Are you going to elaborate on where you disagree, or just “no ur wrong :( :(. Stop bullying my favorite grift”
On the drug trade issue? I’m clearly mostly focusing on all the other ways crypto is fucking stupid bullshit for people that don’t understand technology.
But I don’t think an entirely unregulated market with “anonymous user reviews” is really the smartest or best way to buy drugs.
Alright on break so it’s gonna be shorter but feel free to reply if you want to continue later.
The first aspect of your reply was conflating developers of crypto and especially the initial intent with bad actors who’ve latched on and USED IT for scams, gifts, etc… I don’t see how that’s a crypto specific critique at all, people scam and grift with essentially any form of ownership or commerce, seemingly that’s just shitty human nature.
I work in the financial industry (blech but it pays the bills) and you see the same shit happen here even with the huge amounts of regulation that are applied, plus all the regulation came AFTER. Which is what I am assuming will happen with crypto as well as it continues to mature.
It’s really not all that complicated to understand/use but it’s certainly not as easy currently as just swiping a debit card, with that said though how many people do you know actually understand how their card functionally transmits money? Likely very few because you don’t really need to if it works.
The electricity usage argument is partially fair, however I would love to see how much energy is required to run the already existing non-crypto payment methods, I have never once seen a single attempt at a comparison but I would wager it’s likely extremely close.
Everything is politics because politics and the policies that come from it dictate our lives, there’s nothing more inherently political about crypto though then any other form of payment could be when put under the microscope.
On the point if “accountability is for the people who design build maintain use and moderate a program” I’d ask you to apply that logic to other things in your life.
If you had a glass cup, broke it and used the edge to cut someone, is that the fault of the glass cup designer for not making an indestructible glass cup that couldn’t possibly be used as a weapon? No right, because it’s not possible to completely control what someone else does with a product, you can build in safety guardrails all you want but someone will find a way to missus it, which is where laws come in.
On the point of forking out transactions they don’t like, that’s where you lost me entirely, that’s simply not how it works and it’d be a huge undertaking to explain why that doesn’t make sense.
Then going back to accountability you use CP as an example, do you think the users web browser should prevent them from posting CP? How could that possibly be accomplished? Goes back to my point about enforcement mechanisms outside of the system being our only real option in a ton of already existing technology, but by your logic they’re all just vehicles for misuse.
Crypto currencies aren’t open vessels which can be used for a vast multitude of things. They’re currencies. Defending them on the basis of “what about web browsers”.
They’re not web browsers, which are designed to connect users to the Internet, they don’t allow someone to airdrop a photo of your front door into a virtual wallet without you at least consenting to the service used.
It’s a bit different when the developers and early adopters are the ones perpetuating the grift. It’s a digital money system with aggressive deflation and unregulated trading. Fraud is natural? Not coding to prevent fraud is implicit permission to commit fraud. Crypto didn’t spawn out of a vacuum. They didn’t somehow not know their virtual fake money was going to be used to grift and scam people.
Regular banking transactions cost fractions of a cent in electricity, as they don’t have to do exhaustive amounts of proof of work. Bitcoins value is somewhat tied to the electrical cost of generating a bitcoin.
Hilarious, again to suggest that the creators of fake, unregulated stock markets for fake money are in any way not aware that they can be used for very real scam and fraud and are thus y’know, responsible to regulate it or responsible for the unregulated damage.
A physical object with physical design limitations. A thing that can then physically be broken and abused, not software that can be abused well within the design limitations. Memeable.
Name one of the developers and early adopters of a non-scam crypto like bitcoin (debatable at this point with lightning network being shoehorned in) or ethereum that is a grifter. Scammers making scam coins doesn’t mean all crypto or people who are for crypto are scammers.
Crypto didn’t spawn out of a vacuum, it came from earlier technologies like hashcash that was intended to prevent spam due to requiring a cost (PoW) in order to send the email. For bitcoin, go read the bitcoin white paper to see what the initial intention was.
Regular banking requires more people to manage those funds, think about how many skyscrapers for banks or other financial institutions you’ve seen, a lot of those jobs (and all the electricity requirement that goes into doing their jobs in that office) wouldn’t be necessary due to how crypto functions. If you were to take away all those jobs at once with a crypto solution, I believe it would be a net negative in energy usage, or at the very least not an increase.
That’s entirely speculation but one I don’t see many people entertain at all, they just see the energy usage for PoW coins (which ETH isn’t anymore BTW) and without any reasonable frame of reference (besides small countries because that’s shocking) come to the conclusion that crypto bad because it uses energy.
Bad actors do bad actions, that doesn’t mean the technology itself is bad, there’s been a lot of real development in this space in the 14 or so years I’ve been following it that you completely undercut out of ignorance and preconceptions.
There’s no fundamental difference, a tool is a tool, and people will find ways to abuse those tools, all we can reasonably do is attempt to prevent that to a reasonable extent (again going back to the glass example, we physically can’t yet make a glass that can’t be broken) and depend on external enforcement mechanisms like government.
Doesn’t help our current govt in the US is coopted by a fascist mafia Don who’s actively scamming with his own garbage coin.
Edit: I figure you might latch into my point about financial industry jobs and figured I’d point out my opinion on that concept https://sh.itjust.works/comment/17763409
You clearly don’t know what you’re talking about.
