ineptech

81 ms·

811.
by ineptech 9y ago
You said the founder believes "there aren't and never will be" 4B people "worthy" of an urbit planet. I'm asking where you got that "never will be" part. I think your reading of that bit you quoted i
812.
by ineptech 9y ago
> Right, but you could do that with any P2P overlay network with any embeddable VM. Why use the very unorthodox one that Urbit came up with? Urbit claims to be uncrackable. Not "secure when well-configured and patched regularly&quo
813.
by ineptech 9y ago
> I'm not guessing when I provide that reason for the 2^32 bit address space. It's the official stated answer from the project itself. Link? My understanding was that the official answer was "there should be about as many
814.
by ineptech 9y ago
> Are they shipping? Yes and no; it's a completely functional OS for which there are AFAICT no useful applications yet. You can absolutely run it, but there's no reason to run it other than to hack on it.
815.
by ineptech 9y ago
> ...Yet Another User Management System...
816.
by ineptech 9y ago
I thought of myself as somewhat overpaid, but the 50th percentile for my job/location/experience was $5k off from my actual salary. Now I want to check out the listings. Part of the point, perhaps?
817.
by ineptech 9y ago
Can the team creator give up admin rights on the team without resetting her user? I want to create a team for my employer so we can try it out, but I'm not the person they would want to be the admin if/when they adopt keybase.
818.
by ineptech 9y ago
s/Raspberry Pi/EC2 instance/ A world where it's common for people to run their own server opens up exciting possibilities (just as a world where everyone carries a computer in their pocket has), but I don't think ac
819.
by ineptech 9y ago
The Urbit model (open source, funded by a one-time cost for each new identity) is an elegant solution which has the side effect of discouraging spam.
820.
by ineptech 9y ago
> Im pretty sure, baring literally nazis, you can get just about every person on board with "It's ok to censor people that want genocide". Well gosh, that sounds simple! Who could possibly argue with that! And of course,
821.
by ineptech 9y ago
You're answering the question "Is it okay to censor stuff that's super-duper bad", which no one is asking. The question at hand is who gets to distinguish bad-enough-to-ban from the not-bad-enough-to-ban. That you&#x27
822.
by ineptech 9y ago
> waving swastikas The only reason people wear swastikas in America is because of the strong free-speech protection that this thread is discussing the erosion of. If we banned swastikas (like Germany) then people would stop wearing th
823.
by ineptech 9y ago
Sounds like you're okay with society censoring the websites of Nazis, yes? Care to clarify who gets to decide who is and isn't a Nazi? This is not rhetorical. In my experience, a lot of people agree with "It's okay to
824.
by ineptech 9y ago
The answer to why it took so long may not be any more complicated than "Apple charging cables are notoriously short-lived and surprisingly expensive."
825.
by ineptech 9y ago
Gonna have to talk to friends and coworkers. I've done this (mock interviews for people who are bad at interviewing) for friends and even friend-of-a-friends, but I wouldn't want to be on a searchable directory of such people.
826.
by ineptech 9y ago
> If everyone started requiring the use of a dragnet surveillance program just to log in to services, it would become next to impossible to protect yourself. Yes, this is true. If all websites start requiring their visitors to do someth
827.
by ineptech 9y ago
> your skepticism on this topic is wildly miscalibrated The reason I'm not worried about the government finding out which websites I visit is because they already know, from traffic inspection at the ISP level. Don't think I&#
828.
by ineptech 9y ago
> Sites will use such a service to invade your privacy even further, That's not how OAuth works. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OAuth > the government has a record of every site you've logged into Only
829.
by ineptech 9y ago
Er, why not? Why would the government shut down the account you use to identify yourself, if not because there was something wrong with it, in which case presumably they'd want you to create a new one?
830.
by ineptech 9y ago
> Now seems like the time to set the expectation that this service may not ever be used by private websites. Oh shit! The government knows I bought something from custom-fishing-lures.com! Ruuuuun! Seriously, what you just listed is a
831.
by ineptech 9y ago
...except that TSA Precheck doesn't host an OAuth server that my bank can use in lieu of their dumbshit "street you grew up on" nonsense. But yes, I agree, it's a good point that the government already does this (ditto f
832.
by ineptech 9y ago
> Now seems like the time to set the expectation that this service may not ever be used by private websites. Wha-huh? Why? What specifically is wrong with login.gov (or any government agency) running an oauth server and private website
833.
by ineptech 9y ago
Biometric has its own problems. What's a fingerprint but a password you can't change? Any secret can be stolen, bio or otherwise. The key to robust ongoing identity is not a better shared secret, it's a better way of recove
834.
by ineptech 9y ago
Is it time for a Federal Department of Verifying Whether People Are Who They Say They Are? Veryifying identity with SSN is broken. The right way is probably more or less how big webapps do it - MFA + a password that the user can reset by p
835.
by ineptech 9y ago
To reiterate what someone else has already said, vaporizing is indisputably the way to go. When vaporizing, you can use a bit, wait 5-10 minutes, and then decide whether to use more. With edibles you don't know if you got the dosage
836.
by ineptech 9y ago
Sure, but this is an article specifically about BTC; none of its conclusions hold for cryptocurrencies generally. I guess it just seems really deceptive to talk about fiat's "hidden cost" of inflation while ignoring BTC&#x27
837.
by ineptech 9y ago
I don't understand how someone can talk about making everyday purchases with BTC without addressing the transaction fees and confirmation times. Doesn't it currently cost several dollars to spend a dollar? Is there some reason t
838.
by ineptech 9y ago
> or even better, just generate a random new domain every single time. I'm no expert, but I do recall reading in one of the WC write-ups that there is known malware that does this.
839.
by ineptech 9y ago
> If I see something that is both "free" and "in-app purchases", it already greatly reduces the chance I'll even bother to download If a free app starts out with limited functionality for trialing, with a (one-ti
840.
by ineptech 9y ago
I made a falsifiable prediction about reality. If I'd written an essay on Medium that ostensibly argued for one side's view, but which did so in a condescending and divisive manner more likely to show what a clever guy I am than

More ›