8,660 karma · joined March 7, 2011
To be clear - the US politician wasn't talking about the interview -- but rather the independent review committee's assessment of the meta data collection program.
The NYT Blog - 3 days late, is it that hard for such a "renowned" journalistic enterprise?
Wow! Props to the Associated Press for writing about something globally noteworthy [sarc.] in an article that few cared to carry or - God-forbid - elaborate upon. (ABC merely picked up the AP story.)
That's the very definition of a pathetic free press.
None of these links constitute actual coverage or equate to Cable air-time, where millions of baby boomers develop/refine their world-views.
Also, scroll down to user "Nostromo's" counter (claiming the media did cover the story) w/links and then my reply.
This kind of blatant dereliction of duty in US journalism (IMHO) presages the governments' plans for controlling the (M)essage on websites. One can only assume they have a turnkey solution to suppress submissions and comments on HN, Reddit, etc.
Support projects that attempt to combat censorship at the technological level. This is coming from someone who is working on my own* anti-censorship project. (I care more about the mission than the glory.) retroshare.sourceforge.net promises a great deal and looks OK from a mile-high view (except for mythical documentation). *check profile if interested
In other words, who's to say that the NSA (/GHCQ,etc) was the same party that ultimately defaced the website?
The idea is that people want to gift Bitcoin to others -- there are many means for doing that -- and we don't want to supplant those options with a new wallet service.
I'm the author. You can ask questions @spencenow
My distinction between this and a more general "form of barter"/medium-of-exchange was written as '"first-class citizen" status' currency.
It is already functioning as one -- just not a very effective or useful one. So, please be more articulate if you actually want to have a debate.
But thanks for diverting the the discussion by maligning my character.
Looking through your comment history, it's pretty clear that you have a strong aversion to Bitcoin. As someone so blindly opposed to it -- you probably have an ulterior motive too. At least I was forthcoming about mine -> I'm a Bitcoin fanboy and am building a business around it -- which is more than most speculators can claim.
So, what's yours? Because otherwise, you're kind of in need of digging yourself out of troll status. :)
All joking aside [0], you seem a little over eager to discount Bitcoin in this regard.
Here's my take on BTC's relevance as a currency:
- Its 'success' as a currency in the developed world (in the way we use greenbacks & fiat / Chinese use Yuan in daily life) ...
... on this point, I've never been too hopeful. [1]
This definition of "success" is biased by most of our developed-world perspective. . tldr; - It will likely become 'relevant' without becoming a 'success' in the Western/1st-world sense.
.
Observations on why Bitcoin will struggle to become a ubiquitous currency:
1.) This statement from the PBOC - more or less negates its chances in China as being a "first-class citizen" (status) currency.
This comes as no major surprise to me. But, what is surprising is the portion which reaffirmed the legality of the participation in Bitcoin in China ("... Bitcoin transaction as a commodity trading behavior on the Internet, ordinary people have the freedom to participate in the premise of own risk."), as you alluded to in your comment. This more than "leaves the door open." That said, the factors which contributed to this approach are unbelievably complex and probably nefarious (w/regards to BTC's future).
2.) In the USA, I don't see a pressing need for it to be used in the way we know dollars to be used. The reason here is that we have a historically stable system in place.
3.) The volatility of Bitcoin is not, and likely will never be, as stable as most of the fiat units in circulation. This would discourage me from paying my employees in Bitcoin.
4.) Since day one, we have all been apprehensive about the deflationary nature of the currency -- expressing the Keynesian-concern that spending in an economy is vital to the prosperity of said economy.
.
With that being said, here is where-and-why I'm long ...
I.) ... because of the international nature of the protocol, one must think about those living in Iran, Zimbabwe, Argentina, Russia, etc.. In those places, I think it has legs as a currency, regardless of state-endorsement. Some of these states in crisis may even endorse Bitcoin.
I believe that perfection isn't sought after in the 3rd world, as confidence has been lost in the fiat systems in place. (This is the reason why greenbacks are so ubiquitous abroad.)
