t3chn0SchO0lbus

Gun companies are a bad analogy because they are one of the only exceptions to having legal liability when their products kill people. Almost every other industry can be held liable if their product kills someone.

The Twitter essay is my least favorite thing about the future we live in.

"fluoride"?

I keep trying to wrap my head around the economics of this and maybe give Tether the benefit of doubt. I think the most damning technical detail is that there is no client-side wallet. We can't trade Tether amongst ourselves or engage in any trades that Tether doesn't have at least indirect control of.

It doesn't have to be like that. We could rely on periodic snapshots of the blockchain for future validation. We could even selectively include specific data in the snapshots to be preserved. Maybe some group might need to store the entire history of the blockchain but there is a lot of room for innovation to solve this scaling dilemma.

I think there is a way to have users pay for transactions instead of the contracts or contract owners.

The hackers still have their assets as Ethereum Classic. The fact that ETC lives on is a testament to how nobody could 'take away' what is listed as theirs on the blockchain.

But I don't buy this argument for video games. Most of the game code ought to live outside of the blockchain and that non-blockchain code/art would be difficult to reproduce let alone subject to copyright claims or closed source.

Another random video game thought: Would item storage on blockchain mean that every player could see the inventory of every other player?

"I can look through all of my emails before the end of the day"

>That would be an enormously stupid attempt at insider trading.

A stupid crime is still a crime. It could all be coincidence that his biggest selloff came just after he learned of the vulnerability but the circumstances merit investigation. And he might have thought the stock price would go down more (I sure did).

Children.