Lmao - well done Niantic

Am I being fair when I immediately categorize anything as a summary as a data dump from an AI?

Prediction Markets is such an invented phrase.

Its a sports book.

A sports book of alternatives.

It's absolutely bonkers but hey, the grifters need a new costume, the crypto one is practically strings at this point

I cannot tell if this is sarcasm.

No you didnt

Its already here.

Yea! Back to my amazing Pax Americana of friendly neighbors, high trust in my authorities, and cheerful joyous days in oeace and harmony with my fellow man, complete with gum drop smiles and firm faith in my institutions. A truly brave new world

I'm trying to wrap my head around here.

So there are tests that leverage mocks. Those mocks help validate software is performing as desired by enabling tests to see the software behaves as desired in varying contexts.

If the software fails, it is because the mocks exposed that under certain inputs, undesired behavior occurs, an assert fails, and a red line flags the test output.

Validating that the mocks return the desired output.... Maybe there is a desire that the mocks return a stream of random numbers and the mock validation tests asserts said stream adheres to a particular distribution?

Maybe someone in the past pushed a bad mock into prod, that mock validated a test that would have failed given better mock, and a post mortem when the bad software, now pushed into prod, was traced to a bad mock derived a requirement that all mocks must be validated?

Yeah, seems plausible, or it was just "belt and suspenders." Sure made a lot of pretty green checkmarks.

So the government is afforded the opportunity to constrict compute if for a government interest.

This bill seems to expand powers, not restrict

Before the law, I think the state government or local governments could (by passing a law) restrict computing for any reason, even without a government interest. Now, they'd have to repeal this first.

How?

I know the whole 90s meme of 'I am a controlled munition' went around because cryptography was labeled an ordnance subject to export control laws, and therefore code that performed those kind of computations were forbidden to be sold abroad, liable to a felony.

What happens today? Government gets rights to source code, logs, and rubber stamps/rejects your code from executing in the cloud?

Government limits your access to commodity infrastructure?

djb had to (with the EFF) spend years in court to establish (on appeal) that writing crypto code was a speech issue:

https://www.eff.org/cases/bernstein-v-us-dept-justice

Laws like this make it much simpler for someone to challenge a law or regulation. They don't have to convince the judge (and possibly appeals court) that building or using a computer is a form of protected expression, this law says it is.

It may seem kind of flimsy or non-consequential, but while it's not a massive change, it is a really change and it's constructive.

How? By default, state governments can pass basically whatever laws they want. They don't have (theoretically) limited enumerated powers like the federal government.

Im not asking for policy mechanics, I'm asking for implementation detail clarification.

>When you can't trust that the votes, the comments, and the engagement you're seeing are real, you've lost the foundation a community platform is built on.

This 1000x times