Earlier quoted context omitted.
“Nobody uses crypto!” - people trying to make the use of crypto illegal
"Use crypto!" - bag-holders with a financial interest in crypto being used
Darwin: A framework for evolving decentralized web apps
41–50 of 56 posts
Re: Darwin: A framework for evolving decentralized web apps
#42If the problem is that users using an app that's supposed to be, by it's governance structure, decentralized but in practice it's still centralised and this is the primary reason why changes aren't implemented/pushed through. I think it's more reasonable to think about solutions to the governance problem itself. Imo, thinking a plutocratic structure would ever bring forth power decentralisation is foolish to begin wi…
Wouldn't sortition be game-able by creating a lot of wallets with tiny amounts in?
Re: Darwin: A framework for evolving decentralized web apps
#43Another attempt to shill more and more tokens. What is wrong with open and simple protocols, like NOSTR? Thanks to the different NIPs (NOSTR Improvement Proposals) [1] any client can choose to support or ignore anything that another has bolted on. And incentives for developers, you ask? If your client or relay is truly better than the competition, then users want to use your software/Webapp. They will not mind paying…
Isn't nostr just clients connecting to multiple servers? With no communication between servers?
Re: Darwin: A framework for evolving decentralized web apps
#44Re: Darwin: A framework for evolving decentralized web apps
#45Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Use crypto!" - bag-holders with a financial interest in crypto being used
You’re free to use whatever you want, this discussion is about whether you can ban others from doing the same.
Re: Darwin: A framework for evolving decentralized web apps
#46Earlier quoted context omitted.
You’re free to use whatever you want, this discussion is about whether you can ban others from doing the same.
as far as i can tell very few people want cryptocurrency to be illegal. what people do advocate for is KYC practices at crypto exchanges to protect customers from fraud.
Re: Darwin: A framework for evolving decentralized web apps
#47Earlier quoted context omitted.
Bot-to-bot wash trades as evidence of legitimacy, classic web3.
Unsupported conspiracy theories, classic cryptophobia.
Cryptocurrencies are just three ponzi schemes in a trench coat.
Re: Darwin: A framework for evolving decentralized web apps
#48Going to do y'all a favor and explain EXACTLY why this (and most DAO-like thingies) are goofy. The issue is trust. What you're trying to do is to encode trust and incentives among human beings, and it's far easier to do that WITHOUT complicating it via code.
I thought crypto was about solving a LACK of trust?
DAOs and such are hamfisted attempts to slap crypto-tech on things that AREN'T suited for it.
Re: Darwin: A framework for evolving decentralized web apps
#49Going to do y'all a favor and explain EXACTLY why this (and most DAO-like thingies) are goofy. The issue is trust. What you're trying to do is to encode trust and incentives among human beings, and it's far easier to do that WITHOUT complicating it via code.
Crypto is about trusting the validity of code over the integrity of people. There is a bit more to it than that, in trusting that micro-economic incentives and the design of the protocol will guard the protocol against capture, but that's the gist of it. Ultimately, open source code has a higher safety potential than the integrity of individuals, so I believe static services will trend toward becoming Ethereum protoc…
Re: Darwin: A framework for evolving decentralized web apps
#50If the problem is that users using an app that's supposed to be, by it's governance structure, decentralized but in practice it's still centralised and this is the primary reason why changes aren't implemented/pushed through. I think it's more reasonable to think about solutions to the governance problem itself. Imo, thinking a plutocratic structure would ever bring forth power decentralisation is foolish to begin wi…
Wouldn't sortition be game-able by creating a lot of wallets with tiny amounts in?
There's some projects out there for verifying identities though. So it's possible. You definitely need to be "one person" for sortition to work. I mean, you want to have a proper deliberative structure for it anyway so there's gotta be discussion and so on. It's not something you where you can just skip deliberation altogether which kind of happens in a lot of these cases (for example, in referendum-democracy where people are simply asked to choose yes/no on a series of issues without them ever really engaging in the formation process of those issues).