[flagged]
You can't make large changes like this without undermining your viability as stable infrastructure.
It's a simple rule: "no cryptocurrency projects".
If it was just one guy who arbitrarily decided as such, that's not much of a 'process' and is exactly what GP was calling out.
At this point any project that’s even vaguely controversial ought to be looking at fully decentralized solutions like Radicle.
“Don’t be an AI bro”
“Don’t be a Russian”
“Don’t be a fascist”
“Don’t be an antisemite”
“Don’t be a (insert boogeyman here)”
“Don’t be a sympathizer”
“Don’t be an enemy of the state”
These words are manipulations, and they will eventually catch up with you.
Agreed. No way I will ever use Codeberg from now on.
Currency is a measure of social trust; it allows social contributions to be measured in a fungible unit. Cryptocurrencies erase this concept of social trust under the purported claim that anonymous transfer of “money” is good for society, forgetting why humans created currency in the first place. Anonymity abets money laundering, illicit drug trade, human trafficking/slavery, and CSAM, along with a raft of other antisocial behaviors.
Yes, you can do all of the above with USD, but you’ll have to put a lot more effort into doing so. Hence, it is fair to lump the bad in with the good for crypto (IMO) because it’s unclear how the benefits of crypto outweigh the antisocial behavior it enables. What has society gained in return?
> What has society gained in return?
A currency technology that doesn't rely on central authority, slavery nor imperialism to exist.
Going even further, cryptcurrencies, being distrusted ledgers, still fulfill the ability to test for someone "social trust" within a transaction, anonymous or not. Also, it's not like we, as the whole society, have access to your transaction history at all times with USD (which we do with Bitcoin, funnily enough).