As much as anyone may dislike it, it’s a form of private journalism, private opinion, and private art, and almost all the content itself is free speech. You have to regulate the medium as harmful, very specifically described functionality. What is not protected is stuff like infinite scrolling, but something like comments and voting are likely also protected as speech.
I’m ok with both going. Ymmv
It’s all assholes… all the way up, and all the way down. If you’re lucky you find few good ones in the middle if you make it there for long enough.
Good, speed up the pace, weed them out, praise be Darwin
You just need literally anything else other than the native browser to do it no?
He’ll get some scrutiny, but the real story is the society that put him there and kept him there.
Soft enough to let you down gently as it takes your job
Private tenant doesn’t guarantee privacy, only the data cleansing policy does, since you’re certainly sending data outside the tenant to process by AI. Even if the model is local, each model instance must only have access to a single patient’s data to ensure privacy, else it’s possible an exploit could grab everything or to hallucinate someone else’s data.
I mean, I definitely agree on this specific use-case that it’s problematic. I think some aspects can be resolved with smart contracts or multi-signature requirements, but it really fails here when it comes to compulsion.
If a court cannot compel someone to transfer, because the court doesn’t have the keys… Or you lose the keys and cannot… Obviously this falls apart.
There is a reason people deride nfts, mostly it’s due to ignorance and spectacle lemming behavior surrounding the ape pictures, but the legitimate criticism is really there aren’t many use-cases. But we don’t and shouldn’t wait to build things until a use-case exists. Nfts could be important eventually for preventing things like naked shorts maybe. There are likely very valuable use-cases.
Fortunately our unfortunately that’s all a blockchain is lol. It’s not really different than an exchange pointing to a blockchain and people agreeing 1 bitcoin on that chain is worth X. You always need consensus from multiple entities, but the difference is these ledgers are public, and secured by math. That’s it.
Probably is, but the concept is sound. The inspections and other things aren’t always necessary, but even if they are, an nft transfer can likely be setup to be digitally signed by the recognizing authority. This creates a record on the public ledger rather than a private one, which can be a nice thing. For better or worse nft confers ownership of recognized by such an authority, so there is no concept of not allowed to sell. This is a fundamental feature of blockchain… Enforced control and ownership
It’s just a technology even though people equate it with wildly overpriced art you can copy and paste, which is naive and reductive.
You can be wrong and not fabricate. This is closer to human intentional lying.
I don’t have any nfts as I don’t have a personal use-case. If an authority adopts nft for any of my assets however, yeah I’d get one. For instance transacting a deed can cost a lot, but an nft would be 10-100x less.
Ya’ll are fucking stupid. There is no fall of nfts and they aren’t useless. If there is an authority who recognizes the nft, then it has the utility value of the authority. End of story. It doesn’t matter if some people traded them for outrageous amounts of money and it has nothing to do with the ability to copy a picture. All it does is tie a digital item to a hash to an owner on a ledger, for purposes of authentication. If a hash of a monkey picture gets you on a yacht, then if you don’t have one you aren’t getting on that yacht. In the future, if the nft of your house deed isn’t in your wallet, then if a judge looking at a specific ledger says you don’t own your house, you don’t own it.
Under 3% I’ll take the longest loan I can… It’s free money. Above 6 it’s a perpetual loss. 4 or 5 is borderline.
If they took my average Costco bill, ported it over to Whole Foods prices, then tripled it, I could retire.
Not all gambling is banned, and they are specifically calling out games targeting kids
Capable of what though? We have all the evidence we need that our parents and their parents are brain damaged. Maybe that kind of cognitive capability is bad and there’s a goldilocks zone to go back to.
It’s difficult… We’re not very good at determining what is right and then enforcing it, so we have this weird hybrid system of semi-freedom with some exceptions, and sometimes the utility is responsible and sometimes the user and sometimes it’s free speech or protected art and sometimes it’s not protected speech and it’s not protected art.
Sometimes I think we should encode lessons we’ve learned as evil because they are clearly evil and bad for society, and to ban/prosecute them, but then I look at our world and you realize we can’t be trusted to encode the right things or properly follow through.