If they are concerned about malware then one of the obvious solutions would be safe guarding their play store. There is significant less scam on iphone because apple polices their app store. Meanwhile scam apps that i reported are still up on google play store.
If you write your code such that you are hard to replace, because noone else would be able to understand what you were doing, I would consider that to be "bad taste" and "bad form".
It is the official channel of many governments and worldwide organizations. The Royal Family twitter account posted the news about Queen Elizabeth's death before BBC announcement.
>But this already exists without blockchain! If you play Spiral Knights or Half Life on Steam, you get a hat in Team Fortress 2. There are various third-party websites where you can display your Steam/Team Fortress/Dota/LoL achievements, inventories, ... because those 'ledgers' are public already. You can trade Steam items on third-party websites (which interfaces with steam underneath) that dodge Steam's 30% store tax and will actually pay money out unlike Steam.
That ledger is controlled/can be edited/changed by Vavle. Valve can delete your inventory and there is nothing you can do. Wouldn't that defeat the purpose of having a public ledger that no one can modify on a whim?
That reminds me of the scene where Denethor told Faramir he should have taken the ring back so it can be used for good. Had Faramir done that Sauron would probably win.
Well, compared to that time, Sauron didn't have his Ring and his Ring contained a lot of his former power.
If Aragorn took the Ring, he would be able to challenge Sauron. Denethor was somewhat of a lesser rank, but still an almost pure Numenorean. The Ring would have turned both of them to Evil, for sure, but not necessarily into servants of Sauron himself. They might just become the new Evil overlords of the world after defeating Sauron.
The main character flaw of Denethor is that he sacrificed his life to the cause of Gondor and Gondor only. Existence and might of Gondor were his main motivations, not preservation of Freedom or Good in the world in general. He was based on a stereotype of a proud medieval or Roman noble, though (untypically) a highly educated one.
You can also use it to buy goods from oversea retailers without paying exorbitant fees, bad conversion rate. If you live outside of America and Europe, banks charge a hefty amount of fees for international transactions.
The world is volatile. Syria, Afghanistan, Ukraine, Russia, and in the future who know if China and Taiwan won't become a crappy place to be. The needs to store your wealth and get out of the country quickly is very real. You can't just queue for ATM and holding dollars and gold bars come with significant risk of confiscation or being robbed.
We're not talking about tax evasion. If you don't have hundreds of thousands of dollars in assets, then banks have all sorts of fees that they ding you for just like the phone company when you travel, and they won't waive them as they have no incentive to keep your business. Folks with lots of money who track every penny are often unaware of the landscape for these fees, because banks actually do have an incentive to keep your business and they do waive them without even asking.
If you think there's something illicit about seeking to pay the least in fees and with the broadest reach, or if you think that paying fees to every company who comes along that gets to play middle-man is exactly the same as paying your fair share in taxes then I'm not sure what I can do to dissuade you of this notion.
You know I would not actually mind seeing all the gov budget spending get tracked on a blockchain. I often wonder where the trillions in budget spending goes.
Don't you want some verifiable continuity in those books?
How do you guarantee that continuity breaches are easy to spot when they're "books" and you can publish as many of them as you want, or skip one if it turns out we don't want transparency somewhere because of "national security"?
This argument always seems to start with "there is no application for blockchain" and then moves the goal post to "that application doesn't NEED a blockchain" when we didn't even want ONLY that one application, we came for the whole package.
Do you really trust the government to publish accurate data if there is no transparent mechanism to keep them accountable for their accuracy? What is your alternative proposed mechanism for ensuring that the books are not cooked? (Is it another law, this time that says "books SHALL be balanced" and links to the RFC that provides specific definitions for modal verbs like MUST, SHALL, MAY, COULD?)
We certainly COULD invent another system that all tax money passes through, which ties out and all tax revenue is required to pass through, but how far will you stretch the spec in the opposite direction just to make sure that we didn't use "blockchain" which I'm assuming you consider as "scam tech" and you are apparently convinced that we don't need?
What's realistic is a policy of "no backsies". You can't prevent a party from lying (without remaking the world so that everything happens on your favorite blockchain, which ain't gonna happen), so what you do is you catch them in their lies.
Just so you understand me, I have basically zero expectation that anyone is going to choose "my favorite blockchain" for their next big project and send the price soaring. It's just not going to happen.
With that out of the way, what stops the government from implementing their own CBDC and saying "tax revenues SHALL be paid downstream via the US-CBDC Token" and requiring approved vendors to implement it for their US-Gov Receivables? This seems very likely to happen. I would actually bet on it.
You're telling me on one hand, the problem is solved (example TLS) and on the other hand, I need to be realistic about my expectations, since it doesn't solve the whole problem... which seems to indicate to me that your solution is actually not solving the problem you expected me to have, which is there is no effective or continuous transparency about how much money our institutions have in-flight and where it's going or gone, and there is no sponsored route for institutions to "opt in" to such transparency and actually enforce it permanently.
That's what the blockchain is for.
What's un-fixably wrong with the blockchain solution exactly? I fully expect this US-CBDC is going to look nothing like I wanted my blockchain to look (it won't be in any way decentralized at all, it will have some government-sponsored "oracles" instead of user-sponsored nodes, so that it will be a blockchain in name and in function, but you won't be able to mine it, and it won't be "ours" – it might actually go on Ethereum, but I doubt it will and I definitely won't hold my breath. It will probably be super green for the environment, whatever it is.)
So how can you simultaneously believe this is a solved problem, which can't be solved, and yet already has been solved by Blockchain (but we don't need it?)
> without paying exorbitant fees, bad conversion rate
What the hell would you call gas fees, then? And if you don't already have assets in the crypto coin of your vendor's choice, you're going to pay conversion fees, too.
I concur.
I tried to learn language like C, python... but could never make any progress. However, ironically I made serveral scripts for botting in MMORPG that I played. I could spend days perfecting and running them. It was the shorterm reward for botting in games that kept me going. Meanwhile learning to code is like walking to a destination that you don't know when you are going to reach. It feel like a chore and mentally challenging.
