211–220 of 1001 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> middle aged woman who still calls every video game system "a Nintendo". Using a middle aged woman as a stand-in for technologically unsophisticated user is a pretty negative stereotype both of older people and women: https://geekfeminism.fandom.com/wiki/So_simple,_your_mother_...
yes, now I use "C-Suite manager" instead. "So simple, a C-Suite manager could do it"
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What about proof of stake chains, do you reject those too? How many companies with huge carbon footprint do you reject? What about cows did you reject them?
In my view it is only proof-of-work systems that must be rejected. Alternatives that are less harmful are possible. Pretty much everything that has a large carbon footprint is going to have to be fixed to reduce that footprint, including web3.
The increase in development velocity using services like alchemy and pinata is astounding (I remember spending a month writing a stupid nft app in 2017 which now only takes a weekend.) I think these services are here to stay but they ultimately undermine decentralization.
I'm optimistic for the future of web3. :)
> People don’t want to run their own servers, and never will This kind of gets at the reason why I think a lot of tech articles/blogs about what the future will be like are just terrible. The wants of someone who is driven enough read and write about the bleeding edge of technology are very, very different from the general population. Like this author says, most people don't want to run their own web server, but I'd…
What do we mean by this? I feel like it's a matter of OS improvement that will enable people to manage the software side of their own servers in as little (or less) effort than managing cloud platforms or even VPCs. Ideally in a standard way. Why is learning Dropbox any easier than learning to copy a file to some other FTP serving software? The clouds are just making $$ to support you, though that often turns on it's…
The upcoming generation..even the 'non-tech' people are tech-savvy, meaning most could probably get arch linux up and running at least via a distro or follow the docs, etc...where there parents would fail.
the problem is they need to create something w/ a big enough value proposition but at the same time, easy enough for the masses to assimilate and understand it, and that serves enough utility to make it worth it.
Something like an actual currency w/ basic income dividends (taxed $ goes to lowest 50% who have a minimum utilization score), and identity/fraud management, that has a built in tax and cap system so whales can't abuse it, and zero transaction fees, instead fees are taxes for hodling and lack of utilizing (less daily/weekly transactions lower your utilization score, so you might lose a couple coins/day until you start spending more). Fraud/ID comes in handy here so you can't just spend it to yourself or other accounts you own. 1:1 only.
It'd need wide adoption to make utilization scores accessible, and maybe the price be pegged at or near a loaf of bread... and somehow make that global to be a universal price-setter to.. like say it's 1000 x currency for a loaf of bread in X country and 100y currency for a loaf of bread in y country, the c (coin) to y trade rate would be 100:1, and 1000:1 for x.
I also feel that decentralization can be bad, full democratization is good, and DAO's would be good assuming every member gets equal voting rights (protect against whales), but sometimes esp. in the beginning centralized aspects like identity verifiers could go a long way towards building something resilient, and make tweaks/iterate changes faster than blockchain tech, and then when the tech is more sound in 10 years, move 100% decentralized... or only parts if that's what the org votes on....etc...
When this expands to include metaverse it even becomes more important to have liquid democracy at its core, to ensure fairness and that companies don't control everything.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> middle aged woman who still calls every video game system "a Nintendo". Using a middle aged woman as a stand-in for technologically unsophisticated user is a pretty negative stereotype both of older people and women: https://geekfeminism.fandom.com/wiki/So_simple,_your_mother_...
yes, now I use "C-Suite manager" instead. "So simple, a C-Suite manager could do it"
As much as I hate cryptocurrency as-it-exists, I'm very much into its potential. Untraceable (eg Monero) digital cash that settles instantly? That has the potential to disrupt societies. The problem is that most societies don't have a particular need of being disrupted, so people are perfectly content paying with their credit cards, and why shouldn't they be? The UX is better and the banks are fine as long as they do…
Untraceable digital cash facilitates crime, money laundering and tax evasion. None of these things are good for a stable democracy.
If you care about the environment even a little bit (like turning off lights in rooms you're not occupying) then you will reject Web3. Even the most efficient blockchains use more energy than the status quo unnecessarily. This is also to say nothing of the fact that it's more expensive per USD/KB transferred, slower and more complicated. I think what Web3 should be is a way to use your laptop or any commodity compute…
> this comment could be saved on my computer, but accessible to everyone viewing even if my computer is off via caching
It sounds to me like you're just renaming datacenters from "origin" to "cache", without any meaningful difference in how the data is stored and retrieved in practice.
I was under the impression that crypto currency was thought of as nothing but yet another pyramid scheme.
By definition something with a finite supply cannot be a pyramid scheme, in fact in most cases there are no parallels whatsoever to crypto and pyramid schemes. There are some pyramid schemes within the shitcoin scam and yield farmer communities, but to think that's represents the industry is highly ignorant.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Problem is who cares if you run your own servers when everyone you know is viewing NFTs through servers which are manipulating the data like Opensea is.
That's true, but if the NFTs show up on some places and not on others then you could start a "resistance" against the existing market places. Outside of DMCAs and other such legal requirements, an exchange needs to be impartial about the stuff being sold and published on there to remain credible. The cryptocurrency crowd is usually drawn to the decentralised, unregulated market, and OpenSea has turned out to be the e…
So it shows that people don't really care about (a) decentralisation or (b) manipulation of the true blockchain output.
> People don’t want to run their own servers, and never will This kind of gets at the reason why I think a lot of tech articles/blogs about what the future will be like are just terrible. The wants of someone who is driven enough read and write about the bleeding edge of technology are very, very different from the general population. Like this author says, most people don't want to run their own web server, but I'd…
IMO this diagnosis is still one level away from a more fundamental truism, which is that people don't want to pay anything for digital goods. Running servers can and has been massively simplified over the last couple decades, and I don't see any inherent technical barrier preventing it from being as simple as registering for an account on FB (i.e. anyone can do it). The deeper problem is the lack of willingness to pa…
Which brings up a different problem: Web3 assumes that everything you do online will cost money. Even assuming that fees go to zero, virtually nobody wants that. Web3 advocates will say that the money you earn will offset what you spend, but you only have to look at Patreon/Substack/OnlyFans earnings to see that it won't happen for most people.