161–170 of 699 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How about this: Every economic interaction (which includes employment) is political. Would you agree with this?
I will think about it the next time I buy an old lawnmower on craigslist.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s the energy. Energy usage means security. ArcticBull will argue it’s bad, I’ll argue it’s the best thing ever. Follow the energy. Why has it failed? Works fine for me and many others…
> Energy usage means security Umm.. No. "More energy = More security" is a slogan now being used to scam non-technical users to buy into the crypto ecosystem, but that does not make any sense if you are willing to think about for a second. Also very convenient that this slogan started getting popular when BTC started getting bad press for energy usage. BTW how you reach consensus on a chain is different from how the…
Btw, you are not correct. The entire history of the chain and balances is protected by the hashrate. With sufficient energy you can rewrite history. This is because every block secures the blocks before it. Yeah checkpoints can be used to force a known sync point, but this vastly undermines the decentralization of the chain.
What mission did they focus on and how did it go? All I see here is "I wrote a controversial screed and many people tolerated it and kept showing up to work." That's great and all, but what sort of new things did it unlock? How do you compare it to the world where you didn't write the screed? It all feels like a heap of bullshit to me -- if you're in the right industry, you can be the worst manager on the planet and…
Did you read the tweets? He said that most stakeholders told him they were very happy with the mission focus.
Did they launch more features? Make more money?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why do people think work is an appropriate place for political activism?
Because liberal arts higher education has been completely usurped by Postmodernism and Marxism, and it indoctrinates students with the belief that everything everywhere is politics, always. This mentality has infected "liberal" intellectualism outside the academy, to the point where it is, essentially, the "culture" of much of the Left in the U.S.
Also, Postmodernism in philosophy and sociology is built against Marxism (and Freudism), so i don't really understand the association here.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why do people think work is an appropriate place for political activism?
Everything you do is implicitly political. To say you're non-political is just another political position itself - complicity with the status quo.
[1] https://newdiscourses.com/tftw-complicity/
Edit: changed terminology from "classical white" to "classical liberal" culture. It diverges from critical social justice dogma by doing this, making my attempt at communicating with a Critical Social Justice adherent less in their language, but is hopefully clearer.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Whilst technically correct, I still object. Many if not most things aren't political in a meaningful way, but surely you can make them political. This is how you get "water is racist" and the entire movement of social justice becomes a thing of ridicule. The strategy harms, it doesn't help.
How about this: Every economic interaction (which includes employment) is political. Would you agree with this?
It's not political, it's fashion.
Brian Armstrong was on Tyler Cowen and Tyler asked him if bitcoin was a zero sum game, in a round about way: COWEN: I’ve seen estimates that about 20 percent of bitcoin has been lost, or people don’t have their passwords, or it’s somehow abandoned or whatever. Let’s say that 20 percent were found. Those people would be better off, right? They’d have more wealth. Who is then worse off? ARMSTRONG: Yes, I suppose you ha…
It's hard to find a serious economist who doesn't see major flaws with bitcoin. It's because bitcoin was designed by engineers, not economists. Bitcoin could only have been created by engineers - it misses a few fundamental tests of currency that any practicing economist would have "fixed" during the design phase. So we are left with bitcoin, which looks silly to most experts but is basically a religion to those who…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not getting involved always means at least tacitly supporting the status quo. To think otherwise is just an expression of privilege. There is no being apolitical.
Nonsense. Silence means just that, silence. It could mean anything: I don't know. I don't care. I might care but don't have time to look into it. I care but it's not in my top 10 issues. None of these options support the status quo.
>Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter.
>Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.
>The hottest place in Hell is reserved for those who remain neutral in times of great moral conflict.
>The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in moments of comfort and convenience, but where he stands at times of challenge and controversy.
>The ultimate tragedy is not the oppression and cruelty by the bad people but the silence over that by the good people.
>We will remember not the words of our enemies, but the silence of our friends.
>Pity may represent little more than the impersonal concern which prompts the mailing of a check, but true sympathy is the personal concern which demands the giving of one’s soul.
>Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will.
>The first question which the priest and the Levite asked was: “If I stop to help this man, what will happen to me?” But… the good Samaritan reversed the question: “If I do not stop to help this man, what will happen to him?”
>In the End, we will remember not the words of our enemies, but the silence of our friends.
>He who passively accepts evil is as much involved in it as he who helps to perpetrate it. He who accepts evil without protesting against it is really cooperating with it.
>History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people.
>Every man must decide whether he will walk in the light of creative altruism or in the darkness of destructive selfishness.
Just want to say how ridiculous this is from a European perspective. I know nothing better than for any company to be mission focused. You go to work to do work. And you do so with a degree of neutrality, as you can't pick your colleagues, yet still need to cooperate with them. This doesn't mean you can't say anything at all, it means you shouldn't be overly divisive or confrontational. A company isn't your personal…
it's so ironic to me that he prides himself over the "no politics" policy, yet calls his company "mission-focused". the mission is cryptocurrency, which is very political.
It's not ironic. It's literally the point of why he's calling it "mission-focused" and not "apolitical." If the almost all members of the NAACP happened to be pro-crypto, do you it's reasonable for it's members to pressure its leadership to spread the adoption of crypto?
and yes, i think the members of NAACP would be pushing crypto if that's what they felt was a priority for their cause. i don't understand your logic?
edit: i believe that being apolitical is just as a political stance as being political.