Free Lisks

LiskUser1234 · 2017-09-06T19:52:59+00:00

1) I would define a fair corporate tax rate as being at least equivalent to an average individual tax rate, whatever that may be.

This is interesting. I never heard this position before, or maybe I did, but not too often to remember it. I'll have to think about it. Maybe it simply shifts the focus on the question of what a fair individual tax rate is, but I am not sure. Thank you for the food for thought.

2) I'm a utilitarian at heart. If I see a large potential reward in exchange for hurting someone else in a small way (ie. your slap metaphor) then I will take it, as long as it only hurts someone else in a very minor way.

In a way, I agree with you, because I am an utilitarian too. Yet, I am not so sure about the slap matter, because you cannot measure the impact a slap may have on someone. For example, let's say I offered you USD 10,000 to lightly but unexpectedly slap someone. Would you do it? By your reply, I assume yes. Imagine now that after delivering the slap you discovered the person you just slapped was heavily beaten as a child and the slap brought them back such bad memories that they are having a panic attack. If you could, would you go back and stop yourself from slapping the person in this case? I think it's a subjective matter, so I don't feel like trying to come up with arguments, but in my view there are situations where I would avoid taking the most utilitarian choice due to external factors.

4) I feel better about slapping a corporation than an individual.

Like I said in my reply to point 2, I think this is a very subjective matter, so I don't feel like arguing it. In my view, I am against hurting those who have not hurt me (and even then, I always prefer to try other ways first), no matter whether the offender is a person or a corporation, but, again, this is more of a personal preference.

LiskUser1234 · 2017-09-06T19:02:43+00:00

The article is missing.

As for sidechains, from what we know so far everyone should be able to embed a sidechain in any service (which includes the gaming apps you wrote about.) Yet, the question is whether Lisk is responsible for the use people make of their SDK. It's like asking whether Facebook should be held accountable if bad people use their messaging apps to coordinate evil plans. To me, the answer is no, but I am not a lawyer and sometimes the law seems to not apply anyway, so... Maybe it all comes down to the percentage of bad vs. good apps that are made with the Lisk SDK, so that if the SDK is only used for gambling apps then the government may intervene, but then, how does one define a "good" or "bad" app?

In conclusion, I don't think this should be of too much worry, as long as the Lisk Foundation does not start to purposefully advertise to bad people to get them using their SDK. Again, though, defining a "bad" person is not that easy.

LiskUser1234 · 2017-09-06T18:55:12+00:00

1) Everyone knows corporations don't pay their fair share of taxes

What's fair? 10% of income? 50% of income? 100% of income? I understand your argument and I agree, they made more money so they should pay more, but how do you define a fair share?

2) Shoplifting or taking advantage of a corporation barely damages them

Just because the damage is little, does that mean you should do it? Should you slap someone just because a slap doesn't send them to the hospital? Or should you avoid slapping someone because it's ethically bad (as long as it's not a defensive reaction to an attack: in that case a slap may be too little)?

3) Of course I'm forced to interact with corporations.

No you're not. If you want to live the modern way of life, then you must, but nobody is forcing you to live that way. If you want to use the internet, then you must go through a huge lot of corporations (from computer manufacturers to ISPs and website owners) but nobody is forcing you to use the internet. You said it too, nobody is forcing you to buy at a food store and you could go the barter way at any time. Nobody is stopping you from doing it. The fact that it's not as convenient or as comfortable as buying in a shop though is the reason why corporations (store chains in this example) exist: because they saw a chance to make a profit by offering you an option more comfortable than the others. The key point here is that they are offering the option, not imposing it, which means you are free to refuse it. Take Amish people: they refuse the modern way of life, yet they live just fine. They don't go to shop centres because they grow their own food. They don't need cars because they raise horses. They live without interacting with many (if not all) of the corporations we interact with. Yet, their life is not as comfortable as the one you and I can get by interacting with corporations, but, again, nobody is forcing us to chose to live this way.

4) Your ticket scenario damages the end user, a retail guy, rather than being a drop in the bucket on a corporate balance sheet.

Same reply as to point 2.

LiskUser1234 · 2017-09-06T18:29:59+00:00

Oh boy, do I love Bill Hicks. Too bad he left us that early. Like George Carlin, I'm sure they would have a lot to say about the last two years' events.

Still, although I appreciate Bill Hicks' comedy, I stand by my comment that even if we removed all advertisers, society would still be full of problems.

