Guilty of what exactly? Facilitating drug dealing? Something we both know is going to occur whether the nanny state permits it or not. Ross made it safer for those involved, and even those not involved. Inner cities are war zones because drug deals must be done in person. He deserves a full pardon.
A very interesting philosophical and moral can of worms you just opened there. Bitcoin is governed by the protocol, so if the protocol permits anyone who can sign a valid transaction involving a given UTXO to another address, then it technically isn't a "crime". Morally I'm not sure I'd be able to sleep well at night if I unilaterally took what I didn't exchange value for.
As for the forgotten key case, I think the only way to prove you had the key at some point would need to involve the sender vouching for you and cryptographically proving they were the sender.
Morally, there is no quandary: it's obviously morally wrong to take someone else's things, and knowing their private key changes nothing.
Legally, the situation is the same: legal ownership is not in any way tied to the mechanism of how some system or another keeps track of ownership. Your BTC is yours via a contract, not because the BTC network says so. Of course, proving to a judge that someone else stole your BTC may be extremely hard, if not impossible.
Saying "if the protocol permits anyone who can sign a valid transaction involving a given UTXO to another address, then it technically isn't a "crime"" is like saying "traditional banking is governed by a banker checking your identity, so if someone can convince the banker they are you, then it technically isn't a "crime"".
The only thing that wouldn't be considered a crime, in both cases, is the system allowing the transaction to happen. That is, it's not a crime for the bank teller to give your money to someone else if they were legitimately fooled; and it's not a crime for the Bitcoin miners to give your money to someone else if that someone else impersonated your private key. But the person who fooled the bank teller /the miners is definitely committing a crime.
Traditional banking is governed by men with guns who depend on votes (for appearances). They always have recourse and motivation to intervene with private transactions. Not so much the case with bitcoin, which is extralegal for the most part and doesn't depend on them.
Banking communications and transactions will all be protected by quantum-resistant protocols and ciphers well before that will become a problem. Most of these already exist, and some of them can even be deployed.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but remote code execution has the advantage of being able to access information without the user being involved at all. Sure the user needs to install and trigger the exploit, but whatever code the attacker runs doesn’t require the user to interact with certain urls. If you can launch arbitrary programs, you can probably install all sorts of nasty things that are potentially more lucrative than the victim’s bank or coinbase accounts.
It breaks the assumption that Chrome is sandboxed and something I do as a user including installing an extension will not have an impact outside of Chrome. A new process outside Chrome to call your own and do whatever you want with.
You're on Windows? Download a binary, create some WMI triggers and get executed at every boot as the same user (requires no elevation for same user, if Admin, you can get NT_AUTHORITY). If you find something to elevate to Administrator you could also patch the beginning of some rarely used syscall and then invoke it and get a thread to yourself in the kernel. These things tend to almost chain themselves sometimes. At least on Windows it feels that way.
Also the user doesn't have to navigate to a specific URL in the final form, just needs to open devtools after installing the extension.
So it’s more expensive to make something ugly. Gotcha ;)
The slowness might be explained by the background tasks of restoring previously installed software and data. I have an iPhone 13 Pro with tons of apps and it’s still pretty snappy. But those specific bugs do pop up from time to time. Especially since they release new phones concurrently with new operating systems.
>So it’s more expensive to make something ugly. Gotcha ;)
What is the point of this? Does anyone enjoy this? Everyone knows what is being said based on the context?
>The slowness might be explained by the background tasks of restoring previously installed software and data.
No, it never went away. I had been coming from a Pixel, so I wasnt really forgiving about bugs, limited features, or slow animations. It felt like I bought an old phone. That + the otterbox really dispelled the illusion.
Otterbox is a meme. Might as well carve out a hole in a nerf football to stick your phone inside. The thin leather cases + glass screen protector do nearly just as much to protect the phone and also don't feel like garbage to use.
It's hard to separate from the sea of grifters, con men, cranks, and scammers that infest the domain. Just using the word is a yellow flag that you might be some kind of whacko, even if all you really want to talk about is the math.
People have to forever be on guard that you might at any point pivot to all taxation is theft or how you have formed your own micro nation that consists entirely of yourself and thus have diplomatic immunity from all prosecution. Because it happens. Or maybe you have a once in a lifetime deal to buy this receipt like object for some hideous art that is guaranteed to appreciate in value millions of percent. It's just the crowd that has aggregated around crypto currencies includes a lot of untrustworthy people.
Why do people need to be on guard for those beliefs? People should be critical thinkers and not thought police.
Granted, there are all kinds of whackos in crypto, but we should only be concerned about the immoral ones trying to scam us out of our money: SBF, Do-Kwon, and the like.
people are legitimately buying farming land in the US and currently suing farmers for "anti-trust" for refusing to sell them their land so that they can quite literally create a crypto based sovereign micro-nation of wealthy tech VC's. [1] and I think that is a selfish, vile and delusional thing to do. It has nothing to do with "thought police" its as simple as looking at the impact of their actions and beliefs and making the decision to reject that way of thinking and way of life.
Why is collective bargaining power a concern of the FTC? I would have thought that bargaining power would have increased with a merger (despite being smaller overall with layoffs).
The amount of friends I have with non-trivial amounts of bitcoin they are unable to access anymore due to “self custody” says this isn’t always the best idea either.
I don’t know what a good idea is when it comes to storing your bitcoin. But if you’re gonna go with one of the major players, at this time, Coinbase seems relatively safest.
Odds are they lost access because they didn't treat it as something really valuable. A good idea is to learn how to safely store and backup your keys (plural). If you allow others to hold your bitcoin, particularly a large one that could easily be nationalized, you're playing with fire.
I've got a couple thousand bitcoin in self-custody, mined out of curiosity a couple days after Satoshi's initial announcement.
The key is of course lost, but not to worry; I printed it out on a sheet of paper, which I buried in the garden of my dead grandmother's home. It's underneath the chicken coop. Anyone want to go digging?
