3 ms·

Intent.

by desumeku 2y ago

Intent.

from-nibly 2y ago
Cryptocurrency is an object, it can't have any intent.
- desumeku 2y ago
  This may be news, but most objects are made by people, who are quite capable of having intent.
  - SecretDreams 2y ago
    I reject your intent to educate!
  - from-nibly 2y ago
    That was my point. It's the people who have intent.
ForTheKidz 2y ago
Why does that matter in this case?
- desumeku 2y ago
  I also wanted to say "function", because the main distinguishing factor is that 'real' crypto assets are designed to perform some economic or financial purpose whilst memecoins are not.
  - mrguyorama 2y ago
    What "economic or financial purpose" does bitcoin provide that could not be identically claimed by any "memecoin"? It's entire claim was to be a "payment network" that required no organization or anything behind it. This is equally true of any memecoin. People trade DOGE coin even though it was SUPPOSED to be meaningless. Plenty of memecoins have literally been the bitcoin code with a few strings and numbers changed.
  - ForTheKidz 2y ago
    > because the main distinguishing factor is that 'real' crypto assets are designed to perform some economic or financial purpose whilst memecoins are not This seems like dressing up intent in another phrase and treating it the same. Regardless of intent, crypto currencies mark avenues of mass transfers of economic value. Introducing intent just seems like an obvious way for people pushing crypto to avoid regulation despite pushing the same venues of mass transfers of economic value. It doesn't matter if people had good intents, the behavior itself still must be punished for guidelines to make any sense. At the end of the institution of chattel slavery in the south, the justification wasn't economic, it was moral. (At least in popular, individual conception of the discourse.) To "free" enslaved people was to release uneducated, unprepared people to the world, unprepared to take care of themselves. It was clearly a moral motivation, even if extremely misguided and bigoted. Why would we particularly care about intent here when it's more difficult to come up with a plan for this "coin" where people are not obviously misled and misguided? Surely people would push that "great businessmen" or however you term rich people are better at guiding financial policy allegedly directed by democratic control. (Certainly, crypto offers basically no democratic control outside of control of crypto itself.)
    - desumeku 2y ago
      > Certainly, crypto offers basically no democratic control outside of control of crypto itself. "For the hardcore neo-reactionaries, democracy is not merely doomed, it is doom itself. Fleeing it approaches an ultimate imperative. [...] Predisposed, in any case, to perceive the politically awakened masses as a howling irrational mob, it conceives the dynamics of democratization as fundamentally degenerative: systematically consolidating and exacerbating private vices, resentments, and deficiencies until they reach the level of collective criminality and comprehensive social corruption. The democratic politician and the electorate are bound together by a circuit of reciprocal incitement, in which each side drives the other to ever more shameless extremities of hooting, prancing cannibalism, until the only alternative to shouting is being eaten."

Intent.

from-nibly 2y ago

Cryptocurrency is an object, it can't have any intent.

desumeku 2y ago
This may be news, but most objects are made by people, who are quite capable of having intent.
- SecretDreams 2y ago
  I reject your intent to educate!
- from-nibly 2y ago
  That was my point. It's the people who have intent.

ForTheKidz 2y ago

Why does that matter in this case?

desumeku 2y ago
I also wanted to say "function", because the main distinguishing factor is that 'real' crypto assets are designed to perform some economic or financial purpose whilst memecoins are not.
- mrguyorama 2y ago
  What "economic or financial purpose" does bitcoin provide that could not be identically claimed by any "memecoin"? It's entire claim was to be a "payment network" that required no organization or anything behind it. This is equally true of any memecoin. People trade DOGE coin even though it was SUPPOSED to be meaningless. Plenty of memecoins have literally been the bitcoin code with a few strings and numbers changed.
- ForTheKidz 2y ago
  > because the main distinguishing factor is that 'real' crypto assets are designed to perform some economic or financial purpose whilst memecoins are not This seems like dressing up intent in another phrase and treating it the same. Regardless of intent, crypto currencies mark avenues of mass transfers of economic value. Introducing intent just seems like an obvious way for people pushing crypto to avoid regulation despite pushing the same venues of mass transfers of economic value. It doesn't matter if people had good intents, the behavior itself still must be punished for guidelines to make any sense. At the end of the institution of chattel slavery in the south, the justification wasn't economic, it was moral. (At least in popular, individual conception of the discourse.) To "free" enslaved people was to release uneducated, unprepared people to the world, unprepared to take care of themselves. It was clearly a moral motivation, even if extremely misguided and bigoted. Why would we particularly care about intent here when it's more difficult to come up with a plan for this "coin" where people are not obviously misled and misguided? Surely people would push that "great businessmen" or however you term rich people are better at guiding financial policy allegedly directed by democratic control. (Certainly, crypto offers basically no democratic control outside of control of crypto itself.)
  - desumeku 2y ago
    > Certainly, crypto offers basically no democratic control outside of control of crypto itself. "For the hardcore neo-reactionaries, democracy is not merely doomed, it is doom itself. Fleeing it approaches an ultimate imperative. [...] Predisposed, in any case, to perceive the politically awakened masses as a howling irrational mob, it conceives the dynamics of democratization as fundamentally degenerative: systematically consolidating and exacerbating private vices, resentments, and deficiencies until they reach the level of collective criminality and comprehensive social corruption. The democratic politician and the electorate are bound together by a circuit of reciprocal incitement, in which each side drives the other to ever more shameless extremities of hooting, prancing cannibalism, until the only alternative to shouting is being eaten."