4 ms·

I definitely support the notion of moving from platforms to protocols, at least in theory. I do think you're going to run into the need to regulate wherever com

I definitely support the notion of moving from platforms to protocols, at least in theory. I do think you're going to run into the need to regulate wherever communication starts impinging on not-purely-informational constructs, like securities. I really hope that gambling on GME is not a "major part" of a significant number of people's lives.

YinglingLight 6y ago
But the aftermath of elite HedgeFunds shorting companies that employ us peasants sure as hell does.
alangibson 6y ago
I was thinking more about being able to trade online, not GME specifically. TBH 'protocols not platforms' has become kind of a slogan lately, but history doesn't make it look too promising. Email is a protocol, but it has largely been dominated by Google. A really compelling product can capture a protocol.
- soperj 6y ago
  Realistically though nothing at this moment can supplant gmail without people willing to move away from gmail. They make it hard for people to do their own thing because they spam filter out legitimate email coming from domains that they don't like.
- m-chrzan 6y ago
  Could it be that people are just so used to platforms, that even in the case of the email protocol, they prefer to jump onto the Gmail platform that abstracts away from the protocol and provides a nice, easy to use platform? If so, "protocols, not platforms" remains justified, and proponents might hope that as people get more comfortable with protocols, they will drift away not only from the Facebooks and Twitters of the world, but also the Gmails. For me personally, even if we end up with large players offering the largest (presumably most product-focused) instances of various protocols (Gmail with email, imagine Tiwtter hosting the largest Mastodon instance, Discord providing Matrix hosting), the fact I have the freedom to federate and set up my own instance or pay a smaller provider that will respect my privacy, is still a much better situation than the current "platforms, no protocols".
  - navait 6y ago
    For me at least, it's the anti-spam features, and automatic sorting of mail.
- rlayton2 6y ago
  True but I just migrated my email away from gmail due to "general google worries" and most colleagues dont realise Ive changed and continue to email me
  - andybak 6y ago
    Set up a redirect for a year or so. In future use a domain you own as the email address and redirect to your email provider.
- rejectfinite 6y ago
  >but it has largely been dominated by Google. Maybe anecdotal every company in my experience is on Office 365. Most private people here have hotmail/outlook as they where first before gmail.
heimatau 6y ago
> I really hope that gambling on GME is not a "major part" of a significant number of people's lives. It's a major part of the mega wealthy's lives. They've profited in this pandemic and it's not because of the fundamentals. Shorts squeeze the market too much but they ( hedge funds) should be responsible adults and take their losses. Not force Robinhood to unethically force sell it's massive user base to liquidate b/c their system bit their biggest customer. We're about to see whether the people actually have rights or if this is actually a class warfare situation. I suspect it's the latter.
- dvt 6y ago
  > I suspect it's the latter. It's absolutely the latter. GME is a meme stock that people will forget about in 3 months. If 2008 didn't cause anyone to go to jail (where millions lost their houses and retirements), manipulating a short squeeze on a failing company certainly won't.

YinglingLight 6y ago

But the aftermath of elite HedgeFunds shorting companies that employ us peasants sure as hell does.

alangibson 6y ago

I was thinking more about being able to trade online, not GME specifically. TBH 'protocols not platforms' has become kind of a slogan lately, but history doesn't make it look too promising. Email is a protocol, but it has largely been dominated by Google. A really compelling product can capture a protocol.

soperj 6y ago
Realistically though nothing at this moment can supplant gmail without people willing to move away from gmail. They make it hard for people to do their own thing because they spam filter out legitimate email coming from domains that they don't like.
m-chrzan 6y ago
Could it be that people are just so used to platforms, that even in the case of the email protocol, they prefer to jump onto the Gmail platform that abstracts away from the protocol and provides a nice, easy to use platform? If so, "protocols, not platforms" remains justified, and proponents might hope that as people get more comfortable with protocols, they will drift away not only from the Facebooks and Twitters of the world, but also the Gmails. For me personally, even if we end up with large players offering the largest (presumably most product-focused) instances of various protocols (Gmail with email, imagine Tiwtter hosting the largest Mastodon instance, Discord providing Matrix hosting), the fact I have the freedom to federate and set up my own instance or pay a smaller provider that will respect my privacy, is still a much better situation than the current "platforms, no protocols".
- navait 6y ago
  For me at least, it's the anti-spam features, and automatic sorting of mail.
rlayton2 6y ago
True but I just migrated my email away from gmail due to "general google worries" and most colleagues dont realise Ive changed and continue to email me
- andybak 6y ago
  Set up a redirect for a year or so. In future use a domain you own as the email address and redirect to your email provider.
rejectfinite 6y ago
>but it has largely been dominated by Google. Maybe anecdotal every company in my experience is on Office 365. Most private people here have hotmail/outlook as they where first before gmail.

heimatau 6y ago

> I really hope that gambling on GME is not a "major part" of a significant number of people's lives. It's a major part of the mega wealthy's lives. They've profited in this pandemic and it's not because of the fundamentals. Shorts squeeze the market too much but they ( hedge funds) should be responsible adults and take their losses. Not force Robinhood to unethically force sell it's massive user base to liquidate b/c their system bit their biggest customer. We're about to see whether the people actually have rights or if this is actually a class warfare situation. I suspect it's the latter.

dvt 6y ago
> I suspect it's the latter. It's absolutely the latter. GME is a meme stock that people will forget about in 3 months. If 2008 didn't cause anyone to go to jail (where millions lost their houses and retirements), manipulating a short squeeze on a failing company certainly won't.