I don’t care. I watched an interview with him and his foreign policy takes were so horrid he would be laughed out of the room if he said something like this in my country. Guess some people in the UK don’t really give a crap about Ukraine.

I’m not from the UK but when I last watched something with Corbyn he was shilling for Russia, how is that not an absolute deal-breaker?

Edit: I was completely right and got downvoted for it. He wanted to stop arms to Ukraine. He sucks and can go and die in a volcano. No left-wing politicians in Poland are like this when it comes to Russia, why are western lefties so brain-dead and conciliatory to this horrible regime? Telling Ukraine to roll over and give up its land. Fuck you tankie POS.

I’ll just use Firefox mobile with uBlock Origin then, literally anything is better than ads

It’s a weapon like any other. Maybe you’re iffy on the name, but suicide drones are just another way to attack specific targets, like missiles but far more precise. What is evil about having a remotely controlled aircraft hit an enemy position as opposed to artillery, bombs or gunfire hitting enemy position?

That’s a bit different, as in magnitudes more stupid (if true)

Ideally you would want laws to reflect morality. If drugs became legal, monero would no longer be useful for buying them, if that’s what you’re talking about.

You have no idea what that phrase means.

The “immutable” I’m talking about here is not in the sense of “immutable OS”, but rather immutable like punched cards. You literally needed to punch another set of cards if your program contained a bug. You need to create another smart contract to replace your buggy program. Paying gas fees for it.

umber of crypto services (including Monero) that offer a middleman type service to allow you to spend XMR and have a business get fiat.

So you buy Monero with fiat, just to convert that Monero to fiat again, so the vendor can receive fiat? What for?

There are plenty of stable coins that are stable, such as USDC.

For now. All the stable coins that failed were stable until they weren’t. What incentive is there to actually providing that kinda service, if you won’t make money with it?

Ethereum exists to allow for programmatic transactions (ie: you pay a program to do something, and it’ll get done)

NFTs. SAY THEIR NAME

And remember what a resounding success Wolf Game was? As a hobbyst programmer I can tell you there isn’t an idea dumber that putting code into something immutable, that you have to destroy, create anew, rename the new thing you made to the old one, while paying for each step of the process, just so that you can fix a bug is a terrible idea.

It’s pretty natural that what ended up being contained in those smart contracts was links to jpegs - it’s much harder to mess that up than an actual interactive program.

I have too many people hammering me with comments to respond to all your points. I spend like an hour writing responses to you goobers, unless I see something really stupid I’m not responding any further.

So a quick round: 3&6 social engineering is far more common than simply hacking your account. So no, it’s the opposite. Also, 6- completely false, why do you think they avoid using bank accounts?

5- I gave you an example where someone would know your identity - if you’re using it in a non-anonymous context, like getting paid. It could also be the case when buying something, with your name/delivery address. Unless you go off chain, there is no point of setting up new accounts, as transactions can be traced and connected to the intermediate accounts.

4- Financial policy is decided by elected representatives. Corruption is an issue, but in crypto it’s built-in.

Theatge amount of energy you mention is really only relevant to proof of work. You’ve mentioned proof of stake etc - so you should know that. The energy requirements for “proof” techniques such as PoS is negligible

It can’t compete with payment processors. Proof of stake is also basically just oligarchy, while proof of storage is a waste of hardware. All of them center their validation process on big money investors, who either have a lot of hardware or a lot of money to stake.

Although, I don’t know of anyone that gets their salary into their crypto wallet.

So it would be useless for things normal money is useful for? Where’s the revolution in banking that I heard about? Banking the unbanked?

Regarding on chain transaction transparency, there are some chains that are like this (bitcoin), and there are some chains that are not (monero).

Here you provided users privacy at the cost of making criminals completely untraceable. Bravo.

How about a bank account, where people who know you won’t know your transaction history but police can catch people participating in organized crime?

I don’t think crpyto will solve all of.humans problems, but I might just help with some

Which ones? I have not heard of one use case, only excuses from you guys.

My point is there isn’t any other usage to it. People won’t use Monero for buying their groceries or online shopping, but its nature lends itself to being used to commit crimes. Cash at the very least has serial numbers - you could possibly track that.

The reasons why it isn’t suitable to be used as a currency are exactly what I listed, and you failed to interrogate: volatility, lack of consumer protections, anonymity for wrongdoers, extremely high transaction fees and energy usage, consensus protocols favoring big money and the inability to perform even a basic rollback without splitting the entire economy of your chain in twain.

With e-commerce, you could have someone send you some coins and then not deliver the product. What are they gonna do, get a non-existent chargeback?

