• 0 Posts
  • 266 Comments
Joined 1 month ago
cake
Cake day: October 6th, 2024

help-circle
  • _bcron_@lemmy.worldtoPeople Twitter@sh.itjust.worksNone. Suffer.
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 hours ago

    In the event one is transferred but not both then the previous owner should be able to claim that it is theirs and then the state voids and reissues both. ‘Don’t buy a car without the title’ would just become ‘don’t buy a car without the title and the corresponding other thing’


  • _bcron_@lemmy.worldtoPeople Twitter@sh.itjust.worksNone. Suffer.
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 hours ago

    Kinda. I mean, my car titles are just sitting in a safe somewhere. Probably easier to just steal and part out a car than it is to do fancy title tricks but I digress. If someone managed to swipe them it’d be a pain in the ass at a minimum.

    Ticketmaster, they just dump tickets in user’s accounts that are somehow getting hacked left and right. But, since they’re accounts at Ticketmaster, you have the password and they also have the password (hopefully hashed). If they instead had users associate a wallet to their account, Ticketmaster could instead dump ‘NFT tickets’ to the wallet, you can keep the wallet cold, go to the event, flash a QR code along the way, and you’d be the only person with the password and it Ticketmaster got hacked your tickets wouldn’t be compromised.

    I don’t think it’s good to go burning gas on high frequency transactions like concert tickets but it kinda highlights how having that additional layer can make things slightly more bulletproof, without making things too much of a pain.

    But also in terms of a compromised blockchain, I bet it’s 800 times easier to do some social engineering and gain access to a filing cabinet


  • _bcron_@lemmy.worldtoPeople Twitter@sh.itjust.worksNone. Suffer.
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    4 hours ago

    Hypothetically if it had more acceptance NFTs/contracts could be used for authentication/verification of all sorts of things. You buy a house, county clerk files proof of your ownership away, they could do the same kind of stuff on the block chain as well, make something like title fraud a lot more difficult to pull off. Deed accompanied by a transferrable little nugget of data on the block chain, that type of deal. Backing up data is important and with this you basically plaster it onto 8 million different hard drives around the world with the snap of a finger




  • It’ll implode but there are much larger elephants in the room - geopolitical dumbassery and the suddenly transient nature of the CHIPS Act are two biggies.

    Third, high flying growth, blue sky darlings, they’re flaky. In a downturn growth is worth 0 fucking dollars, throw that shit in a dumpster and rotate into staples. People can push off a phone upgrade or new TV and cut down on subscriptions, but they’ll always need Pampers.

    The thing propping up AI and semis is an arms race between those high flying tech companies, so this whole thing is even more prone to imploding than tech itself, since a ton of revenue comes from tech. Sensitive sector supported by an already sensitive sector. House of cards with NVDA sitting right at the tippy top. Apple, Facebook, those kinds of companies, when they start trimming back it’s over.

    But, it’s one of those things that is anyone’s guess. When you think it’s not even possible for everything to still have steam one of the big guys like TSMC posts some really delightful earnings and it gets another second wind, for the 29th time.

    Definitely a house of cards tho, and suddenly a lot more precarious because suddenly nobody knows how policy will affect the industry or the market as a whole

    They say shipping is the bellwhether of the economy and there’s a lot of truth to that. I think semis are now the bellwhether of growth. Sit back and watch the change in the wind


  • I think a lot of perceived malice is secondary to his selfishness and utter disregard for anyone or anything outside his extremely small inner circle (and even then, he has no qualms shoving them out).

    He’s the kind of guy that would forge his own grandma’s checks to have money for the casino. Not that his intent to hurt his grandma, how she feels is a thought that doesn’t enter his head. He just needs money and there’s money and that’s the extent of his capacity to empathize. If he gets caught he’ll lie or rationalize. He’s not the bad guy for doing it, they’re the bad people who caught him and made such a big deal out of it.

    Basic sociopath. He did so many unquestionably immoral and illegal things but didn’t even think to keep his fingerprints off of everything. He doesn’t even think about how others would perceive him and thus doesn’t even make a half-assed attempt to cover his tracks.

    Not to say he’s not intentionally malicious, but usually that’s aimed at victims after they speak out, because in his mind, they’re the bad guys. He can’t comprehend how others think, or even that people could think or behave differently than him, so he just assumes a whole lot of other people do the same exact stuff and feels like he’s being singled out. There’s a module in his brain that never got wired



  • Since you’re married, I consider the bar for ‘red flag’ to be quite a bit higher, but the answer to this depends on some missing context.

    It’s only a red flag if they have unreasonable expectations to the point that it’s harmful to either of you, and they aren’t willing to entertain the notion that the problem might not actually be the perceived lack of attention/companionship but rather the unreasonable amount they’re expecting.

    Healthy relationships are founded on vulnerability, emotional intimacy, selflessness, being able to have real candid discussions on problems and come together to work towards a solution. It’s not that healthy relationships are always devoid of unhealthy things, it’s that the parties are willing to come together and fix the bad stuff.

    That said, it’s not a red flag if they’re feeling this way due to totally unreasonable expectations, even if they’re convinced that the expectations are very reasonable, just so long as they’re able to acknowledge that your feelings matter too and that this is causing strife and it’s something they’re willing to at least try to find some sort of compromise or middle ground.

    And it’s definitely not a red flag if they have very reasonable expectations by anyone’s standards and they simply aren’t being met.

    But boil it down and the only red flag is if they or you would rather build a trench between you two rather than coming to the table willing to discuss how to navigate through it





  • True, but it’s a little less about the actual content and more about the unusual nature of airing it and the potential implication.

    Could be simple backhanded flattery to the point of thinly-veiled mockery (we’re laughing at you but pretending to laugh with you, immodest Trump family), but then again, if Russia did have dirt, Putin would likely not be blunt about it and instead use a veiled threat. The implication being that they have no qualms airing things that might be deemed too graphic for broadcast, specifically nude images of Trump’s wife. “Look what we can do, take the hint and fall in line”.

    It’s so pointed that Trump should be able to read between the lines, but he’s damn near blind from narcissism to the point that it’s doubtful. A backhanded compliment is a compliment to that guy








  • That’s a different thing entirely. On topic:

    Any constitutional oath is a directive that can be superceded by no man. If someone attempts to amend the constitution without ratification, we’re bound by oath to not acknowledge such a change. If we’re given orders that violate the consitution, we’re bound by oath to not acknowledge those orders.

    Ideally, nobody who made an oath to uphold the constitution will fuck with a ballot. They won’t sieze land, they won’t use force on or unlawfully detain civilians, none of that, and if push comes to shove that is a hill people will ideally fight and die on. Trump can’t make us do a god damned thing if it means turning our back on the constitution. The buck stops there.

    You can soapbox about how we need reform, but that’s a different topic entirely