Laser @ Laser @feddit.org

Posts

3

Comments

664

Joined

1 yr. ago

systemd config is inspired by INI, with section headers and key-value pairs. It doesn't get much flatter than that. It doesn't compare to YAML or JSON.

It's ok dude, I'm not trying to sway you. I'm not invested into the topic enough to defend something against theoretical and unsubstantiated claims. Use what you want or don't

Which part of systemd's config is not text-based? The only "database" it uses for configuration is the filesystem

Can't make it right for everyone... Some people will complain about mining and the energy consumption (Bitcoin is supposed to currently use about 850 kWh per transaction), others complain about a supposedly unfair premine. They didn't even hold an ICO.

51%

That's not currently a required percentage, you need 67% of votes to confirm a transaction. Which in turn means 33% are enough to stall the network. But even then, what would their gain be, apart from owning more of their own currency?

Which is irrelevant because holders can just choose different representatives.

You can, but then you can no longer vote. And if you can't vote, holding Nano does nothing.

I don't think there's a cryptocurrency today that comes without downsides, be it high resource usage, lack of anonymity or others, if they're not straight up money grabs and a copy paste of another random junk on ETH. Bitcoin is not an option for me because of the monster mining has become - I don't blame Satoshi, this is something I didn't expect either, but it's insanity currently.

The Epic "Store" barely qualifies as such, no wonder they're trying to get at least something out of it

What would be a controlling share with Nano? The largest representatives according to voting weight were the exchanges last time I checked, which would imply most of the currency is in "circulation" as in no longer held by the foundation. And even then, voting weight doesn't grant you an immediate advantage in Nano, as there's no staking.

So I mean, while I can't prove that the foundation held now coins than they claimed, I'm unaware that there was ever a sign of them actually doing so.

A better way to do the initial "airdrop" is to not do centralized issuance at all, because anyone would be a complete fool to trust any crypto foundation.

It has to come from somewhere, right? How would you fairly distribute coins that aren't mined?

Anyhow, I'm not here to shill the coin, the ones I bought I bought off an exchange long after the original issuance and all I wanted to show was an example for a good technical solution. Not perfect mind you, just something of which I thought is a positive example where it's just used as a means of payment.

Nano wasn't mined, it was all created at inception, and as you correctly said distributed via CAPTCHA; this was to disincentivize or stop people running bots to claim it automatically. After the distribution period ended, the Nano foundation burned undistributed coins minus an amount that they kept to ensure further development. This fund ran out in 2023 if I'm not mistaken. It's now being developed by volunteers.

Do you know a better idea how such an initial airdrop would be done?

Lol that picture is good but the little girl has a baby hand.

I've seen presidents with smaller hands… anyhow, NanoGPT doesn't run the models themselves, they have professional accounts for the models with the respective providers and basically resell access in per request amounts without an account or anything (your account is just a wallet address, no name or email required). I just wanted to showcase something where cryptocurrency can actually fill a niche.

That’s very nice of you but I won’t deprive you of your coins, another time maybe

All good, I still keep to the idea of cryptocurrency as a decentralized currency for the internet and have no issue with tipping some away if people actually engage in discussion honestly

If you want, I'll send you some to an address of your choosing; you can just use nault.cc as a wallet.

Due to how the site works, you can choose what model etc. they have without ever sending them any money.

like for myself I don’t have any crypto, or at least crypto I can access (lost my monero keys)

Didn't we all? Nobody warned me of the dangers of boating

It's true that you need to factor in the conversion fees. The same however is true, maybe for a smaller fee, when converting between fiat currencies, though my bank is usually pretty fair. Other providers - again PayPal being an offender and often ATM operators - will often have worse rates.

NanoGPT itself doesn't sell crypto I think, they include sellers for convenience. I provided mine years ago on Kraken which is a market exchange.

For testing, I just transferred 0.1 XNO to them, which arrived basically instantly without fees, it was credited to the wallet before I switched back windows to my browser.

I'll try a prompt and get back here if you want? I mean this is not really the core of the discussion but for completion's sake...

Edit: I created this with the Flux Pro model (the most expensive one I think) for about 0.1 XNO:

I mean if it's competitive, why not?

The thing is it's unlikely you'd find a payment provider making this viable. For example, PayPal charges 49 US cents as a minimum fee, or 39 Eurocents. Even just credit card companies charge 5 cents fixed, so cheap payment processors will charge you about 10 cents per transaction plus variable rates and possibly a monthly fee.

It's just used as a means of payment for very small amounts, even less than a single cent if you calculate in dollars.

If the latter we can self host AI.

Sure you can; I certainly can't, lacking the equipment, and the investment would be much higher than any return on it.

But beyond that many dislike crypto for gas cost and same for AI so strapping them together is way less palatable.

Nano, as I said, has no fees, and there's no miners, it's quite ecologically friendly. It does have other challenges (for example only being pseudonymous and fully traceable, plus fighting spam is an ongoing battle, no standard way of association a payment with an invoice). But I always liked its premise and it does make sense for such cases for me.

The beauty with how they implemented is that there's no explicit about apart from a wallet address they create for you, saved in a cookie, so you can straight up use it.

I'm not trying to argue that this is somehow revolutionary or the right way to do it, but it manages to leverage the advantages quote well in my opinion.

No, the Russians already provided the image with the lie

I love steam, but let's get real here for a second. Valve will change some day. Enshitification is inevitable.

Steam is an example where I'm not sure when it would happen.

It already comes with a hefty fee of 30% per sale on the platform. I don't think they can raise that without serious backlash. And there also isn't really a need, Steam prints money. It prints money because it's where users are. Users are there because they like the features. Some good features are only there because of laws (e.g. refunding); Valve can't remove these.

So how would you make the service even more profitable?

Enshittification happens because corporations want (more) money out of a service that built a userbase. These were often running at a loss. To turn a profit, they need to change.

Steam can sell you licenses to games you don't own already. It's up to each publisher. Valve doesn't care, they just deliver.

Which is a shame but not that surprising

crypto is cancer.

I respectfully disagree. There are legitimate use cases do make sense. Of course, these don't make tech bros rich quick so you don't often hear about them.

One of them that I like the idea of is NanoGPT. It's a frontend to various AI services where you pay per request instead of making accounts for each and pay with Nano. I haven't used it yet, but the currency makes a lot of sense there, as it is feeless and requests can cost less than a cent.

Another one is Monero for goods and services that might be illicit under one's jurisdiction. I don't want to go into the discussion whether this is right or wrong; all I want to say is that laws can be nonsensical and dangerous.

Lack of training data

No, there is nothing, and any investigation by copyright holders wouldn't lead to anything. Trying to get anything out of usenet today is futile.

I don't really know. For text based discussion, I prefer something like Lemmy, also due to better moderation tools etc. It's a cool early thread-based discussion tool, but mostly outdated.

Unfortunately, there is absolutely zero other use for it, and nobody should ever bother, it's wasted time.

YOUR REALITY IS SHAKEN

YOU HEAR THE WORD "MONDAY" ECHOING AND SHIFTING IN COLOURS