saba2008

Chemical factory in the middle of heavily populated area doesn't have to be a bad thing, if it is properly managed and safety systems are operating perfectly.

The sun.

Black is both best radiator and best absorber. So it works perfectly in space (where you minimize incoming energy by turning it perpendicular to sun), and not so good on surface.

This material works by being reflective in spectrum, where most of sunlight energy is (which makes it white, as visible spectrum ~= sunlight on earth surface), and being 'black' (good radiator and absorber) in other spectra.

Carboniferous ended 350M years ago. Today lignin is biodegradable and thus does not capture carbon past tree living mass.

It's a long way from bickering to violence, and then even longer journey from fights to wilful and purposeful killing.

Bank of England museum had a holdable gold bar. And yes, cage around it was probably for prevention of body damage, rather than theft.

Limit monthly cash withdrawals to 100 EUR

Limit cash currency exchange to 100 EUR (or just outlaw it)

Wait for some time

Retract cash being mandatory debt settling tender

Wait a little more

And then pompously declare, that only criminals need cash (not far from truth, anybody but criminals and hardcore privacy people will be driven away by then) and ban it completely.

Registering AppleID involves phone number checking. In some countries getting one without exposing personal information is not trivial.

Idea of some grouping tool, orthogonal to security and account managment, used to store personal preferences/notification settings/social network links sound reasonable.

Idea of 'identity for the human' reeks of ghastly surveillance and control. AWS has no business with 'the human', only with client - it's not my family, it's not my friend, it's not a law enforcing state with monopoly for violence.

There is also international perspective: once this mechanism is in place, forced by US, it will become normalized in several years. Then China will have much better leverage to implement their own scans. Once China does it, every powerful state does it. And after that every third world hole will scan for everything.

"say something, you have to stand by it." is great when it's against people you don't like.

Just don't complain when it comes after you.

Got AEG CCM66400BX (~850 USD at today rate) with mechanical controls, which was my primary requirement.

>isn't really about lacking a trusted-party

It's also about minimizing amount of trust to that party. Only thing bitcoin miners are trusted, is determination of correct chronological order of transactions.

>smart-contract approach

Yes, and smart contract will just determine whenever transaction was made under threat of violence!

>end up including a system of checks-and-balances, appeals, manners of collecting evidence

So regular banking, under other name.

Also 'collecting evidence' is pretty much incompatible with anonymity, which is cryptocurrency distinguishing feature.

>trust is decentralized

How is that even supposed to work? Do you expect that every chargeback will be investigated by every mining pool? Or they will have some authority to do it (again, no difference with regular banking)

>most folks

Most folks are ok with current banking system. Cryptocurrency is a niche product, having completely different trade-offs.

>simply a policy in some implementations

Reversals would mean that there is some authority that can declare arbitrary transaction to be valid or not, and cryptocurrency is exercise in creation of payment system without such trusted party.

So no, would not call it simply a policy.

How is it different from just copy-pasting?

It does add some degree of plausible deniability (accidental violation, instead of intentional), but I don't think it would matter much.

Users are not consumers, but product. And untracked users are lower quality, so culling them can be beneficial. So no problem here.

>We've come a long way from the 1970's.

And going for a full circle. No more personal computers, just terminals connected to corporate systems, which have full control over data and usage.

I would call it tempered (forced to compromise on it's nicer features, like representation, to save core ones, like turnover of power) rather than failed (when even core features are no longer present).

Even if you consider two-party system as failed multiparty one, it has advantage of being already past that bifurcation point. And, considering that alternative route is death of parliamentarianism, it's a nice advantage.

Yes, same failure can happen in two-party system, but chances are different - 'usurper' party has to fight against single opponent, rather than against multiple smaller ones. Question of 'whenever opposition can unite' is trivially true if opposition consists of single party.

> an average person having one username and password/authentication method that works across all services

It's a bug, not a feature. It's people throwing away their privacy for convenience. It's proverbial dancing piggies.

Problem with global-scale SSO is not corporations, that control shared identity. It's shared identity itself.

Distributed SSO is as good idea, as eco-friendly vegan huffing solvent.

Same way, trusted cash exchange intermediaries. localbitcoins seems to be exactly this.

And for bitcoin it is much easier than for traditional systems, as trust only need to cover exchange operation.

Multiparty system has failure mode, when one party balloons in size, either by aggressive use of populist rhetoric (NSDAP) or by merging several smaller parties (United Russia). At this point rest either have to unite (producing two party system), or become irrelevant (producing single party system, opening way to totalitarian or authoritarian regime).

Bitcoin is immune same way as hawala is immune. Regulators can push it underground, but it will still function and provide value, albeit on different scale.

On the other hand, two party system proved to be stable in long term, while ensuring rotation in government.

>Just to deny Roskomnadzor the joy?

No, to minimize damage by calming down proverbial monkey with a grenade.

Webmail, imap & registration blocking is trivial to avoid. MX servers ending up in some blocklist might cause much more problems.

Imagine having employer, who has no qualms about killing people and for whom you are a loose end.

You need to be either professional criminal (skill set completely orthogonal to IT, so chance of somebody possessing both at professional level is miniscule), or a moron.

'100 Continue' would probably be better example of breaking request/reply flow, as it provides useful functionality and requires non-trivial implementation and compatibility measures.

While '408 Request Timeout' is somewhat dubious fig leaf over TCP RST

HTTP/1 simplicity comes not from text nature, but from it's clear concept and limited functionality.

At core, it's just request-reply + key-value metadata. Whenever it's text, or binary, it does not matter much. But writing HTTP/2 frame types in letters would not make them any easier to understand.

In Erlang function definitions are '^function_name' in virtually every case.

And if statement is just syntax sugar over goto.

After using mostly Erlang for several years, 'if' feels like ugly atavism.

Sybil attack has nothing to do with stealing keys. It's just sending guesses into the network as fast as you can, to maximize chance of your guess ending up as winner.

Please describe scenario, when that 'another dimension of geographic decentralization' has any effect.