But my old keys, that hold my funds, are still traditionally encrypted, so how am I supposed to securely claim my same bitcoins on the other side of the fork?
Unicomp model M is not the same as the original model M the typing feel is considerably different. I purchased one and ended up returning it since it was so different than the model M feel I was expecting
The build quality is also sadly lacking - I’ve tried two or three Unicomps over the years and they all die eventually. The genuine model m keep trucking along.
I've been using two Unicomps since 2008, one for the office and one at home. They haven't died yet. I've only had the replace the rubber trackpoint nub on one of them.
Supposedly, the build quality since they retooled last year is even better.
Because nation borders draw arbitrary lines splitting territory.
I accept that peoples, ethnical coherent groups, tribes, culture circles whatever you would call it, exist and that it might make sense that these groups would have authority over their internal rules of interaction and living together. Makes sense.
Yet nation borders more often than not do not run along these lines. Rather they stem from historical sways, power grabs, wars and whatever other negotiations and historical circumstances.
The full absurdity of todays nations and their borders becomes apparent when you realize that air, water, sunlight, wild animals, money, raw materials and good all can move freely between nations, but humans can not.
Borders definitely are products of lots of historical events, but still hard to see how it relates to your original statement. Yes, borders are complicated, and what?
And the undisputable fact that humans are neither sunlight, nor air, nor water (even if technically made mostly of water) should show the absurdity of nations how?
Paying a teacher is very expensive and a large time commitment, could you elaborate why the things a teacher can show you are not covered by online or self study
Perhaps you just found an old dusty upright piano next to a dumpster, and you moved it into your apartment. Pehaps you pay a "very expensive" teacher $50 and make a "large time commitment" of 30 minutes for a single lesson. (Btw-- what's the going rate for even moving an upright these days? I'd bet it's more than $50)
The teacher asks you where you'll be practicing, and on what type of instrument. Suppose it's the old upright. As a professional responsibility, that teacher is going to find out exactly what shape that piano is in, if it's in tune, if it has a broken soundboard, etc. Based on what the teacher finds out, they will give you valuable feedback on whether it's even worth it for you to devote learning on that instrument (perhaps it's woefully out of tune[1], which you wouldn't know if you're just a beginner). As well as whether it's worth paying a piano tuner to have a look at the instrument. Tuning costs more than $50, so on that detail alone you may have gotten your money's worth.
Now imagine that instead of an old dusty upright, you have access to a grand piano practice room at a college with a well-funded music dept. You again pay your astronomical fee of $50 for the long duration of 30 full minutes. But the teacher spends the last 10 minutes of your lesson talking about dusty old broken uprights, and all the problems you'd run into if you happened to be playing on that instead of accessing the college's practice rooms.
As a beginner, that last ten minutes would clearly be a waste of your time, right?
Now extend that waste of time over, say, 1/3 of the total time you attempt to learn the piano.
That is pretty much the problem you run into with online/self-study. Either the guide gives you so much material that's irrelevant to your context that it slows your pace of learning, or-- probably worse-- it leaves out crucial details that you need to know in order to progress efficiently.
Finding a human mentor through a web of trust avoids those problems.
In fact, it gets worse over time for the online/self-study because you're entirely dependent upon your own opinion of your progress, which-- as a beginner-- is guaranteed to be flawed. This is an easy route to burn out. Perhaps you feel your progress stunted, whereas a professional could tell you that you've simply underestimated the increase of difficulty of a particular skill. Not to mention setting reasonable expectations for progress in the first place, and a hundred other considerations that a mentor can immediately discover and provide feedback for.
[1] More exponential explosion-- there are various ways in which a piano may be out of tune. A teacher can tell you whether that happens to be imperfect yet usable, or whether it renders it completely worthless as a practice instrument.
I'll call out for beginners at chess, there is no need to learn openings in order to improve at low level. Focus on just playing games and tactics (chesscom paid or lichess free). These things will get you to a level where you can start to parse the difference between openings.
I feel like this would be way more involved and many individuals have better more verifiable alibis with the things listed. Like I'm sure there will be drawback cases but it is seems in aggregate that this stuff is generally positive.
I think you are too optimistic WRT how forensic "science" is
generally applied in the US [1] (one prominent example is e.g. [2]). Now imagine this is you standing in front of a scientifically untrained jury trying to argue against junk-science presented by a "forensic expert" testimonial. Not sure an alibi is going to help you much in that case.
That's why you keep Google location history on at all times, and also post photos to Instagram/Facebook as much as you can so you have timestamped records of photos of what you were doing at all times.
That’s exactly why you would need Facebook or Google or your mobile network operator or all of them to serve as proof of your alibi.
If the finger is pointed at you with a deep fake, you can then counter with proof from large corporations which presumably haven’t all been compromised.
You might also be able to use proof of your location in other settings, such as civil suits or domestic disputes.
Lots of people are using dash cams in a similar fashion. Proof to protect themselves from being named the liable party in a collision.
Same with forcing communications over email so you can prove what was actually communicated in the event a legal or public relations matter arises.
No, to defend yourself just like the guy in your article did:
> Even then, Kenyon wanted to make sure police didn’t have lingering doubts about McCoy, whom they still knew only as “John Doe.” So he met with the detective again and showed him screenshots of his client’s Google location history, including data recorded by RunKeeper. The maps showed months of bike rides past the burglarized home.
I’m posting kind of tongue in cheek, because it’s almost a foregone conclusion that people have their mobile device on them, which means the mobile networks know where you are at all times. In that event, it’s more advantageous for you to have access to your location history (via Google/Facebook/Instagram) when the full force or the law starts coming down on you.
But everybody can give his/her smartphone to a 3rd party to carry around, right? Your Google location history only proves where your phone was, it doen't prove where you were.
You mean you're using online services to provide you with trusted timestamp? [1]. But you need to consider how a trusted timestamp merely proves that some photo was definitely taking at or before the attested time. It does not prove that a photo was not actually taken a day earlier and then merely submitted at the attested time. To prove something was not recorded earlier is a little trickier. Need something like a newspaper headline that would not have been available earlier. And then how do you defend against claims that you took the photo early, but photoshopped the newspaper headline at the time it was attested?
True, maybe Instagram can roll out a feature where it grabs the GPS data to verify location on the photo, or signals that the photo was not uploaded but rather taken.
Each item isn’t meant to be foolproof, just to assist in creating third party verifiable data when combined with things like credit card transaction data or road toll timestamps to make it improbably for anything else to have happened.
The concrete number while it would be nice to include is a lot less helpful for the average reader than something more illustrative like the elephant number.
