qqii

26 ms·

241.
by qqii 6y ago
This is incorrect, unless you can argue that they were so incompitent they wrote '0' instead of 'O' on line 304: bytes32 slot = ADMIN_SL0T; https://bscscan.com/address/0x7e0c621ea9f7afd5b86a50b0942ea
242.
by qqii 6y ago
You are correct, here is their smart contact code which has been verified: https://bscscan.com/address/0x7e0c621ea9f7afd5b86a50b0942eae... Note line 304 the O is a 0: bytes32 slot = ADMIN_SL0T;
243.
by qqii 6y ago
Smart contact development is mostly out of the wild west that you're describing. Development tools and standards means that these cases where funds are directly syphoned are now quite rare. In this case this was a intentional backdoor
244.
by qqii 6y ago
It was an intentional backdoor in the contract. https://bscscan.com/address/0x7e0c621ea9f7afd5b86a50b0942eae... Note line 304 the O is a 0: bytes32 slot = ADMIN_SL0T;
245.
by qqii 6y ago
I found it strange that the title and beginning of the article reffered to this as a "hack" instead of what the test of the article suggests - a rug pull by the developers themselves. Since everything has been scrubbed the only su
246.
by qqii 6y ago
Articles like this never seem to address PGP's web of trust or identity management. For the first the only progress I've seen is Keybase and their idea of a "social proof". For the latter there is opmsg ( https:/&#x
247.
by qqii 6y ago
Can you explain your motivation behind this? If you're looking to evaluate if a thread is worth your time would it not be better to skim the article and comments? What benifit is there in making a decision with restricted information?
248.
by qqii 6y ago
The maintainer would reject such a PR? Even if the CI run takes from the HEAD it would still be the responsibility for the repo owner to not allow the PR to be run in the first place.
249.
by qqii 6y ago
Wouldn't this be as simple as restricting CI until the repo owner has looked over the PR? It's moving the problem but at the end of the day the repo owner has to look over and choose to accept or reject the PR.
250.
by qqii 6y ago
Since then they've bootstrapped their way from 1.28 all the way to 1.50: https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/guix.git/tree/gnu/packages...
251.
by qqii 6y ago
Guix performed the bootstrap from mrustc 0.8 for rust 1.19 all the way to rust 1.28 in 2018: https://guix.gnu.org/en/blog/2018/bootstrapping-rust/ Since them they've bootstrapped this all the way to
252.
by qqii 6y ago
Note the difference between only electricity and other forms of energy, the value listed is total electricity production/consumption.
253.
by qqii 6y ago
The GTX 970 is just borderline whilst the GTX 1080 is "pretty much sufficient" for modern games according to this benchmark: https://youtu.be/bhLlHU_z55U
254.
by qqii 6y ago
> miners can now no longer recoup some money When it was no longer profitable miners sold their GPUs on the uses market, here is evidence of that: https://youtu.be/plrsxEGYO-A > gamers realize they’re being screwed Li
255.
by qqii 6y ago
The initial sentiment in hacker news and reddit threads was overwhelmingly positive for nividia and against miners. Now that some time has passed and Linus (from LTT) has released his video I'd say the sentiment is still mixed. I'
256.
by qqii 6y ago
It's not about trusting if the bottle caps are worth anything or are useful, but if the supply and exchange of bottle caps follows the financial rules that are dictated.
257.
by qqii 6y ago
They can but I doubt the will as I, like the quoted article belive this would lead them to being sued over misleading marketing, just like the 970 3.5G controversy. Maybe the model number would do it, but I'd imagine it would have to
258.
by qqii 6y ago
Gamers are getting screwed by Nivida today since the silicone they normally bin as gaming cards are being allocated to mining cards. In return they're only given the 3060 which is still profitable for miners and Nividia refuses to rest
259.
by qqii 6y ago
> You’re making a huge assumption that they could be resold, even if they’re the same chips. This could be an entirely new market for chips that have yield defects in the graphics units, that will not ever work for games, and were previo
260.
by qqii 6y ago
You're taking his words out of proportion. Just by looking at the steam hardware survey you'll see that the majority of gamers buy mid range cards and own 1080p monitors. The most popular games aren't the latest AAA titles ei
261.
by qqii 6y ago
It's likely they have other subtle differences too. That doesn't mean they can't be worked around. Mining cards could still produce a display output with Looking Glass style software. Gaming cards could still mine using modde
262.
by qqii 6y ago
There's still a difference between buying $GME and playing roulette. Volatile as it may be the chance of loosing all of your investment is greatly lower with meme stocks.
263.
by qqii 6y ago
They improve yields on their flagship 3090s by rescuing ones that fail as 3080, 3070 or the highest bin that they meet specification. They wouldn't become a 2060 as that uses a different architecture. The manufacturing processes will a
264.
by qqii 6y ago
Can you elaborate on what you mean by Societal Costs of crypto? > I have said it a few times on HN: I see more potential into a "Crypto Dollar" than in crypto in general. This, and the potential of smart contracts that use the
265.
by qqii 6y ago
These industries certainly didn't buy mining cards last time.
266.
by qqii 6y ago
The link in your article to the primary source of the Cambridge University survey is unfortunately dead. The alternative metric given ( https://digiconomist.net/bitcoin-energy-consumption/ ) currency predicts 36.95 Milli
267.
by qqii 6y ago
I'd assume you're referring to this source ( https://cbeci.org/cbeci/comparisons ) which gives 0.6% of total electricity production. Out of total energy production that's closer to 0.07% (~170,000 TWh in 2
268.
by qqii 6y ago
The source for the BBC article ( https://cbeci.org/cbeci/comparisons ) even gives it as 0.48% of total electricity production and 0.55% of total electricity consumption. The graph it and the article shows us misleading a
269.
by qqii 6y ago
How did you reach this conclusion? Do you have some sources and numbers? https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/global-energy-substitutio... puts the latest number at 173,340 TWh in 2019. This is an underestimate for the c
270.
by qqii 6y ago
Plenty of second hand mining cards changed hands from miners to gamers two years ago, for the most case the price was very competitive. Depending on the card some would have been run underclocked and even undervolted. I personally know frie

More ›