cowtools

45 ms·

451.
by cowtools 4y ago
Pedophiles? I'm pretty sure they would be forced to take down child porn. I mean, it's a public forum. If you are publicly announcing that you are pedophile or terrorist, that sounds like bad news for you. In any case, does twitte
452.
by cowtools 4y ago
If it is a myth, then it's a noble lie.
453.
by cowtools 4y ago
The difference would be that musk's following is more moderate, and they might respect peering agreements unlike Gab or Truth Social.
454.
by cowtools 4y ago
Well, if the purpose of buying twitter was to improve the user experience of internet users and advance the doctrine of free speech, then why not just spend that same amount of money building your own twitter (mastodon instance or something
455.
by cowtools 4y ago
Because the leftist opposition (like you) are anti-gun
456.
by cowtools 4y ago
>Lol the fact that random people have guns has nothing to do with US dominance It's no laughing matter. It has more to do than you might think. >Unless you’re saying that random armed people are going to defend against a coup fro
457.
by cowtools 4y ago
"The pen is mightier than the sword" is a stupid idea. The pen has no power on its own. A regime will throw out your ballots.
458.
by cowtools 4y ago
There are hundreds of millions of americans. These mass shooting events are insignifigant in the grand scheme of things. I don't think we should give away our essential freedoms just so we can live in a "safe" country like...
459.
by cowtools 4y ago
That is a slippery slope to every state having restrictive NY-like gun laws. I don't care about legal or cultural precedent in germany or the EU. This isn't germany. The US plays a far more important role in global affairs, and as
460.
by cowtools 4y ago
The problem is that you have no actual principles or tangible goals so it is impossible to negotiate with you. It is like negotiating with a bully who promises to only take half of your lunch money, and then the next day you negotiate with
461.
by cowtools 4y ago
Prohibitionism didn't work because the USA was infected with a drinking culture since the beginning. It was about a thousand years too late.
462.
by cowtools 4y ago
Sounds like whataboutism to me. Boycotting speech you disagree with is better than banning speech you disagree with.
463.
by cowtools 4y ago
accountable for what specifically? or do you just want more rigorous reporting in general? TV is a dying medium, is it not? I'd say this problem of sensationalist TV news solves itself within a decade.
464.
by cowtools 4y ago
Maybe I should be more specific: >the onus is now on each individual desktop environment to provide it's own implementation of screensharing wlroots-based DEs can simply use wlroots' screen-sharing implementation for example. T
465.
by cowtools 4y ago
>In reality like almost every other Ubuntu user I've talked to in real life [...] It doesn't matter if "most linux users" contribute or not. Only a minority report bugs, and an even smaller minority fix bugs. There is
466.
by cowtools 4y ago
I'm not sure I completely agree. You have a middleground where smaller DEs (wayfire, sway, etc.) huddle around larger "hub" implementations of wayland like wlroots in the same way that X11 DEs used Xorg. It's really only
467.
by cowtools 4y ago
Do you have xdg-desktop-portal-gnome installed? Screen-sharing is working out of the box for me on both gnome and wlroots. File a bug to your distro maintainers if it doesn't.
468.
by cowtools 4y ago
The problem is already on the social level, it's just that in Classical Consensus, trust is established explicitly. Whereas in Proof-Of-Stake, it's established implicitly by means of controlling monopoly money. If the stakers disa
469.
by cowtools 4y ago
I don't know what you are trying to say here, but know this: ETH and USD are not comparable. The US Government secures real-world business operations themselves, while cryptocurrencies merely secure payments. Who pays the price of USD
470.
by cowtools 4y ago
Interesting idea but you need someone to enforce land contracts and distribute person-hood contracts, so it becomes centralized. Also it would suck for mennonites who don't want to use technology.
471.
by cowtools 4y ago
Yes, but etherium forked in favor of the stakeholders.
472.
by cowtools 4y ago
Any reasonable implementation of classical consensus isn't susceptible to Sybil attacks. You manually select which peers sign transactions for you, in the same way that you manually select CA's to sign TLS keys for you.
473.
by cowtools 4y ago
In classical consensus, users don't need to agree on every block, they need to agree on who signs the blocks on their behalf.
474.
by cowtools 4y ago
How is LN the right choice for decentralization? you need central relay nodes with a ton of liquidity. Besides there is nothing stopping you from setting up LN over a L1 that isn't cramped, you have a limited throughput of settlement t
475.
by cowtools 4y ago
>just as it does with BTC. Reminds me of the (largely failed) bitcoin XT fork. Bitcoiners didn't choose what was right for the network- they chose the easy path in an attempt to prevent fragmentation and keep the price high. I have
476.
by cowtools 4y ago
Why not just ditch the whole Proof-of-Stake system and use a classical consensus system then?
477.
by cowtools 4y ago
I disagree. If you can design a PoW system where the distinguishing factor between profitable mining and unprofitable mining is the depreciation of generic hardware, then the public will generally have control over the network so long as th
478.
by cowtools 4y ago
How would you distribute tokens fairly? Give 1 to every person in the world? What about the next generation?
479.
by cowtools 4y ago
...but if it succeeds, then everyone else gets slashed. The network has no concept of "truth". PoS doesn't fix this, it just puts all your eggs in one basket. Who would be interested in using any network which exists only for
480.
by cowtools 4y ago
keep the value stable or keep the value high? two very different things; For example I'd argue Bitcoin's high L1 transaction fees keep the value unstable, but higher. It is not obvious to me that an agent with higher investment sh

More ›