> So headers are actionable?

It wasnt only headers, they had whole threads

There are many ways to get signal content, even outside the scope of cryptography:

* One traitor in the group simply shared all the communications
* They failed to exchange keys in person, got MITM'd by their phone company
* One person's phone had a backdoor app installed, or was remotely exploited, allowing someone to watch the screen remotely
* One person in the group failed to choose a good password (signal doesnt require it) and their phone was inspected at some point

The core problems with signal are not cryptographic. They are:

* Platform is a cell phone, which is unsecurable - especially vs government agencies. Even with lineage or some custom OS, there are enough firmware backdoors to count the platform as unsecurable
* Centralization, which quickly allows discovery of all groups and traffic analysis
* Use of phone numbers ties each account to an individual human identity

To actually stand a basic 101 chance of running a secure communications group you would need

* A secure platform, such as an airgapped linux machine, for each participant
* Decentralized communications channels, which is also anonymous
* Compartmentalized information, communications training, and even group membership

> Ceres, which is used as a mining colony, had been spun up so that it has artificial gravity, outwards with a colony built in a ring around the equator where they just drop things out of an airlock in order to launch them

Completely infeasible... unless you assume that all the surface ice and most of the useful materials on the surface stripped away such that the planet's size was greatly reduced... and what was left was mostly forgable metals... ?

Then it would be little more than a starting point for a mostly artificial station built on or near it which is the part that spins... or maybe the center doesnt spin at all and a ring spins around it.. which wouldnt match the fiction at all...

In short, yeah, it would make a lot more sense to built a separate station than to spin up a pile of dust that would basically explode. Eros being spun up made more sense, assuming it really is a single rock... but even then im thinking its not likely.

Other than those errors, the early parts of the show had some good physics before it descended into "elves and dragons" with the fantasy wormholes and radiation powered microbes.

> it's also funny to think about the fact that right now, the US Fed is doing the exact opposite of what crypto promoters call "printing money" specifically in order to curb real inflation--that is, they are raising interest rates in order to reduce the amount of easy money in circulation, hopefully to lower prices or at least the rate of increase in price

The current deflationary policy is hardly a small breather from the fresh trillions just recently printed.

One thing that has never varied among national central bank fiat currencies is the inevitability of devaluation by supply increases. And that is largely because they have no choice; fractional reserve banking cannot maintain stability under any kind of natural deflation. It causes a massive debt deleveraging that quickly escapes the central bank's ability to control.

You can be sure the fed will fire back up the digital press in short order; they literally dont have any other choice that isnt tantamount to a full systemic collapse.

> We learned from Valve that bitcoin has a *very* high rate of fraud (50% according to Newel, though Valve isn't publicly traded so I guess he could be lying).

Considering that the US dollar has a 100% rate of "fraud", 50% would be pretty good. In reality, we know from chainanalysis that less than 1% of bitcoin can be tainted as have gone though illegal commerce, while all but the newest dollar bills fresh off the press have traces of drugs on them.

If there is a ton of money to hire stars to shill things, make glitzy promotions, or push other expensive marketing campaigns, I would argue that is actually quite a bad sign.

You don't see gold bullion holding rallies or hiring celebrities. Sound money is supposed to be boring, its not supposed to have a a marketing team.

When you see the cloud of buzz and expensive marketing around NFT's and Defi's, that should serve as a warning that its something to be avoided. Glitter means its bait.

> There is no need for an "expensive and high end portable long range jammer" to take out drones. A cheap and low end portable, light long range jammer will do the trick. And they have excellent range. And they're not anywhere near 20 kg in weight.

Okay, link a unit that advertises those ranges, if you can. I'm referring to the specs of actual equipment, as used by federal agents, militaries and that actually exist in real life, while you seem to be engaging in wild unfounded and ill informed speculation.

If you can make effective jammer that will paralyze a drone over "tens of kilometers" you should be able to make a fortune replacing $15,000 high end jammers than only work out to 1500 meters.

Just spare yagi antennas and AA batteries, right ? For your next trick, maybe can you turn a laser pointer into an air defense cannon.

> This one was so full of utter inaccuracy that I didn't want to leave it in case someone reads through this,

Indeed your post is quite inaccurate, yet you posted it anyway, didnt you.

> Drone jammers are line of sight.

I hope you realize "line of sight" means "straight line" not "infinite range", right? You realize, you can see stars in the sky light years away, right ?

A very expensive and high end portable long range jammer, costing over $10,000, has a maximum effective range of 1500m. It weighs ~20kg so its not really viable for a soldier to carry long distance if they have any other gear or equipment. Not to mention they cost over 20 times what the drones do, so you can imagine there must be more cost effective technology choices. More feasible anti-drone jammers have far shorter ranges, typically under 1000m, so they arent going to help at all unless the drone is right over you. And even then they wont last very long, having a battery life under an hour.

> And that jammer is not expensive either, nor hard to use. There should be groups using those all around the expensive armor.

Right, so lugging around 20kg of jammer, which has a 1 hour battery life and only works at point blank range is going to protect a tank from artillery spotted by drones over 5km away ?

You either have no idea how any of this works, or you cannot get over your tank fetish.

> You like straw men that much, we're done.

None of the facts I'm presenting are strawmen. This is all fairly widely published and well known. Surely, even an old dog like you can learn new tech. If you are done, at least have the dignity to concede with grace.

> Yeah, that's just not how this shit works bro. Thanks for trying I guess.

What he is suggesting actually works fine. He may be overlooking the obvious: its super easy to memorize a "mnemonic", being thats what they are designed for, but he is not wrong. There are countless ways to obfuscate 128 bits of entropy, and there is nothing incorrect about the method he described.

