Is the solution to send him to prison, or to accept this is a popular product and legalise it?

Imagine how much death would be caused if sugar was prohibited.

Imagine how much economic development there has been by sugar.

Stop voting for bad policy.

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c9wkd187505o

Is anyone aware of any implementations of the FIDO Passkey scheme which have multikey/multisig auth?

e.g register three pubkeys with the service, submit sigs from any two keys to login

e.g register just one pub key with the service, create sig using local threshold scheme

Atomic minds, would you kindly fact check this info?

A popular LLM informs me that most SMR designs are fail safe (ie HTGR, MSR). Also that if an aeroplane crash split a reactor open, no clean up occurred and you stood next to it for a month then you would receive 10 mSv which is a radiation dose roughly equivalent to:

- A full body medical CT scan

- 10x long haul flights

And resulting in an elevated risk of cancer in later life of 0.05%. If that is true, am I missing any other worse scenarios? Can a villain use cheap methods to cause hell?

You excellent person! All names followed. See you next Friday.

I wonder how that decision was discussed and settled on.

Should a government want to tax illicit economic activity more than the legitimate equivalent (because taxes are dis/incentive tools) or zero (because they do not wish to benefit from illicit activity or even have the conflict of interest it represents)?

N.B. In the UK proceeds of crime are taxable under the same rules as legal income.

Wow, this is a stunning amount of efficiency progress from Bitmain and TSMC. Suggests commoditisation of ASICs isn’t as close as we thought.

Their latest machine (U3S21EXPH ) is 13J/TH and runs at 860TH/s in a 3U liquid cooled rack. 100kw server rack towers possible now.

TicketMaster’s monopoly is quite an interesting case. Most examinations don’t show a regulatory moat, they just acquired/merged their way to dominance with main tool being protectionist contracts (we cease services if you ever use a competitor). However, dig more and there are multiple regulations they exploited to retain dominance:

- Claiming copyright over etickets to prohibit 3rd party secondary markets and private resale.

- BOTS act 2016 both inhibits touts (secondary market makers) and is costly to implement for firms.

- price floor laws (in some locales) prevent others from undercutting

- GDPR (and equivalent) has been costly to implement for these consumer data intensive services.

There are always laws, often ‘consumer protection’ oriented like the above, which get exploited by the large to crush the small and become the giant.

I don’t have enough info yet to claim it was these laws which enabled TM/LN’s malignant monopoly, but they obviously helped and my suspicion is always that regulatory moats are essential.

Does any one have more insights in the case? nostr:note10kmtsgenv2fquhh3txknm6vdv99agm7jaepqc2p2k6n5dhwuht4sqy949j

I haven’t read about the TicketMaster (Oasis) saga yet. I’m aware they are monopolistic already, and now it’s obvious from the outrage that there is dissatisfaction in the market with their practices. Am I going to find a regulatory/legal moat they exploited?

distros*

I can really see the appeal of having a single script which sets up your entire environment.

NixOS still on my to do list. I tend to focus more on cli/server infra too. Gnome seems nice though?

Nix can be added on to other dostros

I think this is what nixos is for

If the UK removed all taxes and replaced them with a VAT (consumption tax), they would maintain annual tax revenues by setting that VAT rate to about 37%.

Imagine how much simpler life and politics would be.

Taxes aren't just funding, they are also behavioural nudges so this would increase work, and decrease consumption (assuming taxes do indeed have such effects). Most people would say that's a desirable outcome.

Critics argue that this scheme costs poor people more as more of their wealth is used on spending. They are wrong, because everyone employs all available capital. The VAT rate would apply to ALL transactions not just those VATable currently, so, add in real estate, securities & commodities transactions, charitable donations, etc and now it's not regressive.

The really big surprise is that when you broaden the scope of VAT in that way, the universal rate falls from around 37% to under 10%.

Reduce HMRC to a few interns (VAT collection is easy). Reduce all politicking down to 'how to spend' from 'how to levy and spend'.

What's the caveat? We would disrupt our competitiveness on the internal market for better and worse depending on sector. The UK financial sector is smaller than it was but still dominant domestically and a 9% transaction tax might wipe out that sector.

Why don't governments do this (not just uk)?

I think it's because they want the complexity. They want levers to pull, and dominions to manage. They aren't there to run infrastructure - they are there to run the country as a business and compete with other Nation PLCs - we, the people, are staff.

Through the annual self assessment routine. They will estimate that you will earn the same amount next year, then demand half the tax for it half way through the year ‘on account’ whether it’s been earned or not. They at least will reimburse any excess but you have to wait for the end of the year - meanwhile they hold your cash.

The UK already taxes unrealised income

Four UK headlines from yesterday:

- Will tax homeowners & investors

- Mortgage delinquency up 50%

- Hawkish base rate outlook

- Home builders devalued

Pledges were for +1.5m homes and productivity 📈

Truss tried the opposite

Damed if you do/dont

Centralised meddling isnt helping

“Tech neutral” sounds like a sensible position for business leaders and regulators too. It’s an often repeated phrase - and not a helpful one. Two different techs can rarely substitute one another to fulfil some purpose without quite distinct utility and externality profiles.

UK public debt calcs:

GDP: £2.3t

Debt: £2.5t

D/GDP ratio: 109%

Tax rev: £0.9t

Spending: £1t

Deficit: £0.1t

Pay back period = ∞

If we balance budget, cut spend to £0.9t:

Pay back period = ∞

For a 50y back back, cut spend by 13.5% from £1t to £0.865t = -£135bn/yr

∴ inflation

nostr:npub12rv5lskctqxxs2c8rf2zlzc7xx3qpvzs3w4etgemauy9thegr43sf485vg looks like you’ve come up with a nice answer to this question with NWS:

nostr:nevent1qqswt09r5mq59nsqv4wj5z0uz756v6mftzph6ycu863qkreyp8wzcdqpzemhxue69uhhyetvv9ujumn0wd68ytnzv9hxgqgcwaehxw309aex2mrp0yh8xmn0wf6zuum0vd5kzmqpp4mhxue69uhkummn9ekx7mqpz3mhxue69uhkummnw3ezummcw3ezuer9wcuvt7an nostr:note1z5yyec8l9thl8v64rqvafn8suqlvxm84ch7vz8865pst5cf8hg3qz76pxc

Really? Could you explain or show an example of a shop doing that?