I tried to go there for third time in 4 months and they called them probably because the companies they sent me to gave them feedback that I am not working - because here it's mandatory to be trying to get a job to collect the allowance.
Fortunately the guys who arrived were the most reasonable guys I ever met and laughed at them, but suggested I don't go back there again.
> How do you deal with domain squatting or trademark violation?
In practice, it rarely works. Only big corporations have money to actually sue and win these cases. They usually prefer to pay however.
Same with regards to other reasons people give for lack of adoption of crypto alternative.
For example, lack of reversal and dispute handling is cited as the major reason why crypto currency isn't used for payments. That's just not true.
UPI in India does not have ability to reverse transactions either. So does not countless p2p payment systems. UPI alone processes billions of transactions weekly.
I think all these high level concerns aren't the reason for lack of adoption. They might indicate lack of corporate adoption but at the core level, I would think lack of a widely used consumer DNS like 8.8.8.8 and 1.1.1.1 is a bigger hurdle. Both of them won't resolve ENS and any other crypto based alternative.
Your average person is never going to run their own local DNS resolution node and switch it in their browsers.
In iOT and smart devices like TV, DNS is often hard coded so impossible to change.
> UPI in India does not have ability to reverse transactions either. So does not countless p2p payment systems. UPI alone processes billions of transactions weekly.
There's very limited area where banks can refund the transaction where they are at fault. It is not reversal.
For reversing, they have to contact the receiving bank and person to send back the money which in case of scam is low. You can do that with crypto too. Contact the person and ask them to send the money back.
You also need police report and the sum has to be big enough for them to bother.
> There's very limited area where banks can refund the transaction where they are at fault. It is not reversal.
If we're talking in general, no, banks can revert transactions when you pay for something and that turns out to be a scam, or goods/services are not delivered.
I don't know how it works in the case of P2P transactions, but I expect many of the protections to still apply.
> For reversing, they have to contact the receiving bank and person to send back the money
> You can do that with crypto too. Contact the person
There's a big difference between a bank contacting another bank to revert an incorrect or frauduent transaction, and trying to contact a stranger to send your money back.
> You also need police report and the sum has to be big enough for them to bother.
Compare this to crypto where if your money's gone, your money's gone, regardless of the sum or the intent.
You can ask bank to reverse card transaction and certain form of transfers but for UPI, there is no automatic reversal. Your bank needs to contact other bank after receiving police report to freeze the account and then sort it out. The scammer will take out the money before that or move it.
It is not reversal and it is not an option in practice unless the amount is very big which is rare for P2P. There is an upper limit on transactions enforced on UPI.
The point still stands that reversal is not a significant problem for adoption when it's such as an edge case. UPI added dispute handling standard process only after it was processing more than billions of transactions monthly.
There is something else holding crypto back from being used for payments.
Theoretical TPS limit for mainnet and L2s isn't enough to support the scale of twitter. The writes will get expensive very fast unless you offload that and only send a batched proof. Putting actual content on blockchain is a non-starter as well.
Most of the blockchain based social graphs end up using centralized indexer.
Everyone is also dependent on centralized RPC providers for querying and sending transactions since it requires a lot of resources to maintain your own.
So peer to peer isn't possible at their scale depending on how you interpret it.
> He must have been aware of verified accounts getting sold and used for scamming so maybe he wanted to dip into that instead of losing it to middleman.
I don't think we can assume he must have been aware of anything. That team was told to release it by November 9th or they were all fired or some such, right? so in a week and a half, release this new feature.
I don't think there is much you can do. Based on what you have written, I would assume you already invest a good portion in 401K, index funds, and other options.
If you have savings which aren't counted in that, you are better than 90% of the people out there who are happy and chugging along.
I would recommend building document with your backup plans and runaway. That should give you ample time to reflect.
It is same in India too. The amount of time that is wasted on it is absolutely massive.
There is no benefit. We have director and ID sign which is accepted in a few departments for what they ask for a notary to witness in others.
Printing something on stamp paper changes absolutely nothing.
The amount of mindless bureaucracy just to waste people's time gets me every time. If you want more money, just ask for it directly.
Also all the penalties for not doing redundant and useless paperwork.
You can pay all the taxes and be compliant yet if you don't fill form saying I paid everything, they penalize you.
