191–198 of 198 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That sounds quite bad. But it also sounds like sending her to participate would have been even worse than ignoring her!
If they actually walked the walk, her going there would be a sign they were going to do what they were proposing. Them ignoring her was an indication they were full of it, hence why I left.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
FTP was written for an early version of TCP/IP (which wasn't called that). Maybe you're thinking of UUCP, which did often run over dial-up circuits and was used for email, but didn't require two connections.
No, I was thinking of FTP, but I was probably off the mark anyway: I'd noticed that FTP was mentioned in the RFCs and surrounding discussions long before RFC 793, and that it seemed to be behaving like a point-to-point network, but it hadn't occurred to me that it might have just been using an ancestor of TCP/IP -- some variant of the "Host protocol" perhaps? Hard to get the full context, it was before my time: my be…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, we solved it by centralising and ceding our power, so that two companies can see when a lot of people get the exact same message, and delete it for them.
Not at all. I never had a google account and I know many people who do not have one, and no, they have no problems with spam either.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Email requires a message to reach a specific, limited set of participants. Nostr is a public forum, which means an unbounded number of participants who can engage. Ordering a conversation between an unbounded set across independent nodes leads to misordered interactions not possible if you just centralize. It seems like a small issue, but at scale quality really suffers when some universal, fine-resolution ordering c…
There are things like mailing lists since decades and they do fine. You are assuming that everyone can spam your messages whereas in reality with NOSTR you choose from which relays to get updates. These relays are sovereign in the sense that they can (and will) define the rules and who can use them. I've never experienced misordered interactions since years of using NOSTR. This might be something of a theoretical iss…
Nostr breaks down along the longstanding ambiguity around what 'decentralization' means. In the literal sense, centralization leads to economies of scale and the alleviation of coordination issues. Those coordination issues are what make physically decentralized networks so complicated, inefficient and fractured. These networks usually just find ways to centralize despite. People really want decentralization of power…
Accountability is not the same as decentralization of power, don't conflate them. Decentralizing power means that many people are made powerful in their own respects. Accountability means that one person or a small group of people are made powerful, but there are checks or mechanisms on that person's power. These have vastly different impliciations for how organizations and groups of people develop and grow and inter…
In the context of 'decentralized tech' I've come to believe literal 'decentralization' has unavoidably poor network effects, while 'accountability' gives what people envision from 'decentralization' without the tradeoffs—by being a more fundamental property (decentralization can emerge from it if required).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> How would you anonymously pay for a VPN or donate to whistleblowers or get cash from an ATM without having to identify yourself? "Anonymously paying for VPN" seems a bit ironic given that almost all VPN users then immediately proceed to completely deanonymize themselves towards the VPN by accessing it from their (not anonymous) home Internet connection and/or to access sites that deanonymize them. Add to that the f…
What about inflation that eats your savings? Can your bank solve this?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s been 18 years and there are still no useful blockchain projects that go beyond trading and speculation. It hasn’t even produced a compelling currency, <2% of households use it for goods and services. I have no idea how or why anyone is still hanging on.
How would you anonymously pay for a VPN or donate to whistleblowers or get cash from an ATM without having to identify yourself? What is your backup plan to pay bills when your bank account is frozen by identity theft (can take months to resolve)? Only those that believe privacy and sovereign control of wealth has no value, can assert cryptocurrency is useless.