on FUD.

The state of PWA functionality today, and the amount of large and new orgs that want a single super well-maintained codebase doesn't have me thinking native is the future.

Change my view?

Mozilla has a massive conflict of interest.

Massive funding from Google has changed the org.

In my opinion, this issue could be swept up in that.

How do we compromise the e-waste with the fact that a Pixel and Pixel 2 already have, comparatively speaking, insecure hardware to the latest secure phones?

This is why a Pixel 3a or later with GrapheneOS.org is tough to beat.

Best of all worlds.

Other factors possibly involved?

It is technical incapability of some financial institutions to set this up inside of their regulated position.

Other freely operating entities across the globe are not in the same position.

World first - not quite.

This is the fulcrum point of this debate - right here.

Do you think the value of Facebook stock is in the tangible worth of their building, or IP?

Same can be said for gold.

Are most users even capable of melting it into tools when there's nobody that wants to trade for it?

I posted this as an independent post for visibility, and it was killed within minutes, can't even access it.

I understand the side of the debate that begs sticking with Gecko as an alternative etc etc, but, is it really off-topic here to show people the realistic comparison?

A Mozilla hard-fork of Chromium would be a huge kick in the nads, emotionally, but it certainly would accomplish many of the things Firefox would need to reinvent to hope for parity ever again.

Great points, especially,

> They can only get widespread adoption by other hams if they are documented.

> So this regulates itself

Until the first project gets traction that allows you to easily drop in public/private key encryption of payload.

But...there's tons of projects already in use which use protocols that, if the regulatory body isn't following every open source project & actively updating their intake tools, effectively act as encryption schema.

Are we done caring about the restriction on encryption? I'm down.

100%.

That's one of the biggest complaints about ChromeOS, despite its excellent security paradigm compared to standard desktop setups: the user auth/activity pings it sends Google.

> This isn't a bug, this is an explicit decision they made. It caused a bit of a stir at the time, but they went through with the change anyways.

> Personally for me it was the last straw, and I've since moved to Firefox.

Your security currently suffers if you choose Firefox over a Chromium variant.

This feels as shitty for me to write as it will to read.

Genuinely: Do you have any knowledge of the culture from the beginning of the world wide web?

Anonymity, and even pseudo anonymity, ensures free discourse.

Good ideas, no matter how unpopular, scary, or threatening to a power structure that could crush the commenter, rise to the top of most conversation formats with reliable regularity.