Are you going to elaborate on where you disagree, or just “no ur wrong :( :(. Stop bullying my favorite grift”
On the drug trade issue? I’m clearly mostly focusing on all the other ways crypto is fucking stupid bullshit for people that don’t understand technology.
But I don’t think an entirely unregulated market with “anonymous user reviews” is really the smartest or best way to buy drugs.
Alright on break so it’s gonna be shorter but feel free to reply if you want to continue later.
The first aspect of your reply was conflating developers of crypto and especially the initial intent with bad actors who’ve latched on and USED IT for scams, gifts, etc… I don’t see how that’s a crypto specific critique at all, people scam and grift with essentially any form of ownership or commerce, seemingly that’s just shitty human nature.
I work in the financial industry (blech but it pays the bills) and you see the same shit happen here even with the huge amounts of regulation that are applied, plus all the regulation came AFTER. Which is what I am assuming will happen with crypto as well as it continues to mature.
It’s really not all that complicated to understand/use but it’s certainly not as easy currently as just swiping a debit card, with that said though how many people do you know actually understand how their card functionally transmits money? Likely very few because you don’t really need to if it works.
The electricity usage argument is partially fair, however I would love to see how much energy is required to run the already existing non-crypto payment methods, I have never once seen a single attempt at a comparison but I would wager it’s likely extremely close.
Everything is politics because politics and the policies that come from it dictate our lives, there’s nothing more inherently political about crypto though then any other form of payment could be when put under the microscope.
On the point if “accountability is for the people who design build maintain use and moderate a program” I’d ask you to apply that logic to other things in your life.
If you had a glass cup, broke it and used the edge to cut someone, is that the fault of the glass cup designer for not making an indestructible glass cup that couldn’t possibly be used as a weapon? No right, because it’s not possible to completely control what someone else does with a product, you can build in safety guardrails all you want but someone will find a way to missus it, which is where laws come in.
On the point of forking out transactions they don’t like, that’s where you lost me entirely, that’s simply not how it works and it’d be a huge undertaking to explain why that doesn’t make sense.
Then going back to accountability you use CP as an example, do you think the users web browser should prevent them from posting CP? How could that possibly be accomplished? Goes back to my point about enforcement mechanisms outside of the system being our only real option in a ton of already existing technology, but by your logic they’re all just vehicles for misuse.
Crypto currencies aren’t open vessels which can be used for a vast multitude of things. They’re currencies. Defending them on the basis of “what about web browsers”. They’re not web browsers, which are designed to connect users to the Internet, they don’t allow someone to airdrop a photo of your front door into a virtual wallet without you at least consenting to the service used.
They actually are that open, there’s nothing forcing it to be used only as a currency that’s why NFTs are a thing, it’s just code.
It’s a bit different when the developers and early adopters are the ones perpetuating the grift. It’s a digital money system with aggressive deflation and unregulated trading. Fraud is natural? Not coding to prevent fraud is implicit permission to commit fraud. Crypto didn’t spawn out of a vacuum. They didn’t somehow not know their virtual fake money was going to be used to grift and scam people.
Regular banking transactions cost fractions of a cent in electricity, as they don’t have to do exhaustive amounts of proof of work. Bitcoins value is somewhat tied to the electrical cost of generating a bitcoin.
Hilarious, again to suggest that the creators of fake, unregulated stock markets for fake money are in any way not aware that they can be used for very real scam and fraud and are thus y’know, responsible to regulate it or responsible for the unregulated damage.
A physical object with physical design limitations. A thing that can then physically be broken and abused, not software that can be abused well within the design limitations. Memeable.
Name one of the developers and early adopters of a non-scam crypto like bitcoin (debatable at this point with lightning network being shoehorned in) or ethereum that is a grifter. Scammers making scam coins doesn’t mean all crypto or people who are for crypto are scammers.
Crypto didn’t spawn out of a vacuum, it came from earlier technologies like hashcash that was intended to prevent spam due to requiring a cost (PoW) in order to send the email. For bitcoin, go read the bitcoin white paper to see what the initial intention was.
Regular banking requires more people to manage those funds, think about how many skyscrapers for banks or other financial institutions you’ve seen, a lot of those jobs (and all the electricity requirement that goes into doing their jobs in that office) wouldn’t be necessary due to how crypto functions. If you were to take away all those jobs at once with a crypto solution, I believe it would be a net negative in energy usage, or at the very least not an increase.
That’s entirely speculation but one I don’t see many people entertain at all, they just see the energy usage for PoW coins (which ETH isn’t anymore BTW) and without any reasonable frame of reference (besides small countries because that’s shocking) come to the conclusion that crypto bad because it uses energy.
Bad actors do bad actions, that doesn’t mean the technology itself is bad, there’s been a lot of real development in this space in the 14 or so years I’ve been following it that you completely undercut out of ignorance and preconceptions.
There’s no fundamental difference, a tool is a tool, and people will find ways to abuse those tools, all we can reasonably do is attempt to prevent that to a reasonable extent (again going back to the glass example, we physically can’t yet make a glass that can’t be broken) and depend on external enforcement mechanisms like government.
Doesn’t help our current govt in the US is coopted by a fascist mafia Don who’s actively scamming with his own garbage coin.
Edit: I figure you might latch into my point about financial industry jobs and figured I’d point out my opinion on that concept https://sh.itjust.works/comment/17763409
I am working so I can’t right now, but sure later I’ll give more specific critiques.