bigger_inside

14 ms·

121.
by bigger_inside 5y ago
I've honestly been wanting to give Telegram money.
122.
by bigger_inside 5y ago
finally, Mario Party explained? I wonder whether that went into the design of the game.
123.
by bigger_inside 5y ago
"Money Laundering" is the narrative that always drives monetary controls, and by inference, when they're successful, everything that's not under digital surveillance is under suspicion of money-laundering. In practice, A
124.
by bigger_inside 5y ago
exactly. corporate capitalism killed innovation; the poisons are liability, intellectual property, and monopolization in tech that uses the first two in the starting lanes to stop competition, and buyouts if competition makes it to the fini
125.
by bigger_inside 5y ago
which they are, of course, statistically more likely to be in this instance. https://www.amazon.com/Police-Wife-Epidemic-Domestic-Violenc...
126.
by bigger_inside 5y ago
The dollar system is built on eternal growth and the oil economy, and its proof of work is endless wars. I'll take bitcoin and monero any day; they're much, much greener than what we currently have.
127.
by bigger_inside 5y ago
calling it "child safety features" in a report ON it is its own kind of propaganda collaboration
128.
by bigger_inside 5y ago
bad, horrible, buzzfeed-y article. you all remember the history, right? It's fabled. The idea that there is "internet addiction" comes from a literal joke. Cypherpunk pioneer Ivan Goldberg, 1994, posts a list of criteria for
129.
by bigger_inside 5y ago
I'm of two minds on this. We all hate getting calls and mail from people and being hounded time and time again - in fact, I have a certain history of blocking people just for that. So all the anger is understandable. I share that annoy
130.
by bigger_inside 5y ago
Also, only entertainment companies are allowed to push your buttons, outrage you, grind your gears and send you into a tailspin of social media "criticism" of that content, because that is their attention economy business model. I
131.
by bigger_inside 5y ago
well, I hadn't thought about it as accelerationism, and I'll have to think about it more. It's a good point. My first reaction would be that it actually does help in steps beyond just strengthening existing structures, like I
132.
by bigger_inside 5y ago
you're mistaking me for a libertarian. Which is understandable, because you run into so many of those in the bitcoin space, so no hard feeling! :D They irritate me as well. The problem with the current system is obviously not that it&#
133.
by bigger_inside 5y ago
that "would" in your shift argument is already reality, that's the lightning network, which transmits bitcoin off-chain for pennies, but in a decentralized way, because it utilizes existing bitcoin balances on lightning nodes
134.
by bigger_inside 5y ago
...and the US military effectively backs the dollar, which makes this the energy footprint of the dollar. meanwhile, gold stripmines the soil in poor countries, where children die in mines, while the loot is carried off to the west, AND it
135.
by bigger_inside 5y ago
not OP. But the less-buzzwordy argument is this: the existence of money itself isn't the problem. The problem is that the modern monetary system is built on inflation and supermassive debt, and this combination has a bunch of highly ne
136.
by bigger_inside 5y ago
True, the basic lines were set in the original development, that is true. Yet, they continue to be followed by this swarm, which is continuous consent; they could all stop and do something else, but every attempt at that has created largely
137.
by bigger_inside 5y ago
no, the devs can't unilaterally make decisions on how the network works. There are decentralized nodes (very low-barrier to entry) that run the code; the nodes must actually run that code, and devs have no control over it. Then there a