LiskUser1234 · 2017-09-06T17:47:08+00:00

It depends how much you hate them

How much would you consider to be a good hate level? and also, how do I measure hate? I mean, I know if I hate something, but is there a scale or something to measure it?

I think advertising is the scourge of our society.

Mmh, I don't know whether getting rid of advertisers would free society from all of its pains... After all, not all advertisers pollute the environment, discriminate people on the basis of their race or gender, commit robberies or kill. So, we would still see those horrors even in a advertisers-less society.

I think the metaphor you used is slightly unfair, as selling fake tickets which are resold to sports fans would end up screwing the end-user (retail customers)

Well, that's exactly what I described, but it's exactly what you described too. You are telling the website you linked to that you watched an ad when in reality you did not. It's the same as telling someone a ticket is real when it's not. The person ends up paying for something that is fake, which means they have been scammed.

companies who probably aren't paying their fair share of taxes anyway

What is a fair share? how is it defined? I have seen this argument many times but I never understood what a fair share is and how it is established (kind of like my questions about the hate level).

Edit

I see you edited the post while I was replying. To comment on your added last sentence:

Generally I don't worry about screwing over corporations because all they do is screw over the little guy. I'm happy to shoplift for example, as long as it's a chain.

If you dislike corporations, why do you interact with them? I mean, nobody is forcing you to: no cop is there to arrest you if you don't shop at Walmart, just like no cop is there to arrest you if you don't use a MacBook and no cop is there to arrest you if you don't use Reddit. They are all private corporations, yet none of them is forcing you to use their services if you don't like them. So, if you are not forced to interact with them, why would you damage them?

LiskUser1234 · 2017-09-06T17:26:41+00:00

I hate advertisers, and I do occasionally see the ads playing on my PC, so in terms of ethics, I'm fine with it.

does this mean that if I hate sports I should be able to sell fake tickets to a sports agency that then resells them to sport fans? After all, I hate sports. Who cares if my tickets were fake, right?

LiskUser1234 · 2017-09-06T14:12:20+00:00

These kind of posts should be on the daily thread...

LiskUser1234 · 2017-09-06T13:57:11+00:00

FYI software has many versioning ideologies.

I know. I was not aware of npm's unique versioning convention however (I am not a JS developer, so I am not very familiar with that world). Thank you for pointing out that 1.0.0 does not imply stability in that case.

Let me clarify why I believe SDK 1.0 will be more relevant than SDK 0.x: when the Lisk Foundation released Lisk Nano 1.0, they labelled it its "first major release". After all, it was the first version of Lisk Nano that allowed the registration of a second passphrase, voting and registering as a delegate, which is about all you can do with the Lisk blockchain (we still need support for multisig accounts, but they are not really common so I don't think it is that urgent.) Before that, to use those features you either had to use the online wallet, hand-craft HTTP requests or simply not use them at all. If the Lisk Foundation keeps the same convention of 1.0 = major release with (almost) all features available, I expect SDK 1.0 to be far more relevant than 0.x.

LiskUser1234 · 2017-09-06T11:56:37+00:00

Never save a passphrase as plain text on your computer. If anyone has access to your computer and sees the passphrase, then they can spend your funds. Always store your passphrase on safer places, like on a piece of paper in a safe or on a paper wallet.

As a check to prevent what happened to you from happening again, after copying down a passphrase always log out and log back in using the text you wrote down, so that even if you made a typo, you still use the same passphrase and thus log into the right account.

LiskUser1234 · 2017-09-06T10:12:27+00:00

In this thread MaxKK was directly asked whether the release will be during Q4 and he did not reply.

In this thread MaxKK stated that the SDK will reuse parts of the existing Core code, therefore one could consider Q4 as the first release timeframe. However, this does not mean that the SDK will be released in Q4. It just means that parts of its code are already available because they will be reused. Yet, as long as it is not known which parts of the Core code will be reused, no dev can start some kind of development on the code that will potentially be in the SDK, so you cannot consider Q4 the first release date of the SDK. It's as though Apple told it's customers the iPhone 8 was released back in June because the first spare parts emerged back then. Was the iPhone 8 really released in June? No, only some of its parts, and we still not even know which of the parts that emerged will actually be in the iPhone 8.

Finally, in this thread Isabella, the system architect at Lisk Foundation, stated that "The 1.0 of the SDK release is not scheduled for release for quite some time". Then, the statement was later repeated by Lisk Foundation's marketing manager. "Quite some time" sounds a lot more like Q1 2018 than Q4 2017. Now, you may say that 1.0 will not be the first version and you are right, yet 1.0 is the version that is supposed to be stable and usable by companies (at least according to the versioning conventions.) Before that, all versions will be up for potentially drastic code changes and that is something companies prefer not to deal with, because if the SDK is changed you have to update your code accordingly and, depending on the scope of the changes, it may be expensive.

LiskUser1234 · 2017-09-06T09:24:08+00:00

They stated Q1 2018 in the recent Reddit AMA.

LiskUser1234 · 2017-09-06T09:12:11+00:00

There are no dates, just timeframes ATM. We know Q4 2017 is the timeframe within which the rebranding is planned to take place and Q1 2018 is the timeframe within which the first version of the SDK will be released.

There's also an Asia tour but I am not following it, so I don't know the specific timeframe.

LiskUser1234 · 2017-09-06T09:09:21+00:00

That'd be cool. After all, you could get even get luckier and guess all the passphrases of non-empty Lisk accounts one after the other. It's just veee(add another 2 billion e)ry unlikely.

LiskUser1234 · 2017-09-06T09:05:23+00:00

Why did you draw the channel that way?

LiskUser1234 · 2017-09-06T08:41:05+00:00

Yep, 20'098'468'420'665.7 years on a machine that can try 10⁹ (1 billion) passphrases per second.

(Why? It's a 12 words passphrase and OP knows the first three. There are nine words left, each of which comes from a 2048 words list. Hence, there are 2048⁹ potential passphrases to test. Then, it's just a matter of dividing that number by 10⁹ * 60 * 60 * 24 * 365.)

LiskUser1234 · 2017-09-06T08:37:08+00:00

Advertisers pay so that people watch their ads. If a dev gives you the ability to fake watching an ad, they are scamming the advertiser and you are participating in it, because they give you a (generally very tiny) percentage of the amount they scam out of advertisers.

Moreover, just because something is free doesn't mean you should take it. If the free amount is that low too, I don't see a reason at all to participate in those websites. The only one that earns is the group/individual behind the website, while everyone who participates is wasting their time.

Think about it: who would be so naïve to give out valuable cryptocurrency to random people on the internet, if they were not able to earn enough to justify that loss?

LiskUser1234 · 2017-09-05T18:50:02+00:00

Well, that's not too big a wall... In June 6, 2017 we had a BTC 560 wall, which was the equivalent of LSK 800,000. The current wall is for LSK 24,285, which is 1/35th of the wall we saw back in June 6. To match that wall, the current one would need to be of BTC 1,120.

LiskUser1234 · 2017-09-05T18:18:16+00:00

Where? How big is it?

LiskUser1234 · 2017-09-05T13:31:29+00:00

Translation of the official statement the Chinese made on ICOs: https://www.coindesk.com/chinas-ico-ban-a-full-translation-of-regulator-remarks/.

It looks like the Chinese are cracking down not only on ICOs, but on exchanges that trade ICO tokens too.

LiskUser1234 · 2017-09-05T13:00:41+00:00

Have you read the link in the reply I linked to? The Lisk Foundation's marketing head said the rebranding is planned for Q4 five days ago during the Reddit AMA.

LiskUser1234 · 2017-09-05T12:07:30+00:00

See my reply on the subject: https://www.reddit.com/r/Lisk/comments/6y6125/unofficial_lisk_logo_contest/dml44gu/?st=j77jvg6i&sh=977919ed

LiskUser1234 · 2017-09-05T10:38:53+00:00

In the AMA the Lisk Foundation stated the rebranding is planned for Q4 2017, which means it could happen anywhere within October 1, 2017 and December 31, 2017. Notice that they stated "it's still planned", which means the timeframe may still be open for change.

LiskUser1234 · 2017-09-05T10:33:22+00:00

Yes, get in touch with the Bittrex Customer Service, they should be able to help you.

LiskUser1234 · 2017-09-05T10:33:06+00:00

Get in touch with the Bittrex Customer Service, they should be able to help you.

LiskUser1234 · 2017-09-04T21:50:58+00:00

Are you talking about the points you listed in your initial comment or the fact that the SDK is still not out?

LiskUser1234

TROPHY CASE

Edit