>>11247
<Apart from me and Endwall, it's mostly brainlets here.
>look how special we are!
You are in an anonymous community and do an argument as if you know everyone that uses this anonymous community. Good job. Very coherent.
>people who don't agree with me don't have a brain!!!11!
In an discussion community what matters is not if you're more intelligence or how important you are. What matters is the discussion and the possible conclusions from it. Else, you just fall in an eristic dialectics (as Schopenhauer would say), as we are doing now, it seems.
This is not the thread to discuss it. There's a meta thread on sticky for this purpose.

>>11248
>Very coherent.
O irony!

>What matters is the discussion and the possible conclusions from it
The discussion here is largely semi-literate, ill-reasoned, and poor in technical understanding. Exhibit 1: your post.

>>11249
>O irony!
Indeed.
I've said it myself, but you don't want to look at what you already think as important for you (confirmation bias):
>Else, you just fall in an eristic dialectics (as Schopenhauer would say), as we are doing now, it seems.
>as we are doing now, it seems.

> gff4ixq3takworeuhkubzz4xh2ulytoct4xrpazkiykhupalqlo53ryd.onion
omfg

>>11275
Freedom isn't free.

>What transaction isn't? Are you talking about conning people out of some pocket money, (((anon)))?

You can't have any anonymity if you don't have any way to make anonymous exchanges. You can do anonymous exchange right now, with paper money. Paper money allow "black" market, markets out of any state control. For exemple, you buying something for you friend is anonymous, and is de facto in the "black market". It allows anyone to work without the need of any contract.
It's the most basic need. With every transaction being traceable, you're done. You're just done. If they decide to deny you the right to possess a bank account, then you'll not being able to even buy from the most basic store. The whole economy will be controlled and monitored. But I guess that you trust your government and you bank to not do any arm against you, isn't it ((((((((anon))))))))?
Saying that it profits the criminals is monstrously retarded, since the biggest criminals are the banks, and the companies not paying taxes by using tax heavens. It's not the little faggot drug dealer. Moreover, since it's the state that control the drug traffic, don't count on the fact that they'll track them through bitcoin transaction. Police don't have enough people anyway to do this job. That's why it's actually the banks who try to detect credit card fraud (under ~1000/2000 euros), and not the police.

>The only thing that does is prevent hoarding and even more egregious speculation.
What? You're talking about monetary creation? That's the process that build paper money, that makes it remain on pure debt. The dollars paper money you have in your pocket is a debt upon the central bank. The money who's on your bank account is a debt on the bank. Nothing have any value, and it allows bank to create money out of nowhere. Well, not from nowhere, but from continuous inflation. Bitcoin will not solve anything. I pretty much think that it'll worsten the problem. I highly think that today's crypto will not be the future crypto used in global market (when the world will have only one global market). Maybe the blockchain will be private. Maybe they want a decentralised money to make it detached from any nation (since every nation will disapear, it's pretty logic) in apparence, but totaly controlled by the one setting it up.
The whole economy is immoral. Bitcoin will not, but confirm everything that has been destroyed since the founding of modernity.
You truly must be a redditor level faggot using his little mac to think that bictoin is a good thing. That's the same kind of guy who find it totaly normal to implant an RFID chip in their hand, or soon a neurolace. They're the one finding totaly normal to buy modern car which are connected to the manufacturer, manufacturer that can control the car, lock it, stop it etc...

>>11202
Not the same guy, but:
>If they decide to deny you the right to possess a bank account, then you'll not being able to even buy from the most basic store.
You really don't know how bitcoin works. You don't need and "bank account". See TREZOR, for example:
https://trezor.io/

>That's the same kind of guy who find it totaly normal to implant an RFID chip in their hand, or soon a neurolace.
Oh, so you're one of these "mark of the beats" people? I expected more from you...

>>11203
<You don't need and "bank account"
> You don't need a "bank account"*
<"mark of the beats"
>"mark of the beast"
fuck.

>>11203
"I" expected more of you. Don't tell me you're the common hn user, not risking to go in any direction that is not approved by the official good thinking institution.
About the RFID, no, I don't think that it's particulary what is reffered to be the mark of the beast. I think that it's nearly nothing, especially when you look at the neurolace, and what are the tech possibilities that would be available in the close future. Honestly, the private corps already know everything about everyone. All i'm saying is that it's a very very dark future that is being releaved as the days advance. And it's certainly technology which is the conductor. It's like always: a trade between yourself, a piece of your soul and your privacy, for more comfort, social acceptance etc..

Moreover, you haven't read my post to the end: I'm saying that the future crypto currency will be far more controlled than what it is now. Every bank are testing their own crypto.
Don't think that banks will diseapear with the founding of a global market based on an unique cryptocurrency.

Cryptocurrency does amaze me, I think it has potential (that is, *IF* continually allowed to).

However, I do see in the near future one of two things playing out on a global scale: either 1) governments will step in, intervene and take full control over it with new regulations and laws, thus undermining the whole freedom/anonymous concept ... OR 2) governments will just shut it all down, like they have begun to in China. And this will lead to arrests and raids if exchanges don't conform.

