the_stc

12 ms·

61.
by the_stc 9y ago
The point is to remain user-friendly while hiding the actual webservers, databases, and anything else that LE might want to take. An onion-routing proxy is easily setup and torn down and moved around quickly, making it a harder target for p
62.
by the_stc 9y ago
Facebook said they just looked for Facebook and got very lucky. corewww does not have a lot of meaning. We tried the same thing for PinkApp and got all sorts of much-longer matches that we could retcon into meaning something.
63.
by the_stc 9y ago
That does not solve anything. It just means the addresses are so long you are guaranteed no one is eyeball-comparing them. This makes phishing easier.
64.
by the_stc 9y ago
But DigiCert says they are no longer issuing them. Probably because the .onion is an 80-bit truncation of a SHA1 hash so it doesn't meet baseline reqs?
65.
by the_stc 9y ago
This is why we need SSL certs for .onions. DigiCert was doing this, but they told me it is on hold. Maybe when V3 hidden services are out? With an SSL cert, you get a cert for your .onion PLUS your clearnet domain. Then users can access the
66.
by the_stc 9y ago
What is Peter referring to when he says there's no reproducible builds?
67.
by the_stc 9y ago
2^80 is not very weak. That's the level of brute forcing a SHA-1 collision. It's low for a new system, but not very weak. I agree with your 20%/10% comments, but I do not know why you call ZCash an investment. Zcash should
68.
by the_stc 9y ago
What does SW activation have to do with it? Why not have it ready to go, wait for the flip, enable. Or deploy it on a testnet. Or on LTC?
69.
by the_stc 9y ago
But detecting cheating and withdrawing requires you to have client software online and monitoring. Which individuals can not do and thus will outsource it to their payment handling company which will probably be the same as the LN hub.
70.
by the_stc 9y ago
Most people live month-to-month at best. It seems not real they can open a single channel with all their purchases for the year.
71.
by the_stc 9y ago
>short term lightning Can you clarify what this means? Last I read, Lightning was 18 months out. But not really, that's just a number tossed to a crowd. The preview tech published a month ago is nowhere near being ready for use.
72.
by the_stc 9y ago
I had one of our investors write us and say he was really counting on our success to pay some family bills. I told him he should back out, that no investment is a good idea for bills. Much less a startup! Much less an illegally operating st
73.
by the_stc 9y ago
Not many of them! Even the ones that are sincere, often have terrible ideas. Or purely unworkable ideas or no business model. It makes it hard for legit people like my startup. We're actually using tech for an end case, not building te
74.
by the_stc 9y ago
Pink (www.pinkapp.io) | Extrajurisdictional | Designer/Front End Developer, Security Engineers | REMOTE Take part in building the libertarian, cypherpunk future. Pink is an anonymously operating escort agency. Using blockchain fundrais
75.
by the_stc 9y ago
This is one reason why we're excited about our company (info in profile). By operating anonymously, we can choose ethics over legality. By erring on the side of sex workers, we can shift some of the power away from abusive clients and
76.
by the_stc 9y ago
Not starting worldwide. Launch city Toronto. There are essentially no jurisdictions where we'd be legal. Places that have legal sex work usually make surrounding activities legal. Places where it's fully legal have regulatory issu
77.
by the_stc 9y ago
agree
78.
by the_stc 9y ago
I know, but it's the history of the person I'm looking at. Monero could well have weaknesses. That's why I don't rely on it. In fact, I know it has weaknesses. Monero's problem is they do not adequately tell people
79.
by the_stc 9y ago
KGill if you have a specific criticism that we're being irrational, please contact us. Info in profile. This country was founded on taunting men with guns and winning. Every bit of social progress does too. I am a small actor in compar
80.
by the_stc 9y ago
We are not doing an ICO. We are offering shares like any well-meaning enterprise should do. Anything less is disrespectful to investors. We are using blockchain fundraising because tech is good enough to give us enough privacy to operate. T
81.
by the_stc 9y ago
There is no invincibility complex. We are acutely aware of the risks. I just believe I am good enough to get the project working and stay ahead of LE until we can take a more hidden approach and reduce our opsec surface area.
82.
by the_stc 9y ago
> ... SEC won't care if investors are OK, yes. Hastily written comment! Should read: > SEC won't care whether investors are OK I am admitting it is irrelevant as far as legality goes. My point is that if investors are not be
83.
by the_stc 9y ago
You're right, opsec is stressful! That's why the core team's plan is to get the system running and then hire people to handle interactions. We will focus on things in the background. The core team will only use high-latency-m
84.
by the_stc 9y ago
I never suggested morality will prevent a judge or jury. Just that doing fewer bad things results in fewer complains results in less likelihood of spending prosecutor effort on us. But probably when our share price hits $25+ we'll be
85.
by the_stc 9y ago
I am unable to judge zcash and must rely on other cues. So when the founders seem to be saying they're OK with backdoors, it makes me think hey, given the chance maybe there's something they could do. Anyways once they get mandato
86.
by the_stc 9y ago
I don't mean it in bad faith. I am one of the people you and Zooko talk about preventing from using zCash. That's very offputting and since I cannot audit zCash it makes me nervous. People tell me zcash is very advanced and thus h
87.
by the_stc 9y ago
It's our view that the SEC part won't be what pushes us over the edge. 100% what we're doing is not legal, it's in our business plan. SEC won't care if investors are OK, yes. But if investors are OK, they won't
88.
by the_stc 9y ago
That's not an explanation. It's just an assertion they'd not do bad stuff, ignoring what he previously tweeted. Neither is his stuff about it being compatible with law enforcement. A real explanation would follow through the
89.
by the_stc 9y ago
We agree. For instance, we have a very strong anti-drug stance, despite not thinking it's immoral. We just don't want to draw unnecessary attacks against our platform. The SEC thing was probably unavoidable anyways.
90.
by the_stc 9y ago
Exactly. Being ethical is more important than being legal. To be fair, our entire business model is illegal in the US, and mostly illegal in many countries. We already have to deal with the penalties for running an escort agency. On the plu

More ›