Web3? I have my DAOts

Post by okareaman » Tue, Dec 07, 2021, 6:02 AM UTC

mattwilsonn888 wrote: post #45

Commentators on crypto will simply have to get used to this - because it isn't an argument. > For that same reason, I think people can genuinely believe they're obsessed with web3 because of its inherent interestingness when in fact it’s because web3 has made them a lot of money very quickly. The nature of crypto-currencies means that you are free to invest in protocols you believe will make money - either by providi…

Post by tshaddox » Tue, Dec 07, 2021, 6:07 AM UTC

jeroenhd wrote: post #16

TrackerFF wrote: post #8

RE: Censorship You often see advocates of decentralization hail networks for being pro-immutability, battling censorship. How does it deal with data you absolutely do _NOT_ want to be shared and propagated around? I'm talking about things like CP, terrorist media, fake news, scams/frauds, and what not.

In most cases, the answer is simple: you don't. For example, IPFS "solves" this by allowing requests for takedowns per gateway. The upside of IPFS is that you can go after every host, the downside is that everyone knows what content you visit. The network still propagates the illegal content, so you end up with a witch hunt. It's probably a good thing paedophiles haven't widely discovered IPFS+TOR.

Post by jtsiskin » Tue, Dec 07, 2021, 6:18 AM UTC

zepto wrote: post #204

Sohcahtoa82 wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

NFTs don't necessarily represent ownership of the underlying asset. They're like minting a commemorative coin celebrating the asset, and only minting a single coin. The coin does not represent ownership of the asset. It's just...a coin. A token. Supposedly, the uniqueness gives it value, but if I decide to record a single fart, that fart is unique, but the uniqueness does not inherently create value. An NFT for the M…

> NFTs don't necessarily represent ownership of the underlying asset They don’t ever .

Post by theK » Tue, Dec 07, 2021, 6:28 AM UTC

JacobThreeThree wrote: post #244

PragmaticPulp wrote: post #218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But publicly traded companies don't dilute their shareholders away. Those shares either have to be sold (meaning the company takes in proportional amounts of cash, driving the value up) or issued as compensation (which you can't just unilaterally in a publicly-traded company). Your gold example is also very contrived because the futures market doesn't literally dilute away physical gold. As for Bitcoin: You're missin…

BTC futures moves the price of BTC. So you don't even need any BTC to manipulate the price of BTC.

Post by lifeplusplus » Tue, Dec 07, 2021, 6:29 AM UTC

G3rn0ti wrote: post #298

Cryptos and Web3 are currently there where Web 1.0 was in the nineties. It was silly to order Pizza over the Internet like it was laughable listening to a baseball radio transmission over the internet instead using a … radio. LOL 20 years later everybody‘s ordering food over the internet while watching Netflix.