HackerTrans
TopNewTrendsCommentsPastAskShowJobs

leppr

no profile record

comments

leppr
·5 lat temu·discuss
"Code is law" is either nonsensical or redundant when applied to a complex Turing complete language such as Solidity.

If you can't accurately predict the implications of the lines of code in a smart contract, then it's as good as saying "The laws of physics are laws. That ball ended in my garden following the laws of gravity and thermodynamics, asking for me to return it to you is breaching the initial promise of the physical world". This may change with better smart contract languages that can reconcile intent with effect[1], but while talking about complex Ethereum smart contracts, the "Code is law" argument has no value.

Furthermore, as long as you keep within the bounds of trustless cryptocurrency (unfortunately not a tautology these days), code is indeed law. The ETH this person acquired cannot be confiscated.

[1] e.g. https://scilla.readthedocs.io/en/latest/
leppr
·5 lat temu·discuss
First line of the article:

> Hackers exploited Poly Network on DeFi exchanges Polygon, Ethereum and Binance Smart Chain

When even a website supposedly specializing on blockchain can't get their basic terminology right.
leppr
·6 lat temu·discuss
> Multi-destination route optimization is not available.

OsmAnd+ on F-Droid[1] has this feature, although the UX isn't stellar. Add intermediate destinations to your itinerary then the Edit next to intermediate destinations > Sort > Door-to-door.

[1] https://f-droid.org/app/net.osmand.plus
leppr
·7 lat temu·discuss
More precisely, always have a backup plan. Nothing wrong with running on GCP if you're using it in a platform-abstract way (either by using it as a simple hosting provider, or by going through a layer like the "serverless" framework).
leppr
·7 lat temu·discuss
Let me elaborate on why this argument isn't simply "whataboutism":

Nobody would call for Google to be shut down for the "evil" content they mirror and link to. We all have an implicit understanding that Google is simply a tool, a neutral platform to connect people to websites.

In fact, we believe the exact contrary. For us well educated folks, it's preventing access to Google on the basis of its content that is seen as a backward, deeply offensive move (China, Iran).

We look at the purpose and nature of the platform itself when we judge Google. Well, the purpose of 8chan has never been to promote hate, but instead to provide an open alternative to 4chan, where everyone is welcome to open a board about any topic[1].

The reason why 8chan is ridden by "evil" content has more to do with the heavily controlled state of the giant internet networks, than the nature of 8chan in itself. Nothing about 8chan caters to hateful communities in particular. It's simply one of the few open social networks on the web, which naturally attracts the people rejected from mainstream social networks first. Were it to be more popular, the ratio of "evil" to "decent" communities would trend towards the ratio found in other social networks.

So why do we call for it to be shut down, when its only real fault is to be too small? If you were the user of an 8chan community about cooking cupcakes (or furries, or BDSM), you certainly wouldn't want 8chan to be shut down just because some people are using the site differently.

___

Now I don't disagree with the reality that intellectually vulnerable people can be influenced by hateful communities in sites like 8chan, and that this is a problem to solve.

But in my opinion, the solution is to go in the total opposite direction of what you propose. The urge to seek out and enter fringe communities is healthy, and at least a necessary step in one's intellectual development. People will from time to time look to escape out of controlled environments, into the bigger space of possibilities. This won't change for as long as we keep teaching kids that freedom is good.

The problem is that, as conventional social networks get more and more controlled, and havens of diversity suppressed (Tumblr, ...), the only remaining places of freedom are those where all the "evil" has been funneled in. That's how people wanting to escape oppression or simply discover new possibilities, get shoved in places where "evil" looks like the norm.

Therefore, the solution is not to shut down one of the last places of diversity on the internet, Instead, we should try to make diversity and openness of thought as widespread as possible, so that "evil" doesn't seem like the only option to a lost, vulnerable individual.

[1]: the Al-Jazeera documentary about its founder is pretty nice even if skewed: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REnlB3631Nw
leppr
·7 lat temu·discuss
The "megaphone" was simply a ranking of the most popular boards on the front page. There was no promotion of a particular community, it fell on the user to see a board description and think "Oh, I might find interesting content there".

So the crime is mostly in allowing individuals to connect with other individuals interested in a particular topic.

In that case, isn't Google a far more reaching megaphone? One can find far more vicious communities through Google. I remember browsing through racist forums as a kid because a friend had found it on Google (presumably because he looked for it). The community in there certainly matched the worst 8chan boards in their belief and conviction in hateful ideals.

The only difference is 8chan is a neutral rank by popularity, while Google also filters by a user-supplied search string. The same type of communities can be found through both sites.
leppr
·7 lat temu·discuss
Only downside is you can't (easily) map Ctrl+Tab to switch between tmux Windows. Doesn't matter much if you spend your life in the terminal, but for occasional users consistency between applications is important.
leppr
·10 lat temu·discuss
Except the host could argue that they rejected the guest for some other trait than color ("looked untrustworthy", etc).

It'd be better to rely on statistics: if a host systematically rejects some "protected class", THEN you can accuse them of unjust discrimination.
leppr
·11 lat temu·discuss
I think you meant:

>It's also the case they don't care about skin shades OR accents, on the other hand.