There's also a palpable anti-American sentiment in the third world that could discourage greenbacks' usage by the layman if there were a viable and universally accepted alternative.
But paper greenbacks don't play well with the internet. Bitcoins do. One can argue that you could still use greenbacks digitally abroad, but this is not without large transaction fees, and -- in the case of unstable countries -- there may uncertainty in the bank which is facilitating the financial services.
II.) ... it's nature has melded the idea of a cash dollar and a digital dollar into a decentralized, ephemeral-yet-"trustworthy" protocol. I can honestly say: I'd be a fool if I claimed to have the slightest idea how Bitcoin will innovate and make itself useful as a currency.
So, I actually believe that Bitcoin has relevance as a currency, just not in a way that would make sense to the developed world.
The above is part-and-parcel from Bitcoins as a store of value and other financial novelties, which I don't really have the time to enumerate.
[0] - "So much for the debate about bitcoin being a currency!"
[1] - [and it saddens me greatly, because I'm a Bitcoin fanboy, and I've believed since the early days that Bitcoin is special in many other ways. And no, I'm not a Bitcoin millionaire.]
If you enjoyed this comment - I am releasing a Bitcoin-related service in ten days, and, in the idealistic spirit of Hacker News, I kindly encourage you to add me to Google+ or Twitter, so that you can offer early feedback. @spencenow or https://plus.google.com/+SpencerDailey Thanks! :)
What you're seeing there (behind the globe) is pieces of my desktop, code in a text editor, even snippets of another tab open in safari! How is this even remotely secure? Would this be possible in other implementations of WebGL or just Safari's implementation? I understand that it allows for greater access to your computer's resources, but either way, after this user-experience I'm far less inclined to include it in future projects.
Original comment: Cool idea, although I kept waiting for additional/contextual info to load on the globe [a geographic or node-based map; weighted lines between points (or, wait, that doesn't make sense); a click-to-learn-more on the transactions themselves, etc.], just something to delve-into that would make it one-iota more interesting. Either way it's a soothing visualization.
Are the sounds' frequencies tied to the size of the transactions? If so, that's a great idea -- random-but-informative background noise! Kudos - keep refining it! (A bunch of 'texture unit not renderable' messages in console. Tried in Chrome Canary 33.0.1720.0 for Mac version 10.9.)
Tried your other link http://www.craftfortress.com/earthbit/index2.html and the textures loaded no problem (I see the map of countries projected on the globe) -- but transactions aren't loading in now.
That being said, it's important for two reasons:
1.) the paper gets published tomorrow, which will lead to a round of negative press, regardless of the claims' merit.
2.) More significant: it highlights what I see as an existential threat to the Bitcoin experiment: a.) the poor distribution of early wealth and b.) the possibility that a great percentage of all Bitcoins are currently held by bad actors (criminals, anarchists, use your imagination).
A few things to consider: 1. A list of richest Bitcoin addresses is not a good representation of the concentration of wealth. A single person can have x wallets, just like this Ulbricht character. 2. Bitcoin wealth is often used to reinvest in mining equipment, which furthers one's wealth to a greater extent. Rinse/repeat.
Several of the oldest wallets have been dormant for years, which means that this is not hypothetical -- that wealth has not circulated.
edit made to be clear about "bad actors":
"Bad actors" meaning: unpredictable and possibly having malicious intent.
If Bitcoin becomes a more important part of our daily lives, handling commerce ubiquitously, etc.--a single individual with ~10+% of said Bitcoin has enormous disruptive potential. I'm not referring to what said person could purchase with that wealth, but one's ability to manipulate markets.
This has never been a big issue, as far as the growth in value of the currency. However, I think this kind of uncertainty could freak out potential institutional investors.
Altcoins like Litecoin, PPC, Namecoin, etc - do not suffer as much from this issue because their exposure was far greater than Bitcoin ca. 2009, and the mining competition was greater on the respective debut-dates by several orders of magnitude.
