Well, I'm no cryptobro by any means, but I see the usability in cryptocurrencies. As always, when humans touch something well built and thought, it goes corrupt.

The basis? It is useful to overcome censorship, inflation and money transfers without relying on third parties (or relying on burocratic, traditionally greedy and ancient parties). It has some uses as a ledger, but this has not come that useful. Or, in my opinion, useful projects are overlooked and only greedyness is what drives the space.

Your sentiment is not wrong, but I see it as a reflection of human currency interaction. If I say "I don't think I ever heard anything good coming out of cash" could be true. Why would we hear something good about something that only its bad uses are news and worth mentioning. Same happens with crypto. I know it is a bit of a mental stretch to use this argument and it isn't 1:1, but cash is being used illegaly as well.

I see a trend that all privacy focused projects have this bad press always: - Cryptocoins (used only by scams) - GrapheneOS/privacy focused oses (used by fugitives and crimibals) - Tor (Used for dark web)

and while that's true, I keep thinking that the interests for banning privacy focused projects is what drives that bad sentiment and bad press. Not only that, I know betwen black and white there are grays and colours :D

Just my grain of salt

> No it's not. It cannot overcome any of these, and the constant nagging to the opposite is a big part of the scam.

The only person here who is running a scam here is you with your blatant disinformation and fundamental ignorance. Just because you cannot do basic tasks doesn't mean that others can't either.

> The only person here who is running a scam here is you

A naked claim that lacks elementary support, like motives.

> with your blatant disinformation and fundamental ignorance.

Another evidence-free claim. I'm simply describing the state of affairs as they are in real life, the empirical evidence is fully in agreement with my writing.

> Just because you cannot do basic tasks doesn't mean that others can't either.

Same old, same old, you know nothing about me but continue to throw wild claims at the wall.

FYI, I'm quite familiar with all sides of crypto, it's the crypto-bros who are so blinded by greed that end up with absolutely no clue about what they are doing on social level.

You're the one who said cryptocurrency cannot overcome censorship and do money transfers. You might as well have said that humans cannot breathe oxygen. I don't need to prove self-evident truths. By rejecting obvious truths, you are operating in extremely bad faith.

> You're the one who said cryptocurrency cannot overcome censorship and do money transfers.

And you're the one who can't reason.

In order to use crypto, you have to submit your ID with a picture to an entity subject to banking regulations. Thus the anonymity is lost at the edge and from there the vast majority of people can be censored and their transactions suppressed by the banking system - the term is de-banking. They are subject to losing their jobs too plus a number of other strings attached to every law-abiding person.

Criminals on the other hand, don't care about the law, have no jobs and must avoid the banking system so the crypto arrangement works well for them, it also works for corrupt officials, be them private or public.

Crypto is almost exclusively a tool of crime and corruption. That's its social role in the real world. Just because crypto allows a criminal here and a criminal there to avoid censorship, doesn't mean that censorship is a solved problem on social level - not only it's unsolved, you added a criminal problem on top of it.

I don't think you can understand that though, greed impairs the mind and those obsessed with crypto are the living examples of it.

There exist crypto exchange networks that interface with governmental fiat and do not require any KYC. Also, there are mixers and privacy-coins that break linkage. Where there is a will, there is a way.

As for criminals vs others, that again is your own limited viewpoint, with no relation to the broader truth.

It's really not about greed. It's about protection from the government and the whims of banks.

Here's my two cents.

I use GrapheneOS myself and think it's a valuable project to enable communication without being stalked by Big Tech.

I believe cryptocurrencies, however, are primarily an ideological technology, designed to establish the primacy of free market capitalism over any sovereign law.

I think that is why people still hold onto them, despite nothing but scams coming out of them so far.

As somebody who doesn't think unrestrained free markets are a good idea, it feels like the capitalist monkey paw: Finally, there's completely unrestrained uncensorable money. Unfortunately, the result of that is what every advocate of regulation would've told you: Nothing but scams.

Ironically, the phrase capitalists use to describe why socialism can't work - "doesn't account for human nature" - has been proven to apply to their preferred ideology.

They got what they wanted and turns out it sucks. The technology that was supposed to establish the primacy of their world view ended up disproving it instead, plunging them into ideological crisis.

They have no choice but to double down despite ever more evidence of free market failure. There's a certain ideological cost sunk fallacy going on - to admit error and change ones ideological framework completely would be too painful, so they keep waiting for redemption.

Just my grain of salt as a socialist.

Monopoly is not a nice thing. Maybe it is convenient, but not nice.

People that gives money to artists are the ones going to concerts and buying music directly to artists. Spotify gives cents to artists, incetivizing awful behaviour (AI music, aggressive marketing, low effort art...).

Dialogs are a great way to lose information. They are often dismissed by users that want to do their job and are interrupted by modals. Users focused on their tasks blindly dismiss dialogs.

Read the above as a critique to your strong opinion and not an opinion of mine.

My opinion is that toasts are great for notifications that can be reviewed/checked later, like chat notifications or finished background tasks.

What should be avoided, just for the same reason as modals/dialogs, is an overuse, causing fatigue.

Dialogs don't have to be modal, and in the parent comments context they aren't.

