221–230 of 321 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Bitcoin alone currently pollutes about the same as half the global airline industry. If cryptos really are the future, I weep for the planet.
Luckily mining with renewables is much less difficult technically than flying with renewables.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Humans - that is problem number one. Like agent smith said in the Matrix. "Human beings are a disease, a cancer on this planet.." - Advocating for this cure will solve all the problems..
You realize he was an antagonist, right? He's not someone to model.
Generic question: I see a lot of news articles stating that WSB has "10 million members". Does being a 'member' go beyond clicking the 'join' button on that subreddit? If so it's more like a 'follow this channel', isn't it?
Correct. Although that sounds more like the entire number of reddit users, not just WallStreetBets.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Energy usage is a recognised issue and while it offers challenges they are understood and developers are keen to address this. If you want to start deconstruction of the industrial military complex that would be just fine and might really start to change things, until then I argue there are more worthy targets for your ire than the energy use of an emerging technology.
This is like saying that pollution is a recognized issue with fossil fuels and while it offers challenges they are understood and engineers are keen to address this. There aren't always easy solutions and you can't hand wave aside a massive problem because 'our best people are on it'
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, if the evil side can exploit this phenomenon to great success (e.g. drone strikes allowing to kill people halfway across the world, and making it feel like playing a video game from 1990s), why can't the good side? We can despair about the nature of man all we want, but if in the meantime, we can get rich people here to spend a lot of money on helping people far away, that's still a huge net benefit for the wor…
Is it really evil to use drones to kill evil people?
Don't ask me I just fly the drone
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Humans - that is problem number one. Like agent smith said in the Matrix. "Human beings are a disease, a cancer on this planet.." - Advocating for this cure will solve all the problems..
The whole reason we care about the environment is so we can keep living in it. What should we do instead, leave the turtles to inherit the earth and yeet ourselves into the sun?
Why doesn't hackernews adopt something or do something like this? Software developers are rolling in money, and it's not that expensive. Guess we're too busy eating the world.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"adoption" is the terminology used by the foundation, and symbolic adoption is a known quantity in this type of operation so I don't have a problem with it. However referring to wallstreet bets users as "investors" does seem like a bit of a misnomer...
My only issue is that "Reddit investors" means people that invest on Reddit, while the article is about people that speculate with stocks (kinda ok to call them investors) and use Reddit. Still, I don't know how to improve the headline.
I think it probably is more ambiguous to people on this board than the general population since people here are particularly VC-minded.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"adoption" is the terminology used by the foundation, and symbolic adoption is a known quantity in this type of operation so I don't have a problem with it. However referring to wallstreet bets users as "investors" does seem like a bit of a misnomer...
I kind of agree with parent. While I don’t have a problem with symbolic use of adoption, I do have a problem with “multiple adoption”. When I think of a donor “adopting” a case, I have a model of “this donation sufficed for lifetime care of that case”. If one donation isn’t sufficient, then maybe a group of donations would collectively be the adoption. You shouldn’t have a scenario where there are more adoptions than…
Given that almost none of these "adopters" will ever see the gorilla in question in real life, it seems unreasonably jealous to insist that this organization should forgo funding so that they and they alone can have a financial relationship with this particular gorilla.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What about the costs of military and lives and environment of the efforts spent in maintaining the USD hegemony?
If you think the USA would stop asserting its hegemony if the world used Bitcoin instead of USD, I don't know what to tell you.
There is some accuracy to that. Would raise the stakes and the resources involved in funding a war. The last 70-80 years of US hegemony have been based off of the market tolerance for US debt and slowly being paid their money back, in US dollartoken. And before then, US hegemony was not a thing.
So there is nothing to say that the market won't find a way to have fractional speculation on bitcoin/crypto asset backed securities, and there is nothing to say that a governing body won't find a way to sustain itself and gain compliance with its peers through it. But there is also not a history of US hegemony supporting it either. Not a panacea because the world was much more of a tinderbox before US debt based hegemony.