These media companies who want Meta to pay them for content sure seem to post an awful lot of content on Meta properties for free, seemingly on purpose.
The sheer amount of bugs planted in buildings, especially at time of construction, has been an astonishing revelation to me. It’s funny to think that this is a full time job but many people have no idea it happens.
I’d take that one with a bit of a grain of salt - significant factions in the DND really didn’t want a hand-me-down facility in west Ottawa, they wanted to build something new across the river or downtown. There may have been strong inventive for some to “find” reasons to not occupy the former nortel campus.
It's the generic "Terrorism and rape will happen if you are allowed to control your own device that you actually paid money for" FUD.
And the rape part is not an exaggeration, it was actually used as an argument against the Right to Repair ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EozPi1qmH44 ), wouldn't be suprised to hear it in this case too.
I agree. There isn’t an alternative with cellphones because of the importance they hold, legally, financially, politically. Power in your pocket; like a gun.
"The current system where every user is a network node is not the intended configuration for large scale. That would be like every Usenet user runs their own NNTP server. The design supports letting users just be users. The more burden it is to run a node, the fewer nodes there will be. Those few nodes will be big server farms. The rest will be client nodes that only do transactions and don't generate." - Satoshi Nakamoto
You're not wrong. They currently get the block reward and the transaction fees. When there's no more reward to be had they will get just the transaction fees.
To be fair, Lightning works, and it works now on the Bitcoin mainnet.
The idea is sound, the code is written and somewhat tested, and it has been used in a very controlled fashion on the real bitcoin network already.
At this point it's just a matter of further testing and validation that the logic is sound and there isn't anything everyone is missing, and getting vendors on board and adoption started.
Still no guarantee it will happen, but it's looking more likely that it will at least make a good push, and it's no longer a vaporware promise of "in 18 months".
I'm struggling to find references, so apply salt as needed, but I'm fairly sure I've read multiple references to the fact that the LN developers themselves describe it as pre-alpha and still a few years away.
Which, to be clear, isn't necessarily vaporware - I think most people are in agreement that the concepts are sound, but that integration of the execution into the mainstream are quite a ways off.
It is still "early alpha" but bitcoin developers use that term as it was meant to be used.
"early alpha" is just that, early access to a fully working product with all the features that are needed, and it needs a LOT of testing and validation. And because of the "network" nature of it, it needs people or vendors that are willing to try it out before it can even be tested outside of controlled areas.
I agree that we are probably a few years (probably more than a "few") from Lightning being the "default" way to use bitcoin, but I fully expect by Q3 of next year there to be a few vendors which accept lightning natively, and a few "consumer friendly" wallets that have some integration.
In my opinion, I wouldn't want to call it "beta" until there are a few implementations with "user friendly" UI that abstract away the dirty details, and until there are at least enough people on the "network" that it would be feasible to actually use it.
If you want, [0] is a video from last week that shows lightning network running on mainnet. It's a bit of a "fluff video" with nothing really substantial in it, but it at least shows that it's working, and if you compile the tools he used in the video yourself (to target them at mainnet) then you could do it right now too, but without anyone to "network" with, it's kind of pointless right now...
> "Again, the main function of a bitcoin exchange is to get its bitcoins stolen..."
> Really?
Really. Is there any other reason to open a bitcoin exchange other than to have fools give you eTuplips that you can abscond with at a whim?
I mean you might think that running an exchange helps further dreams of a bankless future, but in the real world, most cryptocurrency exchanges went poof, either to steal bitcoins or because they couldn't convince fools to part with enough bitcoins to steal.
But the heady days of an exchange being hacked or closed by fraud every weeks are over. If you want your bitcoins stolen, I recommend investing in ICOs.
