Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Wikimedia Foundation's acceptance of cryptocurrency donations

blog.mollywhite.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 34 posts

Re: The Wikimedia Foundation's acceptance of cryptocurrency donations

#21

Post by arcticbull »

rosndo wrote: post #20
arcticbull wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I do not believe that 'without censorship' provides more value than it costs as for the overwhelming majority of individuals 'without censorship' means nothing. As evidenced by the fact the overwhelming majority of crypto 'transactions' take place on centralized, permissioned, censorable exchanges. I think the costs dramatically outweigh the value provided. However, that is the meat of the conversation we're having.…

Bitcoin revolutionized the drug trade, there’s huge value there. People living in repressive societies like Russia are now able to safely buy weed thanks to cryptocurrencies enabling Hydra. Before these people would risk prison to get a little stoned, but now they can just buy GPS coordinates on the internet and pick up their drugs without ever interacting with anyone. It’s not a coincidence that most of the users co…

Yes the broad enablement of crime and criminality is regressive.

Re: The Wikimedia Foundation's acceptance of cryptocurrency donations

#22

Post by rosndo »

arcticbull wrote: post #21
rosndo wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bitcoin revolutionized the drug trade, there’s huge value there. People living in repressive societies like Russia are now able to safely buy weed thanks to cryptocurrencies enabling Hydra. Before these people would risk prison to get a little stoned, but now they can just buy GPS coordinates on the internet and pick up their drugs without ever interacting with anyone. It’s not a coincidence that most of the users co…

Yes the broad enablement of crime and criminality is regressive.

You are a terrible person.

How can you genuinely suggest that it is progressive for some guy to prison in Russia because of a joint?

Your position is simply indefensible.

Re: The Wikimedia Foundation's acceptance of cryptocurrency donations

#23

Post by rosndo »

arcticbull wrote: post #17
rosndo wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you might have fallen victim to the fallacy fallacy :)

In what way does 'oh you hate crypto? what about airplanes?' add something valuable to this conversation? I'd rather have something concrete I can point to explaining my sentiment rather than simply being rude about it.

People complaining about cryptocurrency rarely have internally consistent values, instead they’re just chasing the flavor of the month to virtue signal.

It would be fallacious to suggest that someone is wrong because of this, but it works as a standalone observation.

Re: The Wikimedia Foundation's acceptance of cryptocurrency donations

#24

Post by arcticbull »

rosndo wrote: post #22
arcticbull wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes the broad enablement of crime and criminality is regressive.

You are a terrible person. How can you genuinely suggest that it is progressive for some guy to prison in Russia because of a joint? Your position is simply indefensible.

Let's take drugs for instance. I'm pro legalization.

The bulk of the harm created by drugs isn't from the drugs, it's from the cartels, gangs, the mafia - and from the police imprisoning users. Allowing the cartels to transact directly with customers doesn't stop that. It allows the narcos to kidnap, murder, rape and fund their empires - so some Russian kid can smoke a joint.

It's actually a way to make the joint smoking kid more likely to be imprisoned because they paid for their drugs not with an envelope of cash nobody will ever be able to trace - but with an immutable, plaintext, public ledger. Entries on the blockchain are prosecution futures for the little guy. As the technology to de-anonymize them automatically becomes more and more mature, it looks less like a great way to pay for drugs and more like a list of people unaware they're awaiting indictment.

It does nothing to reduce the level of imprisonment of users. It makes the harms associated with drugs significantly worse on both ends. The only way to mitigate the harms is to push for legalization.

However, keep in mind that ad hominem attacks are against site rules.

[edit] So you're clear, no, you did not read this reply correctly. I do not believe in accelerationism. Accelerationism is not progressive. Have a good night!

Re: The Wikimedia Foundation's acceptance of cryptocurrency donations

#25

Post by Mindwipe »

What an odd article. The value of most state fiat currencies has many of the problems cited - the value of the US dollar and GB pound is non-trivially based upon slavery and unquestionably significantly driven by environmental damage, but there is no mention of those in the article. That isn't whataboutism, the consequences of not accepting Bitcoin would be to take either not take anything at all, or to take those currencies with the problem that it entails.

I am no Bitcoin evangelist, it has many issues. But it's censorship resistance is important for an encyclopedia. We've seen in recently weeks discussions by the UK government of "regulating" (i.e. censorship) of websites via blocking and payment removal, with Wikipedia specifically brought up as an example by legislators. This is not a hypothetical risk. MasterCard's BRAM rules frequently cause censorship to sexual topics.

Poor stuff.

Re: The Wikimedia Foundation's acceptance of cryptocurrency donations

#26

Post by rendx »

arcticbull wrote: post #12
rendx wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Err, you are aware that electric cars are not more environment friendly than diesel or petrol cars? You more or less just shift the environmental damage to the location of production (batteries, etc). Especially if you consider how modern cars are not meant to be driven for 20+ years. My diesel van is over 25 years old and still going smoothly. Can you imagine to drive a current Tesla for the next 25 years? How many…

The CO2 break-even is around 8 years for an electric car, and the bulk of the other materials are recyclable.