> Drones are dead simple to take down with portable directed jamming gear. That is standard issue to for example Federal agents in the US when securing urban locations, and is extremely cheap and re-usable. Not having that in a conflict today is horrifyingly bad planning.

These have ranges from 400m to 1000m. IOW, even cheapo off the shelf commercial civilian drones require the directed jamming gear to be essentially right under the drone. While the drone spotting for artillery is typically 5-10km away and well outside the range of the hand held anti drone equipment.

Of course, with fairly simple hardening modifications, such as changing frequency/waveform, using inertial navigation, the drones remain cheap and can no longer be addressed by these jammers even if you somehow manage to spot and walk right up to a low flying one.

> None of what you listed, except Javelins, are hard to counter.

At least the APS on an abrams has a chance against a javelin. But there is nothing it can do to an incoming artillery shell spotted by a drone 10km away.

> Any even basically competent force will be immune to such attacks.

If you define "competent" as "not having tanks" and "having lots of their own drones" than yes.

If you insist that it is infantry screened by tanks like ww2, then you are hopelessly out of date.

> They have success with AT4's and NLAW's.

While they also employ AT4s's, you are overlooking the Javelin missiles and the Stugna-P missiles which both reach out to 5km, and have little trouble taking out MBT's.

Even the NLAW can reach out a kilometer, is fire and forget, so the person who fired it will be quickly out of sight before the enemy even know they are under attack.

There is really nothing infantry can do to protect or screen a tank... and in theory the tank is supposed to be the thing screening for infantry in the first place.

We know this is happening: We have already seen that the first reaction of a russian armored column to incoming fire is to abandon all their vehicles and scatter into the terrain. And they have a good reason to do that, because the armor isnt able to stop attacks.

> Modern infantry has tools to combat all of these threats.

Modern infantry has nothing to counter ATGM's. The only plausible defense we know of is APS such as trophy, which is vehicle mounted and nothing to do with infantry. And considering the cost and value of the tanks it is mounted on, its unlikely to be a cost effective option.

There is no defense against drone guided artillery and loitering munitions right now. Nothing that can shoot loitering munitions down costs less than the drones themselves, not even point defense cannons, so they can easily saturate defenses.

And drone spotted/guided shells can be trained from well outside any reasonable engagement distance: Taking out a TB-2 which is 50km away and 5km in the air is beyond the capabilities of infantry, far outside the range of manpads, and even outside the range of most dedicated ADA. We have seen TB-2's spotting for long range artillery strikes on armor with devastating accuracy.

And we have also seen small UAS's do the same, at a price under $1000. Anything which can shoot down a UAS is in limited supply or too expensive to be cost effective, while they are being used to drop anti-tank grenades in addition to spotting and scouting.

All of these constitute direct threats to MBT's that either cannot be countered cost effectively, or cannot be countered at all.

> Tanks that are unsupported by competent infantry when fighting in infantry-friendly battle environments are going to get eaten alive.

Are you proposing to have a 5km radius around each tank completely saturated with infantry, so that ATGM operators have no place to shoot from? If you could capture 80 sqkm without the tank, you probably dont need the tank.

I dont know exactly what you think infantry can do. Perhaps you dont seem to realize we arent talking enemy infantry coating tanks in molotovs, attaching bombs to the treads, or even short range rpgs. We are talking about modern supersonic ATGM's that can strike from 5+ km away and drones which can strike from 5km overhead.

Infantry support is not going to change anything, its not even relevant. They'd just be some corpsey decoration to adorn the lollipopped tanks.

AMBE+ and H26* have been dominant in hardware acceleration for so long for no good reason. There are better codecs that are open and lack the massive patent warchest burden, but for some reason there just hadnt been enough energy behind making chips for them.

It will be great to see at least av1 get acceleration.

> It seems Ethereum is 100% geared towards noobs

yes

> Why isn't there a simple ethereumd like bitcoind?

Because you would need a very expensive data center to run it.

> Is there even an official Ethereum local wallet?

nothing worth mentioning.

> Even after 10 years I don't understand how you're suppose to use ETH without using a 3rd party app.

you are supposed to send all your money to the preminers.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

http://www.newsbtc.com/2016/08...

https://medium.com/bitcoinerro...

https://medium.com/startup-gri...

Eth wont be around much longer. Good luck.

> Headhunters are like apartment finders. They're generally unnecessary if parties on both sides of the transaction are actually interested and above-board.

Exactly correct.

Also, they often have to brow-beat or nag one side or the other to compromise, so they can get that bonus. They don't really care if its actually a good fit or not - which of course explains why both employers and prospective employees quickly learn to dislike them. The fact that recruiters exist at all is a type market failure.

Personally, I think the employee-employer model is far too high friction, and should be replaced with a simple p2p exchange market based on 1099 and independent skill/history ranking services.

No puzzles or mysteries, no comparing benefits packages and vacation/PTO packages, no weighing of complex stock or pseudo-stock options. Just a simple wage/time ratio and an independent 3rd party ranked skillset level and perf history.

You could quickly find the optimal job offerings for your skillsets without the complexity and overhead of the legacy "employee" concept, and manage your time off an benefits independently and privately.

> I can't image what's going to be like when it turns around...

Long term, the dollar is always devalued. Thats why bitcoin, in terms of dollar value, always rebounds from devastating drops like this.

The only question in this case is whether or not bukele can wait for it.

These deflationary periods can last months or sometimes years. Eventually, "stimulus" happens, lots of new dollars flood into markets, and assets shoot up again, typically to all new highs.

So long as they are priced in dollars, stocks, real estate, commodities, and bitcoin will always be breaking new high values. That is, unless something fundamental changes.