Manicode is really awesome, did some actual dev for live apps and it does work.
You must though, learn to code in a different way if you are not that disciplined. I had excellent results asking for small changes, step by step and committing often so I can undo and go back to a working version easily.
Net result was very positive, built two apps simultaneously (customer side and professional side).
If card networks, issuers, acquirers, processors and gateways used bitcoin as their settlement layer, most of the current issues would be automatically solved. They could focus engineering resources on creating better user experiences, anti-fraud, etc.
Consumers can keep using their tokenized credit cards, debit cards, etc, but their money would be moved using the bitcoin time chain, instead of hundred of CSV files.
Why haven't the W3C participants even mentioned bitcoin for standardizing web payments? I believe it's because of politics and business. Bitcoin can't be controlled and manipulated and it's not an easy truth to swallow. I hope this changes.
xml via ftp is used across many industries because these systems are decades old: there are many suitable replacements — the problem is not that there isn’t solutions, it’s that changing old systems is very hard. Bitcoin doesn’t solve that.
It doesn't necessarily need to. The other solutions are dependent on fixing the existing financial system, while the premise behind cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin is to outright replace the existing financial system. Bitcoin, in other words, offers a path to deprecate and phase out the old systems entirely.
Whether that'll actually happen is pretty uncertain, to say the least, but it's a possibility that other solutions generally lack.
It is surprising that in 2022 this is still a popular misconception, even on a site like Hacker News.
The amount of transactions the Bitcoin blockchain handles does not impact how many transactions can be done in Bitcoin via higher layers like the Lightning Network.
I think the reason is that secure and trustless payment methods are a new thing that only came up a few years ago, and nothing like it existed before in the history of mankind.
There have been higher layers like banknotes that "represented" gold, but it always involved trust to use them.
With cryptographic solutions like Bitcoin+Lightning, no trust is needed anymore.
> The amount of transactions the Bitcoin blockchain handles does not impact how many transactions can be done in Bitcoin via higher layers like the Lightning Network.
So there's no misconception. Bitcoin is as slow as ever, and handles very few transactions. It's other layers that provide more transactions. They store those transactions and then dump it in a batch to blockchain.
Congrats. You've invented batch transactions. Something that traditional banking systems has been doing since the middle ages.
> secure and trustless payment methods are a new thing that only came up a few years ago, and nothing like it existed before in the history of mankind.
Very doubtful. All that crypto space has invented so far has been known to mankind for generations (and in some cases for millenia). Moreover, for actual usefulness you need trust and enforcement, none of which are provided by crypto.
> With cryptographic solutions like Bitcoin+Lightning, no trust is needed anymore.
Except, you know, when I order something on Amazon, I expect the goods I ordered to actually arrive, so I trust Amazon, trust the seller, trust the postal service etc. to deliver this to me.
And if the goods don't arrive? I trust my bank to revert the transaction.
You’ve moved trust from the banking system into code. That might be a good thing. I will look into how the lightening network works to inform myself. The climate change and extreme volatility amongst other issues are still going to prevent Bitcoin being adopted for settlements.
The idea that Bitcoin "needs" a lot of energy is also a misconception.
How much resources are used to produce something is determined by the value of that something. At the moment, about $6B worth of Bitcoin is mined per year. So roughly $6B of resources are used to mine Bitcoin. About half of it is hardware and half of it is energy.
At the same time, about $150B of gold is mined every year. So roughly $150B of resources are put into gold mining. Energy, dynamite, melting, transportation etc. The use of these resources is just as "bad" for the climate.
So if you wanted to do something for the climate, going against gold mining would be more than 20x more effective than going against Bitcoin mining.
Additionally, the production of Bitcoin is halving every 4 years. While the production of Gold will go on indefinitely.
> How much resources are used to produce something is determined by the value of that something.
How much resources are used to produce something is defined literally by How much resources are used to produce something.
> about $150B of gold is mined every year. So roughly $150B of resources are put into gold mining.
Kid. Go and read something about a thing called "Value added".
> So if you wanted to do something for the climate, going against gold mining would be more than 20x more effective thatn going against Bitcoin mining.
Indeed, once you understand that you also understand the opposite - central banking and CBDCs. It's two opposite worldviews which lead to two very different definitions of money.
Both Central Banking and CBDCs lead to the same outcome though; reduced personal liberties (privacy and economic freedom), and increased interference of the state with its constituents and the macro economy (skewing incentives through centralizing forces).
I believe this is a hit piece. The author uses the word "controlled" in a misleading way that leads readers to think that the value offer of bitcoin decentralization is not true or worst, whatever product that builds on it is deceiving their customers. Talks very poorly of the author and everyone else involved.
This is just a list of links with no context or real technical analysis. I guess you are comparing LN to something else, in that case you should too make a list of links of the problems and fraud issues with, for example, fiat based payment networks or as another example, real adoption issues for things such as bcash.
And if your objective is to discard LN because of those issues, those same issues do not seem to matter in the real world where people are actually using LN for real transactions every day all over the world. This is public data you can check yourself.
Anyways, I think this list of links is biased and doesn’t add value to someone trying to understand modern payment networks.
Hi! Looks pretty good! Please, check the pricing page, the "Prime Account" box has a higher top margin than the others, I think its an error. Really like the website.
I believe the title of the article should be "AWS Services You Should Avoid if you don't need them or if they are not the right fit for your specific application, for example, if you need social login you are better off with other alternatives more fit to the social login use-case; or for example, if Lambda is not the best fit for containing and deploying my code given my architectural decisions at the moment of this writing".
You must though, learn to code in a different way if you are not that disciplined. I had excellent results asking for small changes, step by step and committing often so I can undo and go back to a working version easily.
Net result was very positive, built two apps simultaneously (customer side and professional side).