Again, my feedback for your landing page is to let people try it, and the concept will sell itself. I'll definitely think of ways to incorporate this into projects moving forward. :)
I'm not sure how I ended up at the vanity URL. I think I saw your email mac@given.to and typed it in manually. Commented-out the FB Connect feedback
I wanted to see a dead-simple demonstration on the website, couldn't find one. Perhaps it would be effective to demonstrate the API by sending a free app link via email. Just have a "Try it now! We'll show you how simple it can be by sending you a free app link to your email on signing up! ~ or something (reduce the copy language)
Keep it up!
PS - Is there potential for a referral/affiliate angle on this API? Apple's TOS probably prohibits that, but if it could somehow be managed--I see massive value there.
Tehwalrus makes an excellent observation. The role that anonymity played for OP on YT would serve her well on other communities like Reddit.
Specifically to your remark on the questionable 'positive impact' of Reddit: I would argue that it has done a great deal to heighten the visibility of the Free and Open Internet/NSA stories and cases of corruption or injustice. There's a lot of insensitive humor, but I'm not going to say my (or anyone's) opinion of that matters, as long as no one is hurt or put in an inescapable position.
The bigger point remains: Which web-communities depend on anonymity? As OP's story highlighted, clearly she (and presumably others), as a Youtube user - depend(ed) on anonymity.
"Hijacking the top comment to talk about a big concern I have. This EFF article argues that there's a place for Anonymity on the Internet [1], and I think most of us agree (especially if we emphathize with those in Iran, China, Syria, and the like).
But what HNers must realize is the following: The mainstream Internet can not become the Tor-visited Dark-Net (which restores anonymity) that many believe is inevitable WITHOUT losing its positive sociological impact. Sites like Reddit, Twitter, even HN rely on anonymity and also provide a great deal of such value. Here's a simple example of 'sociological impact': CNN (FoxNews, etc) pays attention to what the top links on Reddit are, because the site is in the public's face -- and: the people have a collective voice.
Next: Without the perception of anonymity, sites like Reddit will stop flourishing.
Let's go deeper: Reddit's culture thrives on "anonymity" in the form of throwaway accounts and people being themselves without representing themselves. Throwaway accounts (heard of 'Cation Bot' or 'AWildSketchAppeared'?) are a form of expression unique to environments which allow for anonymity (pseudonyms). Who's to say novelty accounts would be as risque or hilarious without anonymity? Certainly these sites flourish because users feel comfortable playing a part and taking a chance.
There are two issues at play which threaten anonymity on Reddit. Now obvious (in light of Snowden's leaks): 1.) Reddit usernames can, and probably are, being mapped to peoples' actual identity. ... Not as obvious: 2.) Users' up and down votes, even private messages, can also be sniffed with ease.
Reddit's' devteam has retreated from the idea of providing HTTPS for its voting/web API [2], so people's actions (aside from comments) can be mapped as well. I tried to raise awareness of this issue five months ago [3]. I know there's an argument to be made that SSL/HTTPS is useless anyway (just use Tor!, they say), but the bigger question remains:
Can a mainstream community such as Reddit exist in tomorrow's Internet? I'd say that such web-societies are fragile -- likely targets of dragnet surveillance and subversion, especially given their disruptive nature.
People and the press are paranoid about Facebook/Google privacy because its users (are encouraged to) identify themselves explicitly, but the reality is no different with sites like Reddit - just the perception. Just think about how much more is shared on a site like Reddit by its members because of their pseudonyms! Few people aside from the avid Tor-using//r/netsec crowd have realized this.
Reddit is the internet "as we know it," and I feel the Internet is about to change.
In hindsight - Google's initial "no pseudonyms" policy for Google+ was prescient -- though the company eventually capitulated to popular demand for them. [4] Perhaps they wished to save each of us the unsavory realization that aliases exist in name-only (pun intended). :/"
[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6652909 [1] https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/10/online-anonymity-not-o... [2] http://www.reddit.com/r/changelog/comments/l4n6y/reddit_chan... [3] http://www.reddit.com/r/privacy/comments/1n73s0/again_reddit... [4] http://www.ibtimes.com/google-allowing-nicknames-pseudonyms-...
