- 0 Posts
- 10 Comments
In both cases the trading value of the currency has almost nothing to do with who originated it, and almost everything to do with how the general public feels about it.
Just like crypto, most “government” currencies are worth what they’re worth only because everyone agrees that they are. That’s called “fiat” currency. And that’s why fiat currency exchange markets exist. The US Dollar hasn’t been “convertible” (redeemable for a fixed amount of precious metal) since 1971, and many other world currencies were already backed in some way by the US Dollar at that time.
The real difference is in the supply.
Government fiat currency is difficult to counterfeit, although the government (or reserve bank) can always make more whenever they want. We trust them not to print more money, increasing the money supply and devaluing the currency. However, this is exactly what has happened sometimes in the past, and no doubt will happen again in the future.
Crypto currency is virtually impossible to counterfeit, and IIRC there’s a finite (but not precisely known) amount of it that can be made, no matter who you are.
Personally, I still use physical fiat currency and no crypto. I’d like to use crypto, but regulation in my country makes it very difficult to use without registering your details with a central authority. And although everyone’s pushing e-money options which are similarly tracked, thankfully I still have the option of using anonymous cash.
I don’t do anything bad or illegal. I just believe that government and big business don’t deserve to know everything I do in my life simply because they want to.
3·3 months agoI presume that the code was tested for various cases where there was at least one previous password on record, but everyone forgot about new users with no previous passwords. However I’m having trouble imagining what the code could actually be doing.
I can only imagine a dynamically typed language, and a “checkedPasswords” variable being declared but uninitialized, then a loop incrementing that variable for each non-similar password pulled from the records, and finally a check to see if checkedPasswords equals the number of stored previous passwords.
The execution environment could type and initialize the variable by default after the first increment, but in the case of the user having no previous passwords on record that wouldn’t happen, and the final equivalency check would be comparing an integer to some internal “NaN” state, thus failing.
I fixed it, but that is weird. I originally thought it had a double “r”, but I looked it up to check and I’d swear that the results spelled it with only one. Now I check again and it’s a double “r”.
Must be arrabbiata, 'cause it’s got quite a burn.
Reading current discussion, it seems more like “You say that it’s impossible to dirty your house, yet nothing’s stopping anyone from dumping out this bucket of mud on your floor, curious!”
Sorry for not being clear; when I said “keep track automatically” I meant dynamic typing. Of course you’re right that “keeping track of your variables” could also be interpreted to refer to static typing.
I started programming in a time when the idea that the computer could keep track of your variable types for you automatically was a fever dream, so it’s wild for me to see some programmers now throwing shade at particular langages for “not implementing proper variable typing functionality”.
It feels like someone saying that low-fat milk producers are too cheap or lazy to put enough fat in their milk.
Fashion really does go in cycles.
It’s the first law that I’m aware of that legally requires an automated system that you own and operate to snitch on you at any time, to anyone who asks, without asking your permission.
For the moment, it only has to report a piece of data that you are free to lie about. For the moment.
The most insidious part of OneDrive and Google’s equivalent (Photos, etc.) on Android is that they both treat the cloud copy as the “original” and the local copy as temporary. That is, in normal usage, if you delete the local copy it remains in the cloud, but if you delete the cloud copy it also deletes the local copy automatically. Under both systems, if you want to delete something from the cloud but keep the local copy, you have to go through a separate, clunky web interface.