MiddleKnight

joined 1 year ago
[–] MiddleKnight@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Only taking cash does not "just work" in denmark, because many people don't walk around with cash anymore.

[–] MiddleKnight@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Sorry about deleting the post. Couldn't remeber if beehaw was one of the instances with rules again dissenting opinions after some time away from Lemmy (I'm pretty sure there was one which would rather be without).

But I think you managed to quote most of it.

Being wanted/needed should be viewed in relation to everything else you could do with the resources available is my point. Not only your particular hobby/interest.

And I still maintain that if you want pure art, you are better off lowering your expectations for professionalism and find people who do it for reasons that are not financial.

[–] MiddleKnight@discuss.tchncs.de 13 points 3 months ago (3 children)

That would then be an entirely different situation?

[–] MiddleKnight@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 3 months ago

You are describing a one party state. Kind of optimistic to assume that if you manage to hand all of the power to one organization, with no real opposition, that it won't be corrupted (more than it already is).

[–] MiddleKnight@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 9 months ago

Denmark has a Lutheran state church officially recognised by the constitution.

[–] MiddleKnight@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

It's mp3 quality through an old tiny battery driven DAC...

[–] MiddleKnight@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I'm pretty sure that using the term "Semite" in any other context than the modern interpretation of "antisemitic", meaining prejudice against Jews, stopped being a thing roughly around the same time that we stopped treating the bible as an authority on the classification of human races. Same with Hamites and Japhetites.

[–] MiddleKnight@discuss.tchncs.de 4 points 11 months ago (1 children)

nation…..thing

we prefer the term "sui generis geopolitical entity" ;)

[–] MiddleKnight@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Having a bunch of answers to very poor questions is not the goal.

If you managed to parse out a good question in there of general interest that has not been answered yet, you can submit it yourself and provide your own answer. That way you are actually adding something valuable to the site.

I agree that it is really hard to contribute in a meaningful way though.

[–] MiddleKnight@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You are claiming that

  1. a blockchain would somehow make it easier to detect tampering or make stronger guarantees about the log integrity (I think you are being a bit vague here honestly)

  2. That a blockchain is easier to set up than my proposed alternative.

Regarding 1: If the other parties just store the log, you just compare what the company provided with what the peers have stored. Then you see EXACTLY what has changed. I still don't understand what it is you claim a blockchain can do here that just having the peers store a copy of the logs cannot and how it is somehow less brittle.

Regarding 2: it can literally be as simple as serving the log from a webserver (with authentication if you only want the peers to be able to read it) and then have the peers scrape it periodically. Or send an email every night. Yes you need to provision infrastructure and integrate with your logging system. But that is the same for hosting a blockchain based system.

[–] MiddleKnight@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 1 year ago (3 children)

You could do the same by broadcasting your events to all your peers and having each peer save everyone's events.

But this is also a prerequisite to running a blockchain right? This is essentially the mempool. Then you have a layer on top which does more stuff (the actual blockchain part)

Surely implementing only the sending of log event is simpler than also adding all the hashing and consensus stuff(which in practice adds no real utility) on top?

view more: next ›