Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hey that's pretty unfair, I was just chastised a couple days ago for implying the killer use case for the blockchain was criminality!
"Criminal" is such a strong word. We prefer "less normatively constrained".
€2.6M spent for a book at auction, believed they would own the IP
151–160 of 398 posts
Re: €2.6M spent for a book at auction, believed they would own the IP
#152Earlier quoted context omitted.
For the sake of accuracy, it appears to me that it is $30k per month total for the core team not each. There is a total maximum operating budget of $50k per month including a maximum of $30k for the core team. When the core team has 4. That is about $8k per month each.
8K seems plenty when you can do your "work" from anywhere in the world (and probably have a good reason to not be too easy to find by your scam victims)
Re: €2.6M spent for a book at auction, believed they would own the IP
#153Earlier quoted context omitted.
But a raffle doesn't have the copyright infringement. You can't make a bunch of copies of a Disney movie but with the ending cut off, and have them be the "losing" consolation prizes.
Right, it’s a raffle with more steps and dubious legality. Seems unnecessary when a regular raffle would have sufficed, but I suppose that wouldn’t have got attention.
Re: €2.6M spent for a book at auction, believed they would own the IP
#154Re: €2.6M spent for a book at auction, believed they would own the IP
#155This is, obviously, silly. There are a lot of silly cryptostuff. Silliness aside though, this highlights a point to me. Methods of organising are (1) very important (2) relatively undiverse (3) hard to create out of whole cloth. The creation/ascendance of "modern" joint stock companies circa 1600 was (arguably) responsible for some serious revolution. The 90s produced some very interesting examples: GNU, Linux, Wikip…
This might have been a rhetorical question but I'll give an answer anyway - this article [0] makes the same comparison and discusses that exact analogy
Re: €2.6M spent for a book at auction, believed they would own the IP
#156Re: €2.6M spent for a book at auction, believed they would own the IP
#157Earlier quoted context omitted.
> the "core team" has started paying themselves ~$30k a month each But don't forget this team has the Q1 deliverable of presenting "a film treatment and budget by Roble Ridge Productions for the original animated limited series inspired by the book for a community vote on Snapshot" - which one can only assume will be a lot of work... :)
And also will be unauthorized since they own no rights to derivative work (or even the original work)
They could release a series about overpaying for a copy of dune at auction and technically fulfill their mission
Re: €2.6M spent for a book at auction, believed they would own the IP
#158Then somehow the world started to join up and information began to seep into local cultures and sweep away a lot of these pre-rational beliefs. And for a while, it seemed like the direction of travel was towards a global system of thought based on a widely distributed factual, rational approach.
But in the last ten years, something seems to have arrested this direction of travel and reinstated local bubbles of thought, insulated from outside challenge.
Cryptoscams are the perfect (but not only) example of a self-sustaining shared consensual delusion. They don’t talk to the outside world. So much so that something like this happens. They are living inside a pre-rational info-bubble which has budded off from reality and floated away on its own wind.
We are not just dealing with scams and fools here. There is an intense current of reality-defiance and cult behaviour. Some people get sucked into the crypto-attractor, but other hallucinations are available.
Re: €2.6M spent for a book at auction, believed they would own the IP
#159I made the mistake of diving a bit deeper into the group who bought it and found a proposal where they are talking about literally burning the book they just bought after digitizing it for … reasons I guess [0] At this point I just hope its some sort of practical joke or whatever because this just seems a bit much. [0] https://forum.spicedao.xyz/t/nft-of-the-book-w-proof-of-jpeg...
Fuck me, they’re talking about using JPEG as an archival format before destroying the original. What is going on here.
Compression artifacts are irrelevant if your scan resolution is significantly higher than the print resolution.
Re: €2.6M spent for a book at auction, believed they would own the IP
#160It’s actually a pretty good description for a bunch of guys passing the same tokens around for ever increasing amounts, thinking they’re getting richer.