71–80 of 318 posts
The author believes "a Twitter where your popular tweets earn you money" would be a good thing? Twitter is already full of people trying to shout the loudest - how can adding a financial incentive to shout even louder make things better rather than worse?
Youtube and Twitch already pay users so what does crypto add?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>taxes now become a voluntary contribution to whatever charity yes >And you don't see any scale issues with that? No. I see it vastly superior as private competition ensures people can donate to charities they find most effective, rather than monopolized government with little incentive for efficiency.
The idea that privately-managed charity could adequately address even one of the numerous structural-level problems in our society is tremendously naive.
But I think that discounts the massive achievements and structural changes around us that private enterprise has contributed to. It seems naive to believe humans can't solve large problems, or at least improve their lot, without men with guns forcing them to pay up for it.
NFTs in the current form might be pretty useless as such (just a proof you "first purchased" a jpeg). But I think in the gaming space this will become huge and actually makes sense - use elements (items, characters, stats,...) and their history in different and independent games if the developer wants to integrate them. No lock-in and portable, not tied to game-specific accounts.
this runs into the boundary issue, though. getting your hat asset you bought in HatWars into your Garden Town save file isn’t trivial. the two games’ developers need to use the same assets or one needs to remake the asset. it’s cool for the player but work and money for the developers that i’m not sure provides them much value
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Youtube and Twitch already pay users so what does crypto add?
I believe the idea of Web3/Crypto is that it's decentralized, so there's no Google or Facebook to take a cut or control a narrative.
I could maybe buy the idea that we'll move to an internet where every site nickel and dimes us. But is it more likely for the world to adopt crypto or is it more likely for our Google and Facebook OAuth accounts to support a non-chain wallet api? The crypto cut seems like it will always be more expensive as well.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is there a single economy that demonstrates this working effectively without taxes?
Quoted post unavailable.
The reason why charities underfund public goods is because of the well-known free-rider problem. It's the same reason why cryptocurrencies need to collect transaction fees and reward miners and cannot rely on charitable miners. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free-rider_problem
1. If you study the history of technology, it becomes pretty clear that it often take decades or even centuries to see the full impact of an invention. Declaring the ultimate value of a technology barely a decade after it was invented is just ignorant. It's only been about 30 years since society became "networked" and it seems clear that some form of "Internet currency" is inevitable. If you had judged the impact of gunpowder, the printing press, or photography 10 years after their invention, you'd obviously be quite mistaken. We might not see the "killer app" (whew that's an old expression) for blockchain for years.
2. A lot of crypto-critics seem to focus on the people in the crypto world (scammers, NFT sellers, etc.) and the things that they supposedly do wrong, but then apply these criticisms to the technology itself. This is a flawed approach for obvious reasons, but I also understand it, as the crypto world is full of hero worship and hype machines. If you're interested in this tech, you have to learn how to ignore these things.
3. It's somewhat unfortunate that blockchain and crypto have become dominated by finance, as it drowns out discussion of other use cases. Hopefully, this will fade into the background more as the technology matures and is adopted by a larger percentage of the population.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Youtube and Twitch already pay users so what does crypto add?
I am assuming they pay users who have USD/EUR/GBP denominated accounts. Not sure how they go about paying in Vietnamese dong.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Quoted post unavailable.
Ah yes, taxes are theft. The solution to government-mandates taxes is _obviously_ private enterprise! Surely no private company would ever do something as unseemly as threatening someone’s livelihood in order to extract payment.
NFTs in the current form might be pretty useless as such (just a proof you "first purchased" a jpeg). But I think in the gaming space this will become huge and actually makes sense - use elements (items, characters, stats,...) and their history in different and independent games if the developer wants to integrate them. No lock-in and portable, not tied to game-specific accounts.
It helps to think about this more clearly if you forget the NFT bit and think about just doing this with standard tech. What stops developers today from implementing publicly documented formats for in-game elements? What stops other developers from writing code to import these elements from one game to another? All an NFT adds is a verifiable signature and a pubic database. The signature bit seems completely irreleva…