Look, let’s be honest. If Hillary had won and Trump was acting like her, you’d be apoplectic about how inappropriate his sore loser antics were. And if it came out that Hillary’s campaign had used a survey to collect data on Facebook, the Approved Position would be “If you don’t think social media is gathering your…

Obama’s own campaign communications director said this week that Facebook allowed them to access more data than policy allows. Because Obama.

+5 Bait of Clicking

Because they don’t have a choice. What are they going to do, jail millions of people who didn’t do anything wrong because someone snuck some invisible code into a product they use?

I am exactly as ok with this happening as all pro-Obama people were with Facebook letting his campaign be handed data which they (FB officials) themselves admitted would not be allowed were it not Obama.

In order to completely eliminate the possibility of transmitting that illegal data, you have to eliminate blockchains themselves.

Not really. This whole argument against “the blockchain” is an argument against the stream carrying the data instead of the person who put it in the stream.

In other words “WE ARE ONLY GOING TO TALK ABOUT IT WHEN IT SUITS MY SIDE TO TALK ABOUT IT!”

I can’t think of a technology that’s been more heavily used to promote crime than the US dollar, but we accept that shit comes with the territory.

No. U.

We might as well ban browsers from being able to display JPEGs. Come on, Microsoft and Google KNOW that illegal porn is being distributed as JPEGs, and they display them anyway.

The repeaters along fiber-optic lines indiscriminately transmit whatever is being input, regardless of what it is. Do we have to pull those?

I don’t think you know what you’re talking about

So what? That doesn’t make it untrue.

If it’s being constantly changed because bad actors are constantly inserting illegal information into it, there’s no point.

but now it’s obvious you’re just stupid.

You are the only one who has responded to me so far who seems to even understand how blockchains work.

“Not going to be popular with the bitcoin community” is both putting it mildly and missing the point. If you think that there’s going to be a central blockchain clearinghouse to control blockchains, you don’t understand the point of blockchains.

So I guess blockchains are just going to go away now that someone can use a heckler’s veto to embed illegal material in them?

My point isn’t what they can or technically can’t do under current laws, rather it is: