Reversibility is a trade-off. It's great if you are on the sending end of a transaction. It can be a nightmare on the receiving end. Irreversibility is the other way around. And both approaches have different costs and assumptions.
> As much as people bandy the term around, copyright has never applied to input, and the output of a tool is the responsibility of the end user.
Where this breaks down though is that contributory infringement is a still a thing if you offer a service aids in copyright infringement and you don't do "enough" to stop it.
Ie, it would all be on the end user for folks that self host or rent hardware and run an LLM or Gen Art AI model themselves. But folks that offer a consumer level end to end service like ChatGPT or MidJourney could be on the hook.
The solution here is for Spacex to tighten up their planned reentry corridors. At this point they should have more than enough experience in their ops to narrow down the likely debris field to a narrow strip that can be easily flown around instead of the huge swath of Indian Ocean they'd been allowing for.
The dilemma here is that the incentive to capture value for yourself comes from the legitimate fear that someone else will try to capture all that residual value you leave on the table instead of allowing that value to be socialized in a healthy way. Which means enshitification becomes the default for everyone.
There's a lot of good cryptography and game theory and economic incentive alignment that can be done to constrain and limit the trust assumptions people have to make. But ultimately, all this does is redistribute and dilute those trust assumptions. It doesn't eliminate them. There is no such thing as "trustlessness".
Reversibility is great for consumers who are sending money in exchange for products and services. It can be a nightmare for people who receive the money and are providing the products and services.
And it isn't just businesses who carry this risk. If a business was depending on a large inflow to make payroll, and that inflow gets reversed, the people who are expecting payment for their labor also are subject to a payment reversal.
There's definitely a lot of benefits to reversibility, but it has very real costs and tradeoffs.
Eh... There's pretty good odds Coinbase will still give customers that either deposit to TC or have funds that came out of TC trouble because the broader AML compliance rules very much still exist.
What this ruling does mean though is that the government can't prosecute a US person for using TC.
If they can get ~100k subs to a $10/mo premium service similar to discord nitro, they are probably close to breaking even at the current scale and ops methodology. Which seems feasible.
If you don't like the Discover feed, you are more then free to remove it from your account and add other feeds which are open source. Or don't add any feeds and just use the default "Following" feed which is just the posts of the folks who you follow and their re-posts, in flat reverse chronological order. That's it.
The networking for Linux "containers" uses virtual veth devices combined with network namespaces that have their own routing table and packet filtering. Now, you are still dependent on what kernel modules the host is running for various capabilities, but otherwise applications running in those network namespaces effectively have their own network stack.
T.38 can help - but the codec reinvite process to switch to it when you detect fax tones can trip up a lot of machines .. And you still have to transcode the t38 back to 711 or tdm to send the call upstream which can be problematic as well on some switches.
> A fax machine can be plopped down and hooked up to a POTS.
Well, in many places, traditional copper pots is dying faster then the fax machines people still want to use. Fax over VoIP can work, but it makes for a lot of headaches if it doesn't.
They've had multiple private VC rounds. They also have had several milestone based development contracts from the government to develop capabilities (iss cargo and crew mainly) while charging the government less to do that dev work then their competitors bid.
> As far as I’m aware, there’s no way of validating something without observing it.
That's where zero knowledge proofs come in. If you know the root hash at state a, and the new root hash at state b is given along with a zk proof, that proof data can quickly prove that the state change from a to b was arrived at correctly. In this case, the benefit of doing this on ethereum (or other evm l1 blockchain) is that those proofs can be validated on chain.
I've used systemd-sysext's to add system level software to my Steam Deck withough having to unseal the root partition. It's slightly annoying in that that I have to rebuild the ext's every time the system updates, but otherwise they work great.
Technically, you are creating taxable events when going in and out of stables to normal USD. Its just that there usually only very minimal gain or loss in the transaction.