341–350 of 440 posts
Stories like this make me consider whether programmers that engage in commerce should be forced (yes, by law) into guilds that have rigid journeyman and apprenticeship stages before the programmer gets to touch the production environment. Specialized, official, bonded developer roles need to be established. Our community cannot continue operating in the hacker mode wherever money is involved.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So now people who are self taught excellent programmers are unemployable without paying a 60,000 tax into the hands of private institutions but morons who graduated from diploma mills in countries with lax educational standards are entirely safe. I'm also sure that nobody will act to artificially limit the supply of legally employable programmers just to enrich the few at the expense of the rest of us. I'm also sure…
I don't think anyone is arguing that all computer programmers need to be accredited. The argument being put forward is that if you are deploying software in certain specific fields then your code should be signed off by a certified professional before it is allowed to be perform it's intended function (which in this case is handling financial transactions). I am an engineer. There are codified regulations that I am r…
This is already the case. Try working in aerospace.
> Having sounded the alarm bells, a group of benevolent white-hat hackers from the Ethereum community rapidly organized. They analyzed the attack and realized that there was no way to reverse the thefts, yet many more wallets were vulnerable. Time was of the essence, so they saw only one available option: hack the remaining wallets before the attacker did. > By exploiting the same vulnerability, the white-hats hacked…
Cash is not for the general public. Someone can mug you and take your banknotes, and the solution to that problem is an authority mugging those people and taking the money and giving it back. Not a sound argument.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Cryptocurrencies, growing pains aside, will arrest the trend toward economic centralization. They are not just more powerful tools. They are tools that shift the control over money from large trusted third parties to individuals. They literally allow an individual to be their own bank. They are a counter-force against the trend toward eliminating cash, and with it, financial privacy [1]: >Any future cashless bank-pay…
> They literally allow an individual to be their own bank. The main function of banks is issuing debt, not holding cash.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In block chain, 51% of the network can decide to modify the ledger to do things that aren't true. That's all it takes to completely change how much money is in my account in a "distributed" bank. I don't own it, and it's certainly not robust against demagogues. Demagogues are by definition political opportunists who play on populism to advance their politics. If democratic elections have a vulnerability to them, so c…
So if a majority of participants (50% + 1 of the network) wanted to say, "rob" the wealthy top 1% of wallets and redistribute wealth by rewriting the history of the blockchain, nothing could stop them?
The attack surface is similarly limited; they couldn't really "rob" the wealthiest wallets, but they could prevent their transactions from ever happening. They could also spend cryptocurrency they don't really have. Here's an intro:
https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Weaknesses#Attacker_has_a_lot_of_...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In block chain, 51% of the network can decide to modify the ledger to do things that aren't true. That's all it takes to completely change how much money is in my account in a "distributed" bank. I don't own it, and it's certainly not robust against demagogues. Demagogues are by definition political opportunists who play on populism to advance their politics. If democratic elections have a vulnerability to them, so c…
So if a majority of participants (50% + 1 of the network) wanted to say, "rob" the wealthy top 1% of wallets and redistribute wealth by rewriting the history of the blockchain, nothing could stop them?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Aside from in the rest of the developed world, where it has...?
I've seen no evidence of that. Pretty much the entire advanced world has seen its rate of progress slow since the late 1960s, in concurrence with growing public sectors.
How are you measuring progress there? If you mean economic growth then now might be a good time to point out that correlation does now imply causation. Otherwise perhaps increasing life expectancy also causes a larger public sector? ;)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If we create a UBI then people will have the time to be better educated, to be healthier, to raise healthier, happier, and more productive families. We're almost there, automation will strongly facilitate this. Because a new technology seems exciting - and gains adoption because early adoption means potential for an individual to turn $1000s of into $1,000,000s with very little individual effort of working towards ma…
>If we create a UBI then people will have the time to be better educated, to be healthier, to raise healthier, happier, and more productive families. We're almost there, automation will strongly facilitate this. Compulsory redistribution programs like UBI pervert incentives, leading to less individual responsibility over time. They're clumsy cookie cutter solutions, which with a stroke a pen, impose the same formula…
What I'd like to know as a developer- what was the "great" idea with the "call forwarding" in specific contract function?! What would be the valid use case, why author decided he should put it there beforehand?
Do we have any idea if the wallets that were stolen from were individuals, companies? How angry would you be if you lost millions and there was nothing you can do.