Oh my god.
All for beauty ideals.
Force-feeding girls a high-calorie diet to fatten them up for marriage, whilst beating them (and more) if they protest.
https://hir.harvard.edu/force-feeding-and-drug-abuse-the-steep-price-of-beauty-in-mauritania/
#mauritania #beauty
Anyone seen the likes of human rights watch? Those woman are probably looking for a friend.
Why does KDE have no option to just toggle the night light feature? Rightnow I need to either:
- manually setting a timed schedule (no flexibility)
- leave it always on (turn it of when I don't need it, AKA every boot)
- always off (no fast toggle)
I can't find this option in gnome asswell, am I missing something?
The thing is that bitcoin as
network is robust in its unstructured simplicity. Nodes work all at once with little coordination. Messages are broadcast on a best effort basis.
Bitcoin is basically made to be broadcast in a radio communicating post-apocalyptic setting.
In a hyper bitcoinized standard, digital security practices and open-source lessons could be much more important and common. Most people don't know about open-source, but once the youth gets educated about it, tides could turn a bit.
Nfc is invizible communication between both parties, so it makes it harder to verify their behavior as they could signal eachother to make up rules. For example, device A could signal to device B that once it loses connection, it creates a dummy transaction, and once it reconnects, it creates a malicious one.
Because you likely verify with seperate devices, you will probably loose connection with one to make a connection with the other verification device, in the mean time the host device or the "hardware wallet" could change the transaction to a normal one to hide the malicious intent.
But I can be wrong.
But I can't see what it actually transmits. I probably can still verify it, but a qr code is more straight forward and more static: I can check the content with multiple devices while being sure that it has not been changed as I would notice it.
Nfc is invizible.
I do like it when folks that host services use it in subdomains, like project segfault and lunar.icu
Darcs.net
darcs is an alternative version control system that is focused even more on distribution. It differs from git in that all changes resemble a seperate branch and they use some mathematical theory to try to guide those branches.
Tye thing that makes it complicated is that not only technical but also social factors need to be taken in account.
You mean that he needs to use subdomains instead?
But alot of stress in the meantime.
That is hot storage, which is unsecure. Remember that.
hardware wallet key signer airgapped bitcoin device whatever you want to call it.
I now have nostr:npub1sqzr42dj8vx32yd5jcvvl3ytux45kl0etgf6y2ymjvmd7lqmuwmqk9vk7v nostr:npub148qm45zettnf6ekgkatnyfadunxwjpu8sy88mjdsgwc5f202d93qmejra7 nostr:npub1xnf02f60r9v0e5kty33a404dm79zr7z2eepyrk5gsq3m7pwvsz2sazlpr5 nostr:npub1getal6ykt05fsz5nqu4uld09nfj3y3qxmv8crys4aeut53unfvlqr80nfm Lightning wallets. 😅
Do you also have a raw mainchain address secured by some kind of hardware address?
Yeah, the universal serial bus needs to support everything and the kitchen sink, while bitcoin transactions only rely on small amounts of data to be transferred in order to be valid.
So in this case: keep it small is preferred.
With monero the whole blockchain needs to be used to find your transactions as they can be in a random chose address on the blockchain.
So I don't think that I can prune anything because I would litterally prune one of the essential privacy features of monero. But I can be wrong so call me out if this is the case.
I don't know, but drive chains really sound like messing with miner incentives. The same problem as with other smaller crypto being overpowered easily by a fraction of the Bitcoin mining power, but then inside of bitcoin itself.
But it is indeed a way to scale, there are actually many ways how it can be done. The problem lies in keeping security in those scaling techniques while they are being used massively. There are other methods asswell, hashing itself is really fast, so the ability to cryptographically secure aspects of ownership can lie in many hands. Lightning has its usecase but indeed it should not be the only one as the inperfect aspects are bound to give rise to problems.
A while back I proposed in a post
(bookmarked, unaware of others who suggested the same but I didn't put in the effort to search for them)
about reducing stress on the timechain by trade that includes seperate utxo's and lightning, a few months later I encountered a kind of implementation of this idea where miners can trade their new mined utxo's for lightning.
And there are possibly other methods too.
Well if there is a secure solution for that, that would be great news.
