em_te

People were accustomed to long pages like Yahoo's homepage with lots of content below the search bar.

They solved it by adding a footer section with typical copyright text and people understood that the page was finished loading.

Chrome's new Side Panel button is an ad for the side panel feature.

At one extreme, apps like UniSwap are mostly blockchain side and server side code and a little client side.

At the other extreme, it is possible to use boilerplate code to write a minimal blockchain part and then have most of your business logic on your own server and then the UI on the client side.

It's interesting you brought that up because crypto has a similar mechanism to get people to complete the whole transaction and resolve disputes without involving interest rates.

For example, imagine person B was buying a product from A. Should A send the product first or should B pay first.

When both sides don't want to take the initiative, they use an escrow contract on the blockchain where both sides have to lock up 150% to 200% of the value of the product in crypto inside the contract.

A then sends the product.

B receives the product.

If B accepts the state of the product, he can press a button to release the relevant amount of crypto in the contract to A and refund the extra 50% to 100% he had to put up.

If B sees the product is fraud, he presses another button and both sides lose all their crypto. This disincentives both A and B from committing fraud.

There are more nuanced conditions involved so I won't bore you with the details, but the main concept is there and it doesn't involve interest rates.

Network capacity isn't affected because the amount of data exchanged is the same.

Gas prices isn't affected because gas price is only correlated with the transactions per second (which isn't changed as transaction time isn't changed) and demand and supply for transactions. When lots of people need to make transactions, demand goes up and price goes up. Vice versa. This is the same with other chains too.

Some chains intentionally lower the transaction time to increase throughput to achieve a lower gas fee, but the disadvantage is that only fast peers can verify the transactions fast enough which leads to centralization.

1) When the domain expires, it still remains active and still linked to the previous owner. People can still use it as normal.

2) When it expires, the price is set to a very high price for a few weeks. Anyone can buy it at the higher price. If no one buys it, it still remains active and linked to the previous owner.

3) If the previous owner wants to buy it back after it has expired, they just need to pay their original price (not the high price), provided that someone else hasn't already bought it.

4) At the end of the initial few weeks, the price drops a little and remains at this price for a few more weeks.

5) The price eventually drops to the regular price after many weeks.

6) At any time anyone can pay to extend the registration for another year.

Next on the crypto train is Sri Lanka. The Sri Lanka government is warning against using crypto, but we'll see if the citizens choose it over their own Rupees.

0% for peer to peer transactions

0% to transfer from your bank account to WeChat

0.001% to transfer from your WeChat to bank account

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/03/06/business/payments-fraud-z...

> “It’s like the banks have colluded with the sleazebags on the street to be able to steal,” said Bruce Barth, another victim. In late 2020, Mr. Barth was hospitalized with Covid-19 and his phone disappeared from his hospital room. A thief got access to his digital wallet and ran up charges on his credit card, took out cash at an A.T.M. and used Zelle to make three transfers totaling $2,500.

> All three accounts were at Bank of America, where Mr. Barth has been a customer for more than 30 years. When he filed fraud reports, the bank quickly refunded his cash and credit card losses. But it denied his claims for the Zelle thefts, saying the transactions were validated by authentication codes sent to a phone that had been previously used for that account. Bank of America was essentially saying that the Zelle transactions were authorized — even if his phone was stolen.

Usually the story goes:

1. Bob is unhappy with his socks, can't find better quality socks anywhere.

2. Bob creates a company with the sole purpose of creating better socks.

3. Bob find a factory in China and asks them to use the best materials to create the ultimate socks.

4. Bob is super happy with the product and happily pads his advertising materials.

5. Bob finds a customer and places an order with the factory and is shocked at the price.

6. Bob tells factory to do whatever it can to lower price to competitors' levels without compromising quality.

7. Socks turn out shit, because price is too low and no economies of scale because order quantity is low.

8. Bob sells shit socks with original marketing materials and secretly vows to restore the quality in some distant future.

9. Bob sells company to an investor.

The UN saved more than 40,000 USD per month in bank transfer costs by using blockchain.

> I'd wager that this is a lie. Please name one.

Alibaba ran a Foreign Exchange service on top of crypto. I don't know if it is still running or not. It functioned like Western Union. Customers sent local currency to Alibaba, Alibaba bought crypto with that local currency and in another country sold that crypto for foreign currency and then deposited it into the foreign currency account.