4 ms·
ipfs and other per to per systems sound like cool idea but 1 it isn't what he/she/them ask (ask for legislation and policies) 2 sound like something that faster
by imachine1980_ 4y ago
ipfs and other per to per systems sound like cool idea but
1 it isn't what he/she/them ask (ask for legislation and policies)
2 sound like something that faster than later will be heavily monitored, in the same way that bitcoin is now.
3 the web3 part which at least for ME now feel like mess of bad ideas, that doesn't solve real problems, and pyramid schemes financed by vc who can't care less about privacy.
- arthurcolle 4y agoAny reason you chose to use per to per vs. peer to peer? Just wondering if I'm missing a fun reference
- imachine1980_ 4y agono,erratum
- throwawaycities 4y ago>but 1 it isn't what he/she/them ask (ask for legislation and policies) Exactly, the problem is asking for law/policy/regulation to solve the problem when it is the problem. In the words of Cypherpunk and EFF Founder John Gilmore: “I want a guarantee -- with physics and mathematics, not with laws -- that we can give ourselves real privacy of personal communications."
- GTP 4y ago>Exactly, the problem is asking for law/policy/regulation to solve the problem when it is the problem One thing is privacy, another is copyright. You already have laws protecting your privacy, cryptography is a way of enforcing them. But if copyright law is a mess, it would be a good idea to reflect about how to improve it.