siwatanejo

Website renders poorly on mobile (Android at least).

Debian providing Firefox debs for a long time? I think you are very wrong because Firefox is not even called this way in Debian, it's IceWeasel.

One thing is lack of performance profiling, another thing is a design flaw (can this performance issue be really tackled or is it a limitation derived from the platform?). Which one are we looking at?

Good investments can't be looked in the short-term. Over the medium-term, bitcoin has been the best investment in history.

So, you are suggesting that bitcoin is or has been a bad investment? You clearly didn't look at the charts.

I would highlight this paragraph: "A wise man once said, disease intensifies narcissism, especially if it is terminal. Interpreting that as advice rather than critique, I’d like to be self-indulgent for a moment, and share what I hoped my life would be. I trained as lawyer, and had wanted to go into human rights. Things don’t always turn out the way you expect, and I ended up in corporate law, living a lifestyle unworthy of myself, and making the world worse year on year. On a dark day, I sometimes wonder if this is the universe’s way of balancing the wrong I did. I tried my best to be a good and kind person, but ultimately, I know my job was one that made rich motherfuckers even richer. I’m sorry."

Link failing because of some TLS/SSL issue on my side.

> BTC is also completely unsuitable for using as a currency given the block size limit.

You can transact with your bitcoins *today* without being affected by the blocksize: just use the Lightning network.

It's a solved problem, so it's stupid to bring it up again and again nowadays.

My point was not comparing Fable vs plain JavaScript, but F# vs Fable.

Note I advocated to use F# but not Fable. You're assuming in your answer that you need to interoperate with JS, why?

Why depend on Fable? If something goes wrong, you need to hunt some bug in horrible javascript code. I would still use F# but not Fable.

In fact it's not about "payment" or "paid". The opposite of opensource is proprietary, not "paid". You can pay for FLOSS.

> But publicly traded companies don't dilute their shareholders away.

Sure; however governments do dilute their share... err citizens away ;)

> For every winner, there has to be a loser.

Completely agree with this sentence. Now, have you happened to frame this sentence in your head when talking about fiat money? Just wondering.

"There will still be occasional differences between distributions. These are things you can work around. It may be painful at first but it will be worth it: you will provide a much superior user experience by working around the issues with your users’ libraries rather than attempting to replace them."

Sure, like it was happening 20 years ago, and we still had apps break ALL THE TIME when the user just upgraded to a new distro version or when she changed her distro. It's simply not scalable. It has already been tried. Sure, the flatpak world is not perfect, and I would never choose this option (maybe I like snap better), but it's a step in the right direction.

I don't understand. Cannot you create a PR and fork the project (and use your fork in the meantime until the PR is merged)? This is what I do when I use opensource libraries. They being opensource shouldn't mean that you get blocked by them.

So the analogy here being Microsoft something you shouldn't trust? Or rather, DNF being actually Microsoft... an scorpion? just double checking here

Most people saying that 137 is too much get responded with "this the only way Tesla can learn". Sure, I agree with that, but is 100% of the fine being awarded to the victim? That doesn't look right, it makes it a honeypot (incentive) for future trials. Even one tenth of that would be too high for a work issue that lasted one 1 year, why make the victim rich (and his decendants)? Compensation doesn't mean windfall/lottery.

Why replace MSBuild?

> ... any large enough nation state could do it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ncPyMUfNyVM

> You do realise Bitcoin is unable to scale with a large volume of transactions, grinding it to almost a complete halt.

Please research the topic more, the Lightning Network solves this problem and is already being used with no issues in El Salvador.

What's wrong with canopy?

This.

> When the government disallows bitcoin/etc because of constant scams,

That's a big when. Also, which government? The only ban on bitcoin that can be effective is the one in which all countries in the world collude, otherwise holders will move jurisdictions (to stop getting robbed from the government via inflation).

> all of the transactions will be tracked and the government will know who spent what on bitcoin.

Hahaha and now you tell me how? If this was easy to do, then technologies such as PayJoin or what Wasabi wallet implements would have been cancelled already. No government can stop this.

Actually thanks to the creation of CBDCs, the switch to bitcoin will even be faster IMO, because thanks to CBDCs people will get used to paying things with crypto, but they will see that using CBDCs instead of bitcoin is a bad decision that hinders the purchasing power of their savings. But exchanging CBDCs with bitcoin is much easier to do than exchanging fiat with bitcoin, so the switch will happen faster!

> The irony is that these real resources are being protected by their respective governments, thus the existence of the US military (and all other militaries) is an essential part of Bitcoin's current valuation.

Sadly this is true, but not for long. Bitcoin adoption is still very small but it will grow. Once it grows to cover the vast majority of merchants in the world, the next flip of a switch will be in people's minds: they will start valueing things in bitcoin (or bits, or satoshis), instead of USD, EUR, etc. (In pretty much the same way people switched from drachmas to euros recently...)

And once that happens, people will stop thinking of the fiat monetary value of one bitcoin (or bit, or satoshi), and then your statement will not be true anymore.

But mining doesn't grant you any power (unless you manage to accumulate 51% of it, which is in this day and age pretty much impossible for a single individual or organization). Mining is just a service that you provide (to secure the network), and you get rewarded for it.

Compare that to how monetary inflation works in the fiat world: they just press a button, et voi-la, they got their funding.

That's why I use cloud providers that accept bitcoin. Credit cards are evil.

Actually, bitcoin proponents can agree with 99% of what this guy is saying. The only thing that is not accurate is when he mentions counterparty risk: Signal is planning to add a non-custodial wallet, therefore there's no counterparty risk (granted, no counterparty risk of magical shitcoins, but yeah, no counterparty risk).

Signal did a bad move here, but they will learn their mistake eventually: once they remove shitcoin support and add bitcoin support.

> ...people are throwing their real dollars into the BTC market

Real dollars? This seems to suggest that USD currency is "real" while BTC is "not real". Exactly how does this rationale work in your mind? Why is a USD more "real" to you than a bitcoin? The latter involved real work (energy) to create, while the former was just invented by a politician (by QE) or a bank (by fractional reserve).

> ...otherwise they're victims of a scam.

What if I told you that maybe by using fiat currency you have been scammed all along for your whole life? Mind you, I still agree with you that NFTs are a scam, but not bitcoin.