Vrpe

You mean value that fluctuates "randomly" on the daily in what was proven to be a manipulated market? A market plagued by corrupt, insecure or amateur on-ramps like Quadriga, Bitfinex or MtGox? Anonymity goes out the door as soon as you get verified on one of these on and off ramps.

You cannot have a store of value if the only value that is created is a speculative agreement. The same critique that went behind fiat currency no longer being backed by gold applies just the same to cryptocurrencies. Turnkey solutions like stablecoins essentially mean you are now forced into using them as a pseudo bank and counting on them to not be handling fractional reserves at any point in time.

Crypto can have its uses in time, but it is not the emperor's new financial panacea that many people hope it is.

Regardless, the project is pretty cool and so is its execution.

Most people will not see the logical conclusion of this whole ordeal and will think you are merely being pessimistic.

Pandora's box cannot be shut. TOR and other projects will not be able to delete the information already gathered, backed up and parsed.

People are happy to tell everyone else what they ate, where they went, with whom and what they are thinking about at all times in exchange for nothing.

Society has made it clear that this erosion of privacy is a non issue.

-------------------

ERROR - Value 'privacy' not found.

Sorry, the value you have chosen to uphold is no longer supported in the latest version of civilisation.

Please select another from the whitelist below.

One thing nobody seems to be putting a lot of attention on is how what he wrote was in a draft.

It was not sent, it was not finalized, it was a thought he laid down in what we can likely presume to be gmail and never hit send.

Is this just normal now?

This is normal behavior for anti cheat systems. It can also be used to see whether or not the game (seperate executable from the client) is running. If I were more optimistic, I would just say it might be some keyword finding heuristic to add scrutinizing weight to anyone who triggers it, but I feel like the pessimist in me is right.

It is yet another tool created with initial honest intentions that has slowly been affected by the need for more and better quality data.

This is just my opinion, but I would not be surprised if most of these anti cheat companies "double-dipped" and sold the data they collected to the highest bidders.

Both are good :)

I did not mean for it to come out seeming like whataboutism. I just meant we should also look into Google's practices. Absolutely not excusing Facebook for what they chose to do.

What really interests me is the lack of scrutiny towards Google. It all seems focused on Facebook, meanwhile what Facebook did was set a trend that others followed. Hopefully there is more to come, but it is definitely too little too late.

It will just end up like the GDPR in terms of user response. There will be yet another new annoying popup with mandatory darkened background asking you to accept the analytics or leave the site.

Most people will not actually read any of it, and hit OK without giving it much thought. I feel as if we are just waiting for something bad to happen before we take action in restricting this big data analytics trend.

It seems to be a trend, we are passive until the problem smacks us in the face and then we grudgingly work on solving it slowly.

Well layed out, my understanding of electrical engineering is a bit lackluster, but I appreciated the article nevertheless.

How hard would it be to self develop a multi color laser projector? How would it work?