noxer

57 ms·

541.
by noxer 5y ago
Why not webmonetization.org ? I dont want different ads I rather want to pay for the content I use and be paid for the content I provide. The third party in between need to be cut out.
542.
by noxer 5y ago
Taxing wealth is "wrong" because you already paid taxes when you earned that wealth. So yes, you own it already and you already paid the taxes for it. + you would get "fined" for saving money if your wealth grows because
543.
by noxer 5y ago
You mean slow down by an probably insignificant amount? Like back to a few year ago levels. All while the combined rest of the world increases pollution? No one can seriously thinks this would make a change. China's additional pollutio
544.
by noxer 5y ago
Its not global and it doesn't solve the problem it just make rich counties move most of their pollution to another place and cause more pollution in the end to avoid pollution taxes.
545.
by noxer 5y ago
>desertified country You should probably look up Switzerland on a map. Its where central Europe fresh water comes from.
546.
by noxer 5y ago
This directly contradicts the fact that they voted against an additional mandatory week of holidays back in 2012. The consensus was that people did not want the short term benefit of more holidays for log term harm to small business who can
547.
by noxer 5y ago
These are not smart contracts. Its a functionality of the software that each nodes run. It can be updated if it has bugs. As longs as there is consensus that something actually is a bug. So to use the example above, you would not be able to
548.
by noxer 5y ago
Systems build for enterprise usage, for example for banks, do have multi-sign accounts [1]. Each key can have a weight and you define a total that's needed to sign a transaction. For example 8 keys where each has the weight of 1 and a
549.
by noxer 5y ago
But I do already have a choice. Ive been trading both on traditional exchanges and on a DEX since a few years. I choose depending on availability of the assets ofc as not all assets can be traded on both systems (yet) but I'm defensive
550.
by noxer 5y ago
>But again, the legal system is king. It doesn't matter what the computer says. There are plenty situation where you dont want or need or can have a legal system to be king. For example: - Cross jurisdiction business, where there is
551.
by noxer 5y ago
The risk is probably way smaller than intentionally collude to make a shitton of money and let it crash and burn. The perfect exist scam if you want. If china for example would actually put an ultimatum on chines miners to shut down. It cou
552.
by noxer 5y ago
Yes, one thing is unavoidable, you have to assume that the majority is honest else the system simply can not work. Identifying the majority is however optional. BTC for example does not. You pick the longest chain you can find at a given ti
553.
by noxer 5y ago
>You cant pick wrong, there is no chain bigger. It happened multiple times that a longer change was discoed shortly after. So in reality you have to wait some blocks to reduce the risk of a longer chain to almost zero. Also the trust you
554.
by noxer 5y ago
You are using the wrong DEX then. Pro tip: Dont use one that runs on a PoW system. PoW chant be cheap.
555.
by noxer 5y ago
Just as stupid ad for Elcomsoft Forensic Disk Decryptor with a click bait title.
556.
by noxer 5y ago
Its called "settlement" when its final. You probably dont need that ever or dont even know there is a difference between a payment and settlement but financial systems do know the difference very well. They just hide it from the e
557.
by noxer 5y ago
Trading on a DEX is free trading on an exchange costs you fees. People are just lazy and use exchanges because they provide easy to use apps and stuff and cash out to fiat etc. but this changes because exchanges are horrible at staying up w
558.
by noxer 5y ago
Could people just stop assuming cryptocurrencies == bitcoin. Also DLT tech doesn't require a token with "value". There is no need to create an "alternative money" It can be just a DL (Distributed ledger). reducing e
559.
by noxer 5y ago
A majority of nodes who listen to each other (mutual agreement). >How do you know if you really have a majority or someone is faking a lot of identities and/or hiding a lot of real ones from you? You decide in advance from which nod
560.
by noxer 5y ago
You dont need a blockchain its a misleading term. There are distributed ledgers that dont requires a chain of blocks. Also majority in a decentral system is not that simple. It can be done with FBA (Federated Byzantine Agreement). If that&#
561.
The Interplay of Nakamoto Consensus and Byzantine Fault Tolerance(medium.com)
2 points by noxer 5y ago|0 comments
562.
by noxer 5y ago
Posted this https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26954023 about a month ago. No one cared about it as expected. The video is the interesting part skip to 13 minutes and 50 seconds.
563.
Apply for a developer grant to fund your next XRP Ledger (XRPL) project(xrplgrants.org)
1 points by noxer 5y ago|0 comments
564.
by noxer 5y ago
See other message. Listening to a nodes is voluntary and secret you dont know who or if at all anyone listens to your node. If you simply created a bunch you can be sure no one will listen to them. It doesn't matter how many % they mak
565.
by noxer 5y ago
You mean like hacking a few mining pools like 4 and then performer 51% attack at near zero cost. Sounds silly but you get the point. The hacking argument is just not realistic. And it gets less and less relisting to more nodes there are. (a
566.
by noxer 5y ago
>You can have that type of finality with centralized protocols built on top of the Bitcoin blockchain — Lightning Network being the standout example. Whats the point? No one wants that beside that LN needs BTC on chain Tx which if you do
567.
by noxer 5y ago
>One way to sidestep this: every few minutes, post the longest hash to some distributed medium that can't be edited, like Twitter. Then the threat model moves to "do we trust the person with the keys to this twitter account?&qu
568.
by noxer 5y ago
> while the BTC model is based on zero-trust. Its based on trusting that never more than 50% hashpower colludes You still trust its just no defined whom you trust. Its an illusion of no trust. Any decentral system can somehow be fooled i
569.
by noxer 5y ago
If you have a final state double-spend attacks are actually impossible. They are based on the fact that someone can insert a transaction then "overwrite" it by providing a longer chain where the transaction didn't happen or w
570.
by noxer 5y ago
ODL is a product that uses a DLT (the XRPL) and a digital asset (XRP) to facilitate cross bolder transaction. Instead of finding a bank or payment provider that hold the foreign currency you want to deliver somewhere and exchange it for you

More ›