My router will still block all ports not explicitly allowed for the hosts regardless of protocol, it’s a firewall after all and not just NAT. Just because the host addressable doesn’t mean its ports are reachable.

Testing is actually mandatory, what’s not mandatory though is to do it before deploying.

what’s feurking

An optional step in the développement process

Emacs? When there’s ed? Talk about bloat…

Personally I’d love to see more wider usage of S/MIME and/or PGP.

I’d rather see less. https://www.latacora.com/blog/2019/07/16/the-pgp-problem/ is a good summary about the issue and they have a shorter follow-up post about why encrypting mail in general is bad at https://www.latacora.com/blog/2020/02/19/stop-using-encrypted/

What I take issue with actalis, is that they don’t just sign your private key but you actually get the private key from them. It then depends on how much you trust the issuer.

By definition, that key can no longer be considered “private”.

l haven’t played Planet Coaster, but my impression was it’s more of a coaster builder than a theme park manager? A lot of “hardcore” players play OpenRCT 2, and for a slightly more modern take on the genre there’s Parkitect. But classic RCT hasn’t been replaced

Could be the kernel itself

Wouldn’t make sense to me because the thread says GNU/Linux and others, though this could relate to Android or distros not using any GNU.

gnupg

Usually not exposed to the network though, but it’s generally a mess so wouldn’t be too surprising

Another candidate I have in mind is ntpd, but again that is usually not easily accessible from outside and not used everywhere, as stuff like systemd-timesyncd exists.

Just want to stress that I’m not sure about it being OpenSSH, it was more supposed to be a fun guess than a certain prediction

Since this affects Linux and others, I’m guessing this is about OpenSSH. But I’m not very certain. Just can’t think of another candidate.

But holy sh, if your software has been running on everything for the last 20 years

This doesn’t sound like glibc as someone in the thread guessed.

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.

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.

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…

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.

Which is a shame but not that surprising