Share good ideas and conversation.   Login, Join Us, or Take a Tour!
querx's profile

following: 13
followed tags: 27
followed domains: 6
badges given: 0 of 0
member for: 1508 days
style: dark

comments 0

And down and down it goes...

I certainly won't say I kinda expected this to happen. Nope, I won't.

    DAOs? Where we're heading there are no DAOs.
querx  ·  link  ·  parent  ·  post: Bitcoin's mempool is over 20 MB

Me too. Sideways, ETH is currently being sold (at least officially) via BTC. So a collapse of the BTC system, where we're heading since a longer period of time, would significantly impact Ethereum's use, development and deployment - and that isn't that good.

Maybe we should create a new cryptocurrency - DAO makes it easy [[UPDATE: to lose your money]] ...

Oh, DAO is ETH based, ETH is BTC based, it follows: all DAO-related currencies are BTC dependent in the current stage.

Ethereum should become independent (if it wants to survive) but not take over the role of Bitcoin. It wasn't intended for it in the first place.

querx  ·  link  ·  parent  ·  post: I never smoke weed.

Haven't listened to high music in a while. Again keep up with great work! Sounds just perfect during me finishing all yearly work.

querx  ·  link  ·  parent  ·  post: Devski Update: password hashes in SQL

I would love an open-behind-the-scenes-source Hubski! Just found Pyski, wondered if I should fork it, but then I saw that the API prototype is down (hasn't been here for about a year or so); so when the API is up server-side, I'm ready to help with the client-side bindings :) Again all the respect for your work!

Anyway, as a hobbyist cryptographer, may I ask if there is a plan/option to upgrade to SHA3 (Keccak) - I would like to see that feature, although I don't know much about Arc programming? Nevertheless, SHA2 is still treated as secure but with the slow rise of quantum giants, it wouldn't be anymore impossible to break it. Although it's a rather silly, paranoid idea, I know.

Love it. You earned a new fan. Keep going. :)

TrueCrypt is dead. Development was discontinued by mid-2014 and the original devs (as other security oriented people) are saying that the source is NOT secure as there are several severe code flaws, found in the second audit round.

A promising successor to TrueCrypt is VeraCrypt as it fixes many vulnerabilities and security issues found in TrueCrypt. More to read here. It even got a PPA.

As I see it, it's more a PR gag than serious protection, mainly to improve their image after the more acute and serious problem, namely YouTube's ultimatum: grant us access to your videos for our paid premium services, or you get deleted altogether.

I feel that the ultimate problem is ultimate of YouTube's and still barely someone bats an eye about it. At what are we watching when such things happen?

The bubble of the Internet Dream just burst... Or did it a long time ago? That's the question we're obligated to ask us.

    He [Cameron] said terrorists, paedophiles and criminals must not be allowed a “safe space” online.

Internet isn't a "space". It's a concept, that defines a pretty complex physical environment, consisting of communication protocols, used by an extreme number of people over the world. And because of some individuals, who are playing by some "different" moral and ethics codex, it's far from being "safe". And I'm not talking about hacktivists.

Not "space", Cameron, "knowledge" would be a better word that you should had used. Hiding the truth could be far more effective. It seems to function anyway.

It's absurd.

    In 20 years, the Web might complete its shift from liberator to oppressor. It’s up to us to prevent that.

I didn't lost confidence in Windows 7 nor Windows 10. What I lost was only the last completely irrational hope that commercial systems could ever be as open and private with the end-user as non-commercial.

Microsoft (among other corporations in this field) is a major player. Their products are as the vision of Microsoft is - useful, productive, synced, always available (and profitable). They just aren't made for privacy. Because privacy (or software builded with privacy in mind) isn't profitable - it requires some fundamental code change. Yes, that's absolutely something that Microsoft should do, but the financial-headed interest won't make this happen.

Honestly, how many of non-business Windows users had bought Windows (and/or Office) out of privacy? I really hardly doubt that anyone. Many, if not all, bought Windows, because it's known. Because our favorite apps are running only on Windows. Because I have all the files and mails synced and available wherever I am in the world. Because it cares about all the things, so I don't need to. Because I've seen a friend, a helper - something that will make my life easier. And not out of privacy.

We just clicked "I agree to the EULA, ToS and PP", rarely to read any paragraph and thinking about consequences of the legal stuff we accepted. And if now the time has come (out of whatever reason) - we can always leave those Terms and Policies behind - the problem is that maybe we just won't get that what we got in Windows. Maybe we don't have the time, the interest, the power, the concentration to afford a change in our daily life habits. It's just easier the say "Meh. I don't like it. Honestly it's against what I'm standing for - but.. I like the comfort". And that's OK - as long as we don't present it as an issue. It's not a legitimate reason to feel offended by something that actually is written in those law papers we accepted by using the "issue".

I'm not saying that Microsoft behavior is good for freedom or privacy - it absolutely isn't. But it's up to us how we'll react to that.

And Linux is always a possibility.

Windows are cooling my computer down. I think Tux will like it.

posts and shares 0/0