A cryptocurrency without crypto is just a currency then?

Regardless of whether it's eroding trust in cryptography today, I still assert it was a reasonable choice when the term was coined. Cryptocurrency depends fundamentally on cryptography.

just because it uses sha256 as it's proof of work doesn't make it crypto, as it was essentially picked out of a hat.

You could probably switch proof-of-work to use some non-cryptographic primitive with similar properties (maybe protein folding?) and it would still serve the same purpose, ignoring the economic problems. I will concede that point.

Bitcoin still cannot function without cryptography. Each UTXO is bound to a particular key pair. Each block refers to its parent using a hash. If either of those were switched to a non-cryptographic primitive, there would be no way to authenticate the owner of a UTXO, nor would there be a way to prove the ordering of blocks. Removing cryptography from cryptocurrency would make it entirely useless as a currency.

And for the signing of transactions, are we going to start calling bank checks crypto?

Banks existed for a thousand years without the existence of cryptography. If you removed cryptography from RCS, you'd still have the rest of the standard for messaging.

I hate to be that guy, but Bitcoin uses elliptic curve cryptography to sign transactions, and SHA256 is definitely in the field of cryptography. While cryptocurrency isn't purely cryptography, it is cryptography plus economics. Borrowing the "crypto" prefix, at least in my opinion, is reasonable.

Split meaning equal shares, or split as in each person pays for what they ordered?

It'll be the best god damn pizza you've ever tasted, but if you ask for anything besides Hawaiian, you disappear forever.

Has the meaning of this template changed? Like isn't the pink guy supposed to be a thing supporting the white dude so they can accomplish a goal they couldn't have done alone?

For example, the pink guy could be "Debian", the white person "Ubuntu", and the yellow goal "Being an awesome distribution".

Every single cell in our bodies contains mRNA at all times.

That's like saying computer viruses are fine because they're made of code, which computers are already full of.

We're full of mRNA, sure, but we're full of mRNA that's supposed to be there.

What are these ways that mRNA could mess you up of which you speak?

I'm no biologist, but perhaps mRNA that creates a prion?

Eh, beamer is more than enough for most presentations. If your slideshow needs to be that flashy, you probably need more substance.

git puts track changes to shame.

You're absolutely right about compatibility though.

It's common when you "wrap" one file type inside another. Like .tar combines multiple files into one, then .gz compresses a single file.

You also see it with PGP (encryption).

The big picture might be nuanced, but link taxes aren't. They're a ridiculous way to try and solve a problem.

Would it be fair to charge a phonebook for listing the mailing address of a business/person? No. Mailing addresses are just bits of information that describe where to find something. Same with links.

If a business wants to make money from people going to their physical location, they stop you at the door and ask for a ticket. They don't go after phonebooks for telling people where they're located.

All true!

You should consider transaction fees though: someone's gotta pay 'em. "Run their own chain" you might say, but then just use a database. Don't need crypto-economic security when you're the issuer and primary retailer.

That leads into having a public ledger. Great for public blockchains, but if you're issuing company scrip, you probably don't want outsiders auditing transactions.