So we’re supposed to just wait until he’s emergency-killing those civilians to avoid discovery/steal from them while on the ground, like the Russian bloke did? Or bombing cities, killing hudreds or thousands?

But the pilot is already a soldier

In the first sentence reiterated insults

Nope. Just pointing out how the feature Monero boasts about (transaction obfuscation) made it a great pick for the conversion target for the ransom bitcoins obtained from the WannaCry cyber attack.

Edit: Are you refering to my first or second comment? In my inbox I assumed the second, since you said “reiterated”, but now I see you responded to my first one. Also, all the insults here are warranted. The future cryptobros want for finance is a dystopian one.

Ah yes, Monero, from the WannaCry incident, the premier currency for criminals. Also I’ve made a detailed list of points and most of them (except 1, which is about stablecoins and 5, which only half-applies) apply to Monero. It’s still proof of work, so it wastes energy, it still destroys consumer protections, is perfect for scams and makes it even harder for authorities to pursue criminals. And it is still a bigger fool scam, despite being useful for criminals.

“a trading card site and two unlicensed online banks went broke so you’re stupid for buying Cisco stock” right after the dot com crash.

Ftx was one of the largest exchanges for the whole of the crypto market. This is like Goldman Sachs, Wells Fargo and Deutsche Bank all going bankrupt and their execs sentenced to prison at the same time.

(There are no major licensed crypto banks btw)

Addendum: Cisco is a company that offers products and services. Crypto is used by criminals and speculators.

But if they land somewhere the opposing troops can’t reach them, you can know in advance they won’t surrender.

Edit: it shouldn’t be a controversial notion that you won’t surrender in friendly territory.

You have to be quite stupid to support crypto in 2023, after Luna, Ftx, NFTs, all the rugpulls and explicit pump and dumps, you morons just keep coming back for more. That last paragraph is pure comedy gold - you’re so close to self-awareness it’s hilarious.

• All stablecoins are not stable and a scam, algorithmic ones can’t work, since they mimic death spiral financing, and the other ones just gamble their clients money
• Every non-stable coin is just a bigger fool scam, since there is no use case for crypto, so no way to derive a non-speculative value (beyond selling illegal drugs, 419 scams, and couple of enthusiasts trading it personally as donations and the like)
• Crypto destroys customer protections, to do a rollback a few bad transactions you have to convince the entire chain to back you and force a fork, creating an alternative, competing version of the economy
• All consensus mechanisms are geared to allow the wealthy to control the crypto economy, whether it’s proof of stake, work or storage, since you can buy all those things with money. They also waste inordinate amounts of energy which translates to an exorbitant transaction cost compared to payment processors like Visa or MasterCard
• Crypto gives great privacy protections to anonymous criminals and scammers and destroys privacy for anyone using the system as a honest user. If you used your crypto wallet as a bank account, anyone with whom you interacted on the blockchain in a non-anonymous capacity (like, idk, your boss at work, sending you your salary) knows your wallet address, and can figure out where your money is going. You can’t hide your dildo purchases or campaign contributions from your employer, no matter how many intermediate accounts you create, there will always be a trace. How fun
• Crypto aims to prevent man-in-the-middle attacks, when most attacks nowadays are done through social engineering, which crypto makes trivial, due to it’s write-only nature. 419 “Nigerian prince” scammers love crypto - because just like their other favorites money transfer through Western Union or MoneyGram and gift cards it’s an irreversible payment method. If you pay with your bank account or PayPal, you can dispute transactions or get a chargeback, aside from forking the whole chain there ain’t no way you’re doing that with crypto. This also makes it perfect for retail scams.

I actually disagree with this one. Pilots will kill more people through bombing unless killed if allowed to return to their planes later. Unless you can be sure of their capture there’s no reason to let them live, from a humanitarian perspective. There was even this case where a pilot from a Russian aircraft killed a civilian on the ground. This rule just never made sense to me - you don’t have that with the crew leaving a tank, do you?

People are becoming more conscious of stuff plenty of us have been aware for quite some time already. The idea that a browser made by a corporation who harvests your data for the purpose of advertising doesn’t give a shit about privacy and will try to block adblockers is not something some people weren’t expecting - but normies are getting this shoved in their face with YouTube giving them the anti-adblock notification.

Firefox (and it’s clones) is basically the only other choice - all the other (major) browsers (that aren’t Safari) are based on Chromium, which is developed by Google.

California has like 40M people. That’s ten cents per person, spread over 6 years. It’s literally nothing. A road costs more to bankroll (I tried looking up a specific figure but they’re all over the place).