With Plex every time I try to sync new content I put in the folders it says I’m unauthorized and have to close the server and reopen it.

Haven’t bothered to trouble shoot it yet as it’s annoying but not annoying enough.

It’s already going to cost them what I imagine is billions in upgrades.

On the last earnings call Elon finally admitted that HW3 will probably need to be upgraded for people who bought/buy FSD.

That’s millions of cars, and there’s been some rulings that the upgrade includes people who decided to subscribe to fsd instead of purchase.

Lawsuits aside from it never being complete, the moment whatever their latest tech is that can, even if it is somehow all cameras, is going to lead to millions of cars needing upgrades.

However, if they truly solve it, that’s probably a drop in the bucket compared to the profits itd generate even if they have to add lidar or refund thousands of dollars per vehicle.

There might be laws against it like there is for mail?

For instance, you can’t opt out of mail from your member of parliament here, nor political ads that happen around election.

I was looking at it more, and it does use IPFS for the data storage (files and the collaboration chats etc), as well as Arweave, which I’d never heard of until today.

(Not op) Its distrubuted so you don’t lose your content if something happens to one location.

Just browsing the landing page, it looks like the blockchain part offers proof of ownership and strict access controls without having to use a centralized service, which is needed in some form if it’s distrubuted.

I imagine but haven’t seen that it might handle payments for having things be distrubuted as well, which would have meant having to include credit cards otherwise which would complicate things like micro payments to any given person hosting your content.

Edit: also this is the kind of thing that should use an S3 compatible API so you don’t get locked in as you said. It’d let you move the data between providers effortlessly.

This is a better start

Whats also likely is people see the attack coming due to the large validator queue, and they implement some sort of counter measure before the attack can even happen. Unless they let a 2048 eth validator in as quickly as a 32 eth validator, were talking many many months as there’s a massive influx of validators.

Imagine buying all that eth, and the community seeing the attack coming in advance, and instead saying, were going to lock out new validators after XYZ date, and force them to exit instead.

It would cause problems no doubt, but there would be a lot of options before an attack and after if they get that far to address it.

edit: They could also dramatically reduce the allowed validators per day if it was suspected, making the attack take years to even be possible.

So a government is going to spend hundreds of billions of dollars to get enough Ethereum to disrupt it, before accounting for the price going up by purchasing hundreds of billions of dollars of Ethereum, and then they’re going to destroy the hundreds of billions of dollars they invested to take the network down, temporarily. Like sure, it’s possible, but once established, it’s not happening.

It would be more cost effective to do a supply chain attack and introduce exploits/weaknesses to try and make people doubt using it, attack the infrastructure and steal coins from exchanges and other off chain services or smart contracts with bugs, and pass laws to restrict it.

edit: Oh and there’s also the queue to activate a valid staker. It will take a lot of time to even begin to be able to do this, instead of hoarding/renting asic hardware and turning it on out of the blue.

Edit: Sorry I’m also wrong, it’s 66% of staked ETH, it’s not half the market cap. So we’d be talking probably upwards of a hundred billion (not hundreds) by the time we account for price increases from having to buy to even start to initiate the attack.

Edit: I also wonder if the future change to allow a staker to stake up to 2048 eth instead of 32 could quicken the attack (as it’s 1 validator in the queue instead of 64) or if they’ll delay larger validators longer, maybe based on its eth amount? I’m not up to speed on that. But in theory the queue would be 64 times quicker if they can join as quick.