If a vehicle can't react to the emmergency break of the vehicle ahead, it's their fault. Change the kitty for a child and the complaint of the scooter is nonsense.

I don't disagree, but I'm still left killing a father of a family afterwards.

No. The other driver almost hurt himself following too closely, and not paying attention. There is nothing exceptional about emergency braking in a residential neighbourhood. Your prime responsibility when driving a car is in the direction of travel.

Yeah, that would be hard.

It sounds more like instead of learning a lesson about following too closely, he decided to turn the mix of anger or fear onto you. Hopefully, with time removed from the situation, he will realize that he should not follow as closely. And hopefully you won't be too affected by guilt-manipulation. (Obviously, it's a good idea when something behind you cannot slow quickly, to try not to brake too quickly, but in theory, a scooter should be able to stop very quickly.) With hard calls, you only can do your best with the information you had at the time.

Be wary at higher speeds of veering due to animals. Insurance could blame you if you start an accident and don’t end up hitting the animal.

Makes sense. I did not veer because it's a very dangerous road and in Rome veering to dodge means you are hitting a scooter (scooters zip through traffic in Rome).

The reason why the guy behind me survived is because he did veer when I slammed the breaks

Same as my other comment, it seems like you are involved in the project. Stop responding like this is facebook or reddit. Here we offer our expertise with all good intentions. They haven't said it is a simple task, you are assuming that they said that.

If you can't take constructive criticism or even respond to opinions you disagree, then it is better to not respond at all, because it is bad PR.

I understand that maintaining a project like this is hard, that you need to be compensated and that open source corporate usage tends to be disgraceful. But that's not what they are telling you. They are just shating their opinion, which is part of your potential customer opinions.

Share the rationale behind paywalling common features. Give us, if you have to respond, why you hide the pro features off the homepage, etc. Instead of this kind of childish reaction that adds nothing

I'm a user of datastar, nothing more. And I'm defending the developers against all of the baseless slander here.

And now Im forced to defend myself against your baseless slander. If you cared to read, you'd see that I said it was a simple task to update the pre-pro versions of the tiny plugins to be compatible with the current api, because it would be. And they replied on that basis.

The rationale has been shared many times - here and elsewhere. And the pro features are not "hidden" - they're right there in the header. And it's not for any nefarious reason - precisely the opposite, in fact. They don't want to appear to be flogging something. Similarly, they don't advertise any of the pro features as being free, anywhere.

But, I brought this all up with the devs earlier and suggested they add a small link or banner or something to the pro license and they said they would. But not because it's a good or necessary idea, but instead just so all the trolls won't have even the wobbliest leg to stand on in the future on this topic.

Please take some constructive criticism - you have no idea what you're talking about here, in any regard. It is childish. Please inform yourself in the future, especially when you want to try to correct someone.

I have already seen a few of your responses to criticism coming up toxic like this. They don't need to fork it, but some of your potential customers could. They are explaining to you their opinions, and in HN, this is very valuable.

Most of us have some decision at companies, which are your real customers, and criticism like I've seen you respond boldly and badly, is the criticism I think you should review and take into account.

Personally, I like everything of the pro, except the features that you decided to exclude. Doesn't seem pro features, but features you ramdomly decided not to open source them, and that could be ok. But instead of doing it like this, maybe put a restrictive license so that companies with more than 5 people have to pay.

But I think you should focus on premium/pro features that are really a plus, like your debugger, the bundler, etc. And find features that aren't common and give a plus.

And it is an opinion which you may disagree with, but if you respond to me, don't do it like that, because to me, it is not professional and I'll tend to avoid doing business with people that respond like that

That makes LaLiga look as if they were the victims, but they are not. They don't want to notify Cloudflare nor have done it any time since they started blocking it. LaLiga says that this blockings affects "hundreds" of people, and that they a rightful by doing that. Truth is, they are abusing their power and the spanish legal system to do whatever they want, as usual.

Cloudflare is not ignoring LaLiga and they are open to collaborate, but LaLiga refuses to do so, and are battling legally over it.

It's not a sponsored content but a happy user sharing with its community.

> You want me to pay to search the internet?

Yes. Or you pay and get privacy and good results or you don't pay and they decide which results are better for their profits. That's not how it should work. Companies should build good software so that users use them, not because they have the monopoly and can do dark patterns that result in good profits for them at the expense of the user privacy. Google is not a good software company anymore, their products are abandoned and UX is in extreme decadence in favour of AI.

On the other hand, Kagi uses AI to provide good results and give the best UX to its users. You see? The other way around.

By itself

A major volcanic eruption is the only significant event which would lead to a reduction.

Heat balance can also be achieved by investing $10b a year to mimic volcanic activity

Disclaimer : Will cause white sky and unknown health effects.

Don’t get me wrong : we may or may not have to do this one day but it can only be a temporary solution in a too late transition scenario. It’s not a solution on top of our current fossil based economy else that would just be a time bomb.

If we keep having exponential growth in solar for another 15 years, we will be in a fine position to transition. But better to start asap and prevent runaway feedback loops.

And by start, I mean do tests and research. That is currently banned.

I care what one of the most famous philosophers and thinkers of our times says. He's not the most up to date, but calling him an idiot positions you politically and intellectually.