That being said, invest wisely and DO diversify! Do not hold all your eggs in one basket. Make sure you have plenty of basic essentials needed to survive stocked up (the prepper mindset), have some physical gold or silver coins to barter with, guns/ammo/mags won't hurt for self-defense (if you can get them), if you can buy some property away from a major city I highly recommend it if you are up to that line of work, make sure you minimize your debts too. Try to become as self-sufficient as possible.

We all know that governments are planning to steal our wealth via the banks. We need to be planning ahead of time, to mitigate how much they can steal. And it is possible but you have to diversify your investments and holdings. Don't just trust one entity to protect your wealth - it is mostly up to you. When SHTF you have what you can physically hold onto and that's pretty much it.

Check some great prepping tips here: https://archive.fo/dr3NH

>tfw still haven't disabled ME
guess I have nothing to hide.. right ?

The best possible outcome is this ends in an extreme train wreck and Intel remove ME/vPro on desktop chips.

Less ideal is after said train wreck people create tools to easily disable this shit.

Worst case, it's only a partial train wreck and Intel dismiss the whole thing with marketing and PR bull shit about increasing security so it doesn't happen again and the majority go back to sucking Intel dick.

>>11253
Normies will never even hear about this, and the few that do will not care. Normies do not even use Intel hardware anymore, except at work. They use ARM processors on their smartphones and tablets. Those that do use laptops use Apple, and will be convinced that they are immune to this problem.

<teehee, I use Mac, not Intel, silly. It's SO SECURE! Way better than that Windows or Intel or whatever you're talking about. OMG did you see that article on Black Lives Matter from HuffPo?! I mean, I didn't read it on HuffPo, just in my Facebook feed. OMG!!!!!!! [ten emojis follow]

>>11049
>and resolution
I'll concede I skipped over much of it because I assumed he was retarded. It still holds true you can spoof your resolution without compromising tor features and disabling redirect. A better use of all of our times would be to parse the JS for redirect arguments and work from there.

>>11058
>I'll concede I skipped over much of it because I assumed he was retarded.
Nah, it was a less than 50 word post. You didn't skip anything, you're just too stupid to understand what was being said.

So it turns out that you're the retard. Ironic. It's like that movie Inception, but with retardation. Tardception.

Good job, Leotardo DerpCaprio.

Mist be useful to someone. youtube gives a lot of timeouts on searx so I just use this as an alternate search engine in qutebrowser.

https://m.youtube.com/results?persist_app=1&app=m&client=mv-google&gl=EN&hl=en&q={}&submit=Search

God, I hate having to use Jewtube so much. I hate how addicted I am to it. I even deleted my fucking account and I somehow have ~60 subscriptions to keep up with via RSS feeds. Oh well, gotta fill the void somehow.

>>11236
Exactly. I try to watch good movies when I'm not reading, but youtube non-sense content always comes back.

>>11231
>word salad
Hahahaha, never heard that before, so perfect.

>>11232
Was that meant to be a capitalised "YOU" or are you just unaware of what the internet or the web is?

>>11234
>and you are like OP
>but that doesn't affect cyclists
>What most stupid respondents are saying is to build a new shiny car model
Your metaphor could be better defined but message received. To try and use your metaphor: The "cars" can only drive on the roads. I'm saying we become "cyclists" and get off the roads.

That said, the idea that we can keep our own little corner of the web clean, safe and free browser compliant (which I assume you are saying) is naive. For reasons stated here >>11213 the web and because of that in part the internet is now compromised as a safe platform. Even non web applications like IRC rely on domain name servers and the web to communicate the address to users. If the web does become hostile we can only hope it's at such a slow transition that we can easily adapt. Alternatively we can start discussing technologies now.

>>11237
>become "cyclists" and get off the roads
Now you're purposely being ignorant of both human behavior and progression. The cyclists expression here is using cURL or ed browser to "display" a httpd "site". I'm sure even /g/ wants to be able to at the least display video and sound, no? By aeroplanes, I mean better clients like seamonkey and flexget.

>>11234
Banks, websites, governments, etc. could have been requiring DRM for years in order to access and interact with their content. Flash and Silverlight make DRM possible. EME has been implemented in various browsers for years, and in all major browsers since 2016. Every single site on the web could have required users to use DRM to access their content for years now.

Yet they haven't, and have no reason to do so for most content. Again, you do not understand what DRM is, apparently.

Were you freaking out about your bank potentially requiring DRM 7 years ago, even though they could have done so at any time? No. Because you have no fucking idea what you're talking about.

You're freaking out about it now, because you read about the W3C recommendation a couple days ago on reddit and now, all of a sudden, you think the sky's falling.

>>11245
Found the person living off the grid

Can I download the movies with english subtitles ?

openeverythingfilmfestival.com uses an invalid security certificate. The certificate is not trusted because the issuer certificate is unknown. The server might not be sending the appropriate intermediate certificates. An additional root certificate may need to be imported. The certificate expired on 06/12/2017 07:07 AM. The current time is 09/20/2017 09:47 AM.

I am interested to see what the blender foundation have later. Last I saw was Big Buck Bunny.

>>11212
Creative Commons is not mandatory. Some projects are, though, so you can probably download them.

>>11214
I receive this too. Since it's just to GET the website, a bad TLS will not make much difference, although I think that's self-signed or something... haven't tested.

>>11215
I don't know if Blender Foundation will release something, but there's many other people submitting short movies. I for myself am thinking about a 'cyberpunk' short film, I just need the screenwriting...

There's nowhere to go.

>>11191
Don't say that...
8ch.net/tech/ is one/two months /g/. It was bad, but at least there were good topics. Now there are windows faggots everywhere, battlestations, ricing thread etc...


Don't say there is nowhere to go :^(

>>11193
>Don't say there is nowhere to go :^(
There is one place left to go.

>>11193
There is nowhere to go.
End/tech/ is too slow.
Lainchan only has faggots.
8ch/tech/ [no words to describe such thing].

Maybe the intelligence of users is inversaly-proportional to it's collaboration on a discussion forum.
If it's true, then intelligence equals internalization. Then, the perception we have about the world being too dumb is just an illusion.
Or, we all suffer from Dunning-Kruger effect.

>>11195
In case any of you faggots find something don't forget to post it here so the others don't kill themselves.

>>11134
So why don't you, like fucking everyone since the night of times, purpose a paid subscription?
You know what internet is like? A free to play. First to make it extremly accessible, while taking money from the customer who don't even know they's one. It's a shit economical system, based on ignorance.
People still think that google, facebook is free. Just ask anyone how they win billions and are at the top of tech industry, most people will not even be able to answer (or something vague like "ads?").

We need to stop with this. "If it's free, then you're the product."
All I see is that a lot of people actually started their blog for fun, to share with people, then they discovered that they could make a shit tone of money on it, so greed came on, and they try to only live on that. That's not how reality works. You can't live only on your shit little blog, or on a little youtube video. Just look at how newspaper use to work in the past. It's the same thing. It's not because I share some good inside with peoples that I'm gonna create an entire newpaper on this idea, and only live on that.
I need something serious. A team of writers, a shit tone of work, talent. Not just random internet luck of fame.

That's the root of the problem. Too easy for random people to get too much money. Just look who're at the top of youtube, or other medias. That's ridiculous. It's certainly, certainly not a meritocracy. Even the top youtuber agree with that, that they're were they are with only luck, and that people with less success have more talent than them.
Thanks retarded internet economical model.

>>11175
>Thanks retarded internet economical model
I don't think it's an internet issue, I think it's an human issues. Nikola Tesla, Kurt Godel and many others, died poor and fucked, for example, before the internet existed. The people that really constructed computing, like Konrad Zuze, never appear on mainstream, just the fancy Steve Jobs that did nothing of good.
It's how our primitive thinking always end up with the same patterns. People don't like to extend their thoughts, therefore, shit content will be produced to keep the circus running.
People like to think how things "might look like" and not how it really is, therefore they numb themselves with myths.

>>11175
>So why don't you, like fucking everyone since the night of times, purpose a paid subscription?
Because people are lazy and selfish, and they won't bother getting out their credit card to pay for anything but porn.

>>11179

Internet is a human construct, so it's pretty normal that it was designed with ideology in mind. That's why it's the support of the worste surveillance technology ever. That's why it's so hard to access privacy, because it was made to be public in the first place.

GNU is a complete meme. Some software is meant to be proprietary. Without it, we loose our jobs.

>>11160
It's a problem of economical model, and government that push for free market, but without doing its job to eliminate monopolies.
You should actually get back in time, and understand that everything was sold with the "source code". You washer was sold with the manual describing everything about it, every pieces used with reference to allow you to repare you machine.
Today, everything is made breakable, and the most complicated to not allow you to do any repair, any modification.
Even though software is a special case, because you NEED the source code if you want any security, but you don't want to easely give out your source code to every one, it pretty much followed the same path. Basically, anything closed source is backdoored from my point of view. I'm not even talking about the official stuff, like microsoft who gently tell you that it tapes everything. Or apple that trace everyone's move.

A mechanical system can't be close source, because you still can "easely" reverse engineer the process by simply opening your car, if you know what you're doing.

So no, it's not that black and white. If you have a bullshit job, it's the problem of an economical model based only on an all mighty market, and not a market serving the actual people.
Free market without regulation create this kind of none sense, because the goal of any companies if not to serve any general interest, but egoist profit.

You're not the only one who have a partly immoral job, it's pretty much general. So please, don't say that we need close source because you need a job. That's in no where a justification. A lot of industries had to close their door, letting the workers without any job because of technological progress.
https://archive.fo/cklzq

>>11115
Hahaha, I see our atheism debate was deleted.

>>11183
There was no atheism debate. There was an altruism discussion (calling it a debate is too generous and doesn't accurately reflect your inability to construct logical (or even coherent) statements) which you repeatedly tried (and failed) to turn into a discussion about atheism.

>>11183
It was moving very far outside the scope of /tech/.
I did archive.is it before deleting it.