That’s fair. However, I’d say anyone that is just fine with the deaths of >50,000 innocent people because of some tenuous revenge premise fall closer on the politicial spectrum to Reagan or Bush than anyone I’d even consider labelling a “liberal”.
I suspect you should listen to your own counterpoint:
Don’t walk down the street because someone might rob you.
Don’t use your computer because someone could hack you.
Don’t go swimming because it is possible to drown.
Throwing out the baby with the bathwater.
An uncensorable ledger not controlled by any one party is (at the very least) a valuable technology with unique abilities despite scammers using it for gambling.
The digital equivalent of uniqueness is (at the very least) a valuable technology with unique abilities despite assholes using it for Bored Apes.
Just because you can’t see the use case, doesn’t mean we need to stop innovating.
Scammers:
- don’t tend to share any of their their source code
- usually have an initial token allocation where insiders are given early access to more than 15% of tokens. (this one is a CRUCIAL)..Obviously, the best ITA is one where the tokens are 100% available to everyone at once.
- heavily market their cryptocurrency before it even has a use-case (most projects fall into this category)
- their governance is centralized to some charismatic Elon-bro that talks about price all the time
- don’t let you use any wallet you want (self-sovereignty is CRUCIAL)
- don’t give you access to your keys at all times (again, self-sovereignty)
- are usually just some governance token or ERC-20 or some quickly minted Solana token ($LIBRA $TRUMP $MELANIA were all obvious scams)
- never have a viable peer-reviewed white paper
- their code is NEVER formally verified by neutral parties
- use technologies that are not auditable
- use technologies that are not decentralized
I’ve spotted many scammers a mile away just starting with this list off the top of my head.
For instance, I am the moderator of infosec.pub/c/midnight and actually locked my own communities until I see the source code.
I like the tech from what they tell me. But, I can’t, in good conscience recommend it yet because it ticks some of the above scammer boxes.
Don’t call me buddy, guy!
You: “If you won’t spend your whole weekend on your smart phone, writing a paper for me complete with MLA formatted bibliography, you are wrong.”
https://jamesclear.com/book-summaries/confessions-of-an-economic-hitman
It was an abuse of banning, censoring, trolling, and brigading IIRC. I wrote your name down, though because you were one of the worst offenders.
Right on cue, one of the other notable genocide supporting trolls comes out of the woodwork to defend his bud.
Replying uselessly to comments you don’t like just to defend a censorship-happy neoliberal hivemind hotbed makes you look like a petty, bored, very gullible person.
Guy, you're the same person that was attacking people over their disapproval of a genocide only a few months ago. So, please just shut your fascist mouth.
lemmy.world
is too communist for you?!?!?
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
25
view more: next ›
Are there obvious, inherent pitfalls to deregulation of anything at all? Yes.
Is it absolutely necessary for it to exist? Also yes. Self sovereignty is both dangerous and absolutely necessary…unless you WANT Uncle Sam to be able to put a short time-limit on spending your tax return once they adopt a Central Bank Digital Currency (and they will). With a CBDC controlled by the Fed, we will be subject to money that expires and other features that feel like bugs that go hand in hand with a central power controlling a currency.
Agree to disagree then. You don’t seem to grasp my points and I don’t grasp yours. Peace.
As my rant above detailed, I’d be happy to give up my belongings if I lived in a truly communist society. But I don’t. So, I hold onto my possessions tightly since it is literally the way I survive.