Ah, it’s Muslim belief that the original Quran is sacred and a work of god, but a translation is made by humans, and is thus not the truly correct version and only an interpretation.
Its not that you can’t read a version of text in another language, but it won’t be the sacred text.
Yes, but Muslims are rather particular about translated versions not reeeeaaally counting.
How readable is the Quran in modern Arabic? Or is it translated?
Life advice: no courtesy flushing
Yeah, the Effective Altruisme weirdos are hard into AI religion.
Yes, it’s because of enshittification. Companies need to change their TOS to allow them to exploit you more monetise their core assets.
Middle class white males. Though granted, white women probably had it best out of all women.
Welcome to conservatism!
Perfectly on brand for the 80s
I’m going to annoy all my relatives with this, thank you!
clutch is only required for getting the initial gear in
Is that still the case for modern synchro cars?
So, how do these scumbags even get your number?
I see nothing
And it turns out that elections have consequences beyond owning the libs
Boba IS tapioca
So… What are the bubbles then?
If each vote is a block in the chain them it is definitely recountable.
That’s not what it means. With this system, you can’t independently verify what happened. You can only also look at the blockchain and see that some hash has registered some vote.
But you don’t know if that is actually true. You can’t see if pushing the red button makes the red vote come out. You can manually count if you want, but the original billet doesn’t exist, only a processed form of it on the blockchain.
If I get a reciept of my vote’s hash in the chain, I can confirm it’s being included.
Only THAT it’s included. Otherwise you have something linking you to your vote, which is bad
That’s not the first-owner problem. I’ll try to explain in more detail. The problem arises when you’re using the blockchain as a “reciept”. You can only ever trace the ownership of the reciept, not the item it represents, without a trusted party.
Say we made a blockchain that determines the ownership of all fluffy hats in the world. It starts at june 1st 2026. Lets just assume there’s a trivial way to perfectly describe fluffy hats that we can put in a token. Or hell, pretend it’s super complex, that changes nothing.
You bought a fluffy hat in 2002, and made one for yourself in 2008. You own both, wearing one to bed when you go to sleep on may 31st, 2026.
At 1 second past midnight, june 1st 2026, I make two tokens, one for each of your hats.
I am now officially the first owner of those hats. You are suddenly a thief holding my property, even though it never left your head.
That’s the first owner problem. Without a trusted source, there is no way to ensure the first owner in a blockchain is actually the owner under the current legal definition (as in, you made the hat from homespun wool, it’s on your head right now). It gets even worse though, because I can even make tokens for nonexistent fluffy hats that haven’t been made. As soon as someone makes it, i’m already the owner.
The ONLY application for a blockchain with a trustless system is if the entire property is directly on the blockchain, and that doesn’t work.
Yes, but I already have all the diseases that I have. I don’t need to add all the diseases everyone else has too, or vice versa.