3 ms·
[Oh shoot, did you edit your parent reply later on? Wondering if my above reply was meant for another message.] Re: "DAOs with currency is just feudalism redon
by reginold 5y ago
[Oh shoot, did you edit your parent reply later on? Wondering if my above reply was meant for another message.]
Re: "DAOs with currency is just feudalism redone" - I like the way you put this. There does seem to be this kind of land grab where giving ownership somehow changes everything.
Re: Self-hosted currencies in small communities - this one I'm less curious about so am wondering what you see in it. Would the 15,000 cryptocurrencies in existence today start to meet this criteria of different currencies across many different communities?
Re: Cryptocurrency with a built in decay rate - also interesting to think about. Kind of like having a digital tomato or something, it must be used before it molds. I've heard Dogecoin has a high issuance rate, I wonder if that would apply. My sense is it's hard to disconnect from everything else though, and if I had a bunch of rotting tomatoes I would convert them to something more stable (tomato sauce, or trade them for money) unless I had immediate utility for tomatoes.
Re: your above point about nocoiners having more of a disconnected view, agreed. Curious what you think of my comment here on this, speculating that as more of the world becomes a financial instrument, it gets harder and harder to be a nocoiner. In that case we must figure out how to be curious while having/talking our book: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29297148 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29297148
Like I said, would love to find a place for more discussions like this with you, more distance than the "to the moon", but less technical than an https://ethresear.ch https://ethresear.ch.
- igorkraw 5y agono, i didn't edit the first one, maybe you meant to reply to svennek. communitycoins: these are interesting because they'd be small-people-fiat, giving tiny communities the possibility to bootstrap mini-economies and then linking into some federated system according to some rules and based on people vouching for them. notably, they'd be the inverse of todays crypto- nonanonymous, consensus based on trust. re decaying currencies: yeah, but then you'd need to buy an explicit store of value, and especially if money decays fast, whoever sells that to you will need to get rid of it again. but i think this one would be an experiment in money the same way gopher and gemini are experiments in hypertext Re your comment: I think it doesn't quite hold, because I can buy shares in the VT index and can then talk about it without needing to hype it - the underlying value is highly independent of people's opinions because everyone eats,shits and dies and so needs the commodities and services provided by the underlying companies (in the long run). I think it is only the most hype-dependent securities like cryptocurrency and Tesla where the underlying is questionable and so bag holders feel the need to defend their investment quite literally (note to all the true believers in either:relax, I said questionable, not nonexistent, if I'm wrong with my opinion you can pay someone to laugh at me later) Honestly, I think it needs to be specialises forums or side threads like this, any crypto community will be overrun by the moonboys and libertarians too quickly.