It looks dead in that repository though.

The article doesn't either. Yet somehow you were at the bottom of the page for me. I don't understand why.

Seems odd that it would be the first and only response given this video.

> Many defendents refuse a plea bargain of "guilty" because they don't want to be put on that list.

This is not the US.

> Non-police residents can inquire about felons on the list because of Sarah's Law

This is no different than an extended check which any company allowing you to work with children can carry out. The difference is here that vulnerable new partners of the person can enquire if they see fit.

It is about keeping people safe, not punishing people. It's literally a criminal offence to reveal information about someone having to sign the register.

We have a Violent and Sex Offender Register: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Violent_and_Sex_Offender_Regis...

It is not public, it exists to facilitate Police intelligence.

> Unfortunately, the Ledger team appear to be asshats, so there's every reason to fear using them in the future, even if they've fixed this specific issue

Your first two lines completely contradict each other.

The Nano S is #3 in your list.

Lightning seems quite sound in theory, but I have misgivings about the order in which a fresh transaction is signed, and the secret to the old transaction revealed.

It would seem that by interrupting this chain before both old secrets are revealed, the attacker could safely claim all coins in the channel.

I'm probably wrong, but I'd like to know why.

a) Does not work b) Seems to be specific to Ethereum c) According to a mirror, has its information sourced from an unverified Reddit post.

Is there anything but FUD here?

Unless your bank considers the fraud to have been caused by a lack of care on your behalf, in which case you will not be refunded and have virtually no means of appeal

(note: Obviously depends on your country and local laws)

In lightning, you need only virtually connect them.

There's a literal world of difference between the two.

> instead they have to be given permission to transact by monolithic liquidity hubs

Completely false

> who of course must take their own fee

May, and routes aren't prescribed so they may take a fee on a payment that may be routed through them.

> I would want a rate of return similar to stocks but times some multiple to account for the very high risk of my hot wallet getting hacked and losing all my money.

What. This is completely disconnected from Lightning's functionality.

Please stop spreading FUD.

There is no requirement for this. This is FUD.

I think renaming a bunch of packages with a prefix is probably silly, but your response also strikes me as incredibly prescriptive.

I like brew, but I don't like that attitude.

It's something that has to be picked, and the parent poster will undoubtedly count as 'arrogance' for choosing a workaround.

Indeed, and once that was pointed out his response was equally polite and accurate, offering a workaround which keeps everyone happy.

Literally, what more do people expect?

Logs and error and continues? I think you're confused by Systemd exposing all sorts of frailties of traditional software. How do you propose that it differentiate between UIDs and user names?

They've had to delete multiple posts from the thread which are nothing but trolls, hell YOUR post is nothing but a troll.

On the other hand, you come here to uselessly complain and have the temerity to complain that poettering doesn't write exactly the code you want him to write.

How do you justify your ridiculous attitude?