5 ms·

This is just so wrong in so many different ways, it actually fills me with despair to think that there are people somewhere who actually think this is in some w

by astoor 5y ago

This is just so wrong in so many different ways, it actually fills me with despair to think that there are people somewhere who actually think this is in some ways a good idea. To the point of wondering if there is some way of organising more direct action to stop this kind of disaster from befalling the human race.

ganzuul 5y ago
At some point one needs to assume it is no longer a matter of ignorance, but instead one of malice. Not sure if this is near that point. Perhaps this guy is simply a fluff bunny who has never seen any evil in this world.
- ramesh31 5y ago
  >Perhaps this guy is simply a fluff bunny who has never seen any evil in this world. Having met Altman, "fluffy bunny" is not a too far off assessment.
  - astoor 5y ago
    I know there's the whole "never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence", but is incompetence a more likely path to becoming a billionaire?
- anonporridge 5y ago
  Maybe it's not quite malice. Is there a word for knowingly becoming the villain because you've decided that the force of Moloch in civilization is unstoppable and if it's not you who uses your power to take control of something vulnerable and weak, someone else eventually will, and they might actually be malicious.
shafyy 5y ago
This might be an onpopular opinion on here, but I think that software (and hardware) development needs to be regulated, similar to pharma or other regulated industries. The regulation can take into account several factors to make the barrier for smaller projects not too high.
- hobofan 5y ago
  So what roughly would you regulate about "software (and hardware) development"? FYI this project (and basically every cryptocurrency project) already falls under some kind of financial regulation in most jurisdictions.
  - shafyy 5y ago
    The basic idea I have is that when you bring to market a new technological product, you need to register it with your government/jurisdiction and depending on a few params (maybe company size, revenue, funding, industry/vertical etc.) provide more information. Similar to tax and accounting regulations, as you grow these regulations grow, too. For example you might need to provide risks and threats analyses for your technology. You're liable to provide this information to the best of your ability given context (e.g., they wouldn't require a 30 page risk analysis from a indie hacker who has 20 users). If it turns out that you provided false information delibrately, or acted in bad faith, there are consequences like fines, bans, and so on. Of course, based on your technology the government can prohbit you from bringing it to market, add constraints or require more info.
    - waldohatesyou 5y ago
      How confident are you that the government could accurately assess the risk of any technology? Why couldn't I just write the same risks for any given social networking site and copy-paste it every single time I was faced with a compliance form like the one you described. This all just sounds like an exercise in pointless box ticking but that just might be my deep skepticism of governments talking.
      - csee 5y ago
        Even if they could assess those risks, how confident are we that the government wouldn't err far too much on the side of risk aversion? Bureaucrats and politicians would see no upside in allowing a medium-risk high-reward venture to go ahead, since the outcome is binary for them - get the same salary regardless or get fired if something goes wrong. I think the idea is terrible. You want laws to be prescribed and debated, not allow some administrators to make shit up on the spot.
NoGravitas 5y ago
I should think the types of direct action needed against crypto scams are pretty straightforward, but I also think site policy largely prevents me from elaborating on them here.

by astoor 5y ago

ganzuul 5y ago

At some point one needs to assume it is no longer a matter of ignorance, but instead one of malice. Not sure if this is near that point. Perhaps this guy is simply a fluff bunny who has never seen any evil in this world.

ramesh31 5y ago
>Perhaps this guy is simply a fluff bunny who has never seen any evil in this world. Having met Altman, "fluffy bunny" is not a too far off assessment.
- astoor 5y ago
  I know there's the whole "never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence", but is incompetence a more likely path to becoming a billionaire?
anonporridge 5y ago
Maybe it's not quite malice. Is there a word for knowingly becoming the villain because you've decided that the force of Moloch in civilization is unstoppable and if it's not you who uses your power to take control of something vulnerable and weak, someone else eventually will, and they might actually be malicious.

shafyy 5y ago

This might be an onpopular opinion on here, but I think that software (and hardware) development needs to be regulated, similar to pharma or other regulated industries. The regulation can take into account several factors to make the barrier for smaller projects not too high.

hobofan 5y ago
So what roughly would you regulate about "software (and hardware) development"? FYI this project (and basically every cryptocurrency project) already falls under some kind of financial regulation in most jurisdictions.
- shafyy 5y ago
  The basic idea I have is that when you bring to market a new technological product, you need to register it with your government/jurisdiction and depending on a few params (maybe company size, revenue, funding, industry/vertical etc.) provide more information. Similar to tax and accounting regulations, as you grow these regulations grow, too. For example you might need to provide risks and threats analyses for your technology. You're liable to provide this information to the best of your ability given context (e.g., they wouldn't require a 30 page risk analysis from a indie hacker who has 20 users). If it turns out that you provided false information delibrately, or acted in bad faith, there are consequences like fines, bans, and so on. Of course, based on your technology the government can prohbit you from bringing it to market, add constraints or require more info.
  - waldohatesyou 5y ago
    How confident are you that the government could accurately assess the risk of any technology? Why couldn't I just write the same risks for any given social networking site and copy-paste it every single time I was faced with a compliance form like the one you described. This all just sounds like an exercise in pointless box ticking but that just might be my deep skepticism of governments talking.
    - csee 5y ago
      Even if they could assess those risks, how confident are we that the government wouldn't err far too much on the side of risk aversion? Bureaucrats and politicians would see no upside in allowing a medium-risk high-reward venture to go ahead, since the outcome is binary for them - get the same salary regardless or get fired if something goes wrong. I think the idea is terrible. You want laws to be prescribed and debated, not allow some administrators to make shit up on the spot.

NoGravitas 5y ago

I should think the types of direct action needed against crypto scams are pretty straightforward, but I also think site policy largely prevents me from elaborating on them here.