In some sense, anything is "recyclable". What does that mean in reality? How much "recyclable" material is actually reused, how much resource transformation does it take to reuse or recycle? Which economic incentives exist, and are they working? "co2" is a single data point, and of course you can tune the process to minimize one, at the cost of something other. How about all the "rare materials" that are required, and all the other pollutants?

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/aug/20/electric...

https://www.bbc.com/news/business-56574779

https://undark.org/2021/01/21/electric-car-looming-recyclabi...

Cars are getting bigger and heavier, people buy more cars than ever, and transportation still becomes more and more individualized. The overall environmental damage continues to rise. All these are sad facts, and there is an abundance of "proof" to be found everywhere.

Re: The Wikimedia Foundation's acceptance of cryptocurrency donations

#27

Post by rosndo »

arcticbull wrote: post #24
rosndo wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are a terrible person. How can you genuinely suggest that it is progressive for some guy to prison in Russia because of a joint? Your position is simply indefensible.

Let's take drugs for instance. I'm pro legalization. The bulk of the harm created by drugs isn't from the drugs, it's from the cartels, gangs, the mafia - and from the police imprisoning users. Allowing the cartels to transact directly with customers doesn't stop that. It allows the narcos to kidnap, murder, rape and fund their empires - so some Russian kid can smoke a joint. It's actually a way to make the joint smo…

Am I getting this right? You’re pro legalization, but you’re so upset with some people in Mexico(?) that you’re happy to see consumers around the world jailed in order to spite the Mexicans?

> It's actually a way to make the joint smoking kid more likely to be imprisoned because they paid for their drugs not with an envelope of cash nobody will ever be able to trace - but with an immutable, plaintext, public ledger.

People in more repressive countries usually source their cryptocurrencies anonymously, western markets all use anonymous monero. Hydra will probably move sooner than later too.

Anyway, in the real world people buying from “traditional” dealers are far more likely to go to jail than those buying dead drops off of hydra.

The truth is that enabling the cartels is extremely progressive. This will eventually force the governments to play ball and liberalize their policies.

> However, keep in mind that ad hominem attacks are against site rules.

In philosophy ad hominem reasoning is often considered an essential part of moral debates. Some opinions are vile and reflect poorly on you, that’s just how it is.

Re: The Wikimedia Foundation's acceptance of cryptocurrency donations

#28

Post by arcticbull »

rosndo wrote: post #27
arcticbull wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let's take drugs for instance. I'm pro legalization. The bulk of the harm created by drugs isn't from the drugs, it's from the cartels, gangs, the mafia - and from the police imprisoning users. Allowing the cartels to transact directly with customers doesn't stop that. It allows the narcos to kidnap, murder, rape and fund their empires - so some Russian kid can smoke a joint. It's actually a way to make the joint smo…

Am I getting this right? You’re pro legalization, but you’re so upset with some people in Mexico(?) that you’re happy to see consumers around the world jailed in order to spite the Mexicans? > It's actually a way to make the joint smoking kid more likely to be imprisoned because they paid for their drugs not with an envelope of cash nobody will ever be able to trace - but with an immutable, plaintext, public ledger.…

https://news.bitcoin.com/ciphertrace-enhanced-monero-tracing...

Prosecution futures.

> In philosophy ad hominem reasoning is often considered an essential part of moral debates.

No it is not lol.

And I strongly suggest you re-read what I wrote because it appears to have bypassed you entirely.

Re: The Wikimedia Foundation's acceptance of cryptocurrency donations

#29

Post by [deleted] »

arcticbull wrote: post #28
rosndo wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Am I getting this right? You’re pro legalization, but you’re so upset with some people in Mexico(?) that you’re happy to see consumers around the world jailed in order to spite the Mexicans? > It's actually a way to make the joint smoking kid more likely to be imprisoned because they paid for their drugs not with an envelope of cash nobody will ever be able to trace - but with an immutable, plaintext, public ledger.…

https://news.bitcoin.com/ciphertrace-enhanced-monero-tracing... Prosecution futures. > In philosophy ad hominem reasoning is often considered an essential part of moral debates. No it is not lol. And I strongly suggest you re-read what I wrote because it appears to have bypassed you entirely.

[deleted]

Re: The Wikimedia Foundation's acceptance of cryptocurrency donations

#30

Post by op00to »

foobank wrote: post #9

Disclaimer: I have no assets or vested interest in cryotocurrency. The author doesn't like cryptocurrencies and is articulate in describing why. The author is free to support and use alternate payment methods. Others seem to like cryptocurrencies. There are harms in its use, as with many actions. Does the author refuse to use airplanes too?

I’m sorry, does Wikipedia now take donations in airplanes? Or are you making an ad hominem attack?
Post reply on HN