pennaMan

The community doing things around the ethereum / smart contracts world are certainly on the building things side of things yet they are met with the same cynical skepticism around these parts.

>The world is a much better place without enforcement of "ownership".

Then you will have no problem if I move in with you, kick you out of the house you own then charge rent on your house?

Parent's central argument seems to be that creators of digital content do not deserve ownership of or royalties for their work because bits are infintley-copyable...

>it laments the death of open-source culture

Imagine a world where contributors to an open source project earn royalties from, say, FAANG using the open source project based on ownership of their contribution. Is that the death of open source culture or the rennisance?

Yes, just like a house ownership contract by itself is just a piece of paper and is independent of the underlying house. And to prove your ownership of your house that contract must be validated by a central authority - a goverment.

A house ownership NFT on the other hand requires no central authority for validation and complete strangers can exchange that house without a central authority being involved in proof of trust, and the buyer can immediatly charge rent based on his new ownership of the house. Thus removing several layers of bureaucracy.

Indeed, enforcment against mallicious misapropiation of ownership still requires a central authority with monopoly on violence.

NFTs provide proof of ownership of something unique, not enforcment. You are still free to put any jpeg you want on any profile pic you want. Like you can reproduce and hang a multi million dollar painting on your wall without enforcement but that provides no proof you own the original thing.

I do not get the argument that an algorithm for decentralized proof of ownership of an unique token has any moral attribution to it. If anything it enables a future where content creators can get income for their content without the ad industry (youtube, major labels, facebook etc) getting any cut. And that could lead to the erosion of IP laws all together.

We are already seeing experiments with distribution of royalties implemented with NFT smart contracts of today and the tech is still in it's infancy both in implementation and applications.

The reality is that good content, be it art or media, needs revenue for the content creators to produce content. Currently their options are limited to censoring themselves in the name of profit because profits are gatekeeped by the ad industry via the monopolies of google facebook and amazon.

A future where digital economies are decentralized and self sufficient, where anyone can publish and make royalties via the uniqueness of holding the "original" work of content and all future developments in this space is a future I look forward to.

A future where content creators have alternatives to monopolies like google amazon and facebook and most importantly the advertising cabal for revenue? Yes please, build more of that future.

The point is that this technology forum is in the sad state of being consistently dismissive of novel technology.

I would go further and ask for mandatory 24/7 surveillance of elected officials for transparency and to combat corruption every time they bring up this bullshit.

n=1 but I thought myself computer science while skipping high school and smoking copious amounts of said "awful herb" and I'm convinced I would of never chased that dream sober. I also have fond and clear memories of said period.

> Most people aren't dying from an accidental overdose

Yes they are. Before fentanyl contaminated heroin came around most heroin overdoses were because of massive differences in product purity. You know the dosage for your usual 10-20% heroin and when you get a batch of 60%+ you are doing over 3 times your usual dose without having a clue and because heroin has a low delta of LD50 to active dose, your usual dose is now letal.

If medical grade heroin was available, with known purity and no contaminants, heroin deaths would drop to almost 0. The drug itself isn't even that distructive in normal dosage, apart from the crippling withdrawl that btw is not letal and dosen't even require hospitalization, unlike benzodiazepine and alcohol withdrawals which can be fatal.

What are you on about? Rhodium was the name of one of those old school knowledge base websites and I have no idea what hit you got on palladium but it seems to be involved in synthesis.

I think we are talking about wildly different things here.

>centralizing a currently decentralized network onto a blockchain controlled by a few major players

No, the basic idea is simply decentralization of trust. I do not know what specific blockchain you are refering to.

>someone buys into the system you’re pushing

I'm pushing that we come together to develop novel systems that fundamentally change how governments and human collaboration in general work. Speculative markets do not interest me.

In your view, what are the use cases of regular money?

Someone who is not me regularly buys LSD with monero for what it's worth and the shopping experience is almost Amazon level, next day shipping included.

Every time crypto is mentioned on HN it's like the Dropbox Show HN thread over and over again.

Decentralisation, open collaborartion, opportunity for entirely new paradigms of entrepreneurship free from the constraints set by the rulling professional managerial class. Weren't those core hacker values?

The Nakamoto consensus algorithm is the single biggest contribution to CS so far in the 21st century. Choosing ignorance of novel technology is really sad to see on a forum intitled "hacker news"

"There is no reason for any individual to have a computer in his home."

The Scandinavian solution works because of it's highly functional education system. When enough percentage of people have at least a basic comprehension of logic and the scientific method the "surveillance state" as you call it does not need to strong arm common sense in its population.

So if Visa and Mastercard refuse service to your legal business because they don't like you, what options do you have?

Instead of asking the payment processor monopoly to censor things you don't like you can.... you know.... not indulge in things you don't like instead of ruining it for everyone who does like it?

The market speaks out with wallets not with hypocritical outrage nor moral high grounding nor virtue signaling and especially not straight up random censorship of legal buisnesses. And last time i checked onlyfans was wildly profitable and legal.

You forgot to add the test cases :)

Why did he have $1M of crypto on Coinbase? I want to hear how that came to be because from the outside it looks like plain stupidity.

>I don't think sending them bitcoin is illegal?

Well, according to the EU, not yet.

Criminals by definition do not care how many laws and regulations a honest person has to deal or wrongly go to prison for.

>Cryptocurrency fees are significantly more expensive

That statement makes no sense. Crypto transfer fees are not a percentage of the transferred amount.

It's where all the infinite feed dopamine fiends hang out, so the huge potential audience beats out any UX issues.

What's really interesting is the cult following of highly educated women he had!

so we'll just sweep the CS PhDs sex(?)(sex prose?) cult under the rug because grandparent wanted anonymity and was a bit harsh in expressing reality?

What should be brought up is why does GP have such strong feelings towards the guy? And why does he have this strange following?

http://web.archive.org/web/20200922180636if_/http://trilema....

http://ossasepia.com/2021/06/24/severed

Strange, on the McAfee thread people where bathing in hate for the guy and I kinda respected his crazy life.

This guy, being my conational that I never heard of, I got into a bit of digging and discovered a really creepy couple of blogs of women with CS PhDs that talk about him like some kind of cult leader and at the same time apparently the man regularly had 4chan level public discourse. What's up with that? Does anyone have info on this? Maybe the blog authors could even clear it up in this thread! But instead the thread gets buried because speaking of the dead (that did not lead a publicly known degenerate lifestyle apparently) is frowned upon.

News of death can be a good trigger to uncover knowledge. Choosing ignorance and shutting down speech because of cultural afterlife superstitions is not productive.

Citizenship may take longer but you can for sure buy investor visas