I would definitely give it a go if I owned an Android device. As it's a rather unconventional approach to go Android first (at least in the U.S.) my guess is that your team was predisposed to Android development? Also, does the iOS counterpart have an ETA? A blog post about your Android store experience would be informative. Either way I respect putting all the wood behind a single arrow for your users -- keep it up!
Procedure for Recalling State and Local Officials in California
[1] http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20131031/12394625090/feinst...
--
Websites like Reddit and HN are extremely vulnerable.
Hijacking my comment here to talk about a big concern of mine. This EFF article argues that there's a place for Anonymity on the Internet [2], and I think most of us agree. Especially if we emphathize with those in Iran, China, Syria, and the like.
But anonymity is also the key to websites like Reddit and Twitter (including HN). These websites represent breakthroughs in sociology: memes; open, real-time, transnational, popular (upvote/downvote, retweetable) discourse.
It's not an understatement to say that Reddit, Twitter, even H.N. are some of the greatest manifestations of the Internet-age -- look at the impact they have had on mainstream media and raising the bar for popular discourse.
(Ex.1: I would argue that the Snowden revelations would not have persisted in the public conscious nearly as long if it hadn't been for Reddit's continued rage. Ex.2: As it is, news outlets hawk Reddit/HN for story-material, and build the story's narrative with Twitter.)
But what HNers must realize is that: The mainstream Internet __can not become__ the Tor-visited Dark-Net that many believe is inevitable -- WITHOUT losing its positive sociological impact.
Yet without the perception of anonymity, sites like Reddit will stop flourishing.
Reddit's culture thrives on anonymity, throwaway accounts, and people being themselves without representing themselves.
There are two issues at play. Now obvious: 1.) Reddit usernames can be mapped to people's actual identity. Not as obvious: 2.) Users up and down votes can also be mapped to their identity. Reddit as a dev-team has retreated from the idea of providing HTTPS for its voting/web API, so people's actions (aside from comments) can be mapped as well. I tried to raise this point 5 months ago [3]. I know there's an argument to be made that SSL/HTTPS is useless anyway (just use Tor!, they say), but the bigger question remains:
Can a mainstream community like Reddit exist in tomorrow's Internet?
People and the press are paranoid about Facebook/Google privacy because its users identify themselves explicitly, but the reality is no different with sites like Reddit - just the perception. Just think about how much more is shared on a site like Reddit by its members because of their pseudonyms! Few people aside from the avid Tor users have realized this.
Reddit is the internet "as we know it," and I feel the Internet is about to change.
In hindsight - Google's initial "no pseudonyms" policy for Google+ was prescient -- though the company eventually capitulated to popular demand for them. [4] Perhaps they wished to save each of us the unsavory realization that aliases exist in name-only (pun intended). :/
[2] https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/10/online-anonymity-not-o... [3] http://www.reddit.com/r/privacy/comments/1n73s0/again_reddit... [4] http://www.ibtimes.com/google-allowing-nicknames-pseudonyms-...
But that will never happen, because bureaucracy doesn't shrink. Period.
This explains my libertarian-leanings --> laws aren't written by the people, they are written by those who stand to benefit most directly from their passing. And the devil of a bill is always in its details, which laymen (sometimes even the congressman presenting the bill) can't understand/decipher. Read the Pulitzer-prize winning biography "The Powerbroker" if you want a lesson in how to abuse the public's ignorance through the cunning drafting of legislation. There is no CTRL-Z in DC.
There are movements, gaining traction, to introduce state-sponsored "internets" - because this is the path we have prescribed to the world. Yet such a profound outcome was not mindfully chosen by the people, it was incidental to the law.
We therefore have forfeited the greatest invention of our time through our collective lack of understanding and/or vulnerable&reactionary mindsets.
I'll be spending the rest of my life ruminating on this simple fact: the internet is sick, and my government is the disease.
[1] - And now that caricature-metaphor has a literal face, drawn by one of NSA's own--if you ever wanted to know what Big Brother "looked like."