darawk

38 ms·

361.
by darawk 5y ago
> This is how "web1" operated all the time: People have a cool idea and fire up a webserver to host it. Self-Custody in its purest form. Web1 assets are not scarce, that's the difference. > Sure, others could copy it, b
362.
by darawk 5y ago
Well, again, in principle, NFTs can be used to represent ownership of anything. The current crop of NFTs I find just as silly and worthless as you do. However, I will note that even the current stuff is no more worthless than, e.g. a piece
363.
by darawk 5y ago
Facebook wasn't the first social network. Not even close. Facebook succeeded because it did very similar things to the prior ones, but a little bit better than them in just the right ways. That is the essence of a fork.
364.
by darawk 5y ago
Sushiswap did for a bit, iirc. It's doing quite well either way, though.
365.
by darawk 5y ago
Agree completely. There is a ton to criticize about crypto and "Web3" (I hate the term, tbh). It's rife with scams and unearned wealth. Even the things that aren't outright scams are mostly people selling hype. But this
366.
by darawk 5y ago
> Captives and slaves, which kidnapped children are the first and often also the second, can be either tools or status symbols (or both simultaneously). Yes, that's true. But that's the wrong side of the transaction. This IRS p
367.
by darawk 5y ago
Except all these things can be trivially forked. If you don't like how the VC one is doing things, just fork it. There are a billion forks of everything in the crypto space, for exactly this reason.
368.
by darawk 5y ago
> Since Veblen goods are defined as anything where the demand curve slopes upward, that would only be a result of an empirical study if the study was designed to test, and strong enough to confidently disprove, the existence of goods wit
369.
by darawk 5y ago
Every study ever done on demand curves for literally anything shows that they consistently slope downwards, with the exception of Veblen goods, which kidnapped children most certainly are not.
370.
by darawk 5y ago
Right, I agree. I just think all that is encapsulated by the prohibition on copying. The purpose of IP law was always to protect the owners right to choose when, and in what manner, that IP may be used/redistributed. E.g. an owner has
371.
by darawk 5y ago
> "The purpose of DRM is to give content providers leverage against creators of playback devices." What does this actually mean, though? What is it that the playback devices are doing that they don't want other than playin
372.
by darawk 5y ago
This article is clickbait. The headline makes a bold claim, and then the article goes on to say: The purpose of DRM isn't to prevent copying, it's to prevent unlicensed reproduction. That is, it says 'copying' in differe
373.
by darawk 5y ago
This is pretty different than most of the other recommendations on here, but the "Johnny Keys" story from Sammy Gravano's podcast, which starts at the end of episode 6, and continues to the beginning of episode 8: https:&#x2
374.
by darawk 5y ago
> Do you seriously not see that this doesn't make any sense? Why would a criminal bank executive who's willing to run away with the bank's money care about the damage being done to the bank's reputation? They don&#x27
375.
by darawk 5y ago
> No, a bank can't go to prison, but its executives can. Further, a bank is a registered corporation and a legal holder assets which can be seized by courts. This means it can't escape legal action. The courts would seize the s
376.
by darawk 5y ago
> Laws and law enforcement prevent crime, not reputation Enforcement, by definition, does not prevent crime. It may deter crime. But a bank cannot be put in prison. The damage to a bank from stealing its clients money is reputational,
377.
by darawk 5y ago
I believe what you mean is that it's something that doesn't happen frequently. But do you know why that is? It's not because banks are unable to steal customer's deposits. It's because of the capital investment th
378.
by darawk 5y ago
> Awesome. I appreciate that. That tacit acknowledgement is lacking in all pro-crypto posts. To put a more fine point on it, i'd say about 10-15% of my net worth is exposed to crypto. > Most silicon valley companies want to make
379.
by darawk 5y ago
Yes, those are problems. Just like the existing textual contract system has problems, so does this new system. The new system is, obviously, much newer. The practices around the modern textual legal system have grown up over hundreds and th
380.
by darawk 5y ago
If you think that JPMorgan is equally likely to steal your money as some small scale local bank, I think we're just going to have to agree to disagree here. I think the historical evidence is super clear on this point, not to mention t
381.
by darawk 5y ago
> No they don't, they are trustless. They do exactly the opposite. They allow anyone to build a trusted application. That is the sense in which they democratize trust. Prior to crypto, anyone building a stateful software application
382.
by darawk 5y ago
> It's not open source versus closed source Banks are literally closed source. Crypto is literally closed source. So, yes, it is. > and loss of money is never irrelevant. Loss of money from centralized exchanges is irrelevant to
383.
by darawk 5y ago
Real estate title is a good example of something that could be handled this way more cheaply than it is now. Title to any physical asset could be handled this way, too.
384.
by darawk 5y ago
Yes, and the stability of all those things come from scale. Institutions are strong for several reasons, but one of the most important is size. You would, or at least, should, trust a small bank less than a large one, all else equal. You sh
385.
by darawk 5y ago
This is a nonsense position, though. Crypto futures markets track spot markets. It doesn't make the slightest bit of sense to allow futures and not spot. If spot is manipulated, so are futures.
386.
by darawk 5y ago
> Most people are not advanced coders and will never be. So most people still have to trust a random coder (be it close friend or someone on the news or online). If something happens to your money because someone took advantage of you in
387.
by darawk 5y ago
> What you're asking us to trust is that: > 1. We trust the coders to know what is best for us. > 2. You can write perfect code so that our money is safe. > 3. The price will never plummet. Nobody is asking that. The
388.
by darawk 5y ago
Trust requires us to give leverage to centralized authorities over our critical records. If you deposit money in a bank, they can unilaterally decide that you can't withdraw it today. Their systems can be down. They can be closed at a
389.
by darawk 5y ago
> It’s sprung when you’ve lost your job, are vulnerable and are about to become homeless. I mean, I think you can call this a trap, or you can call it a life raft. If you take away the option of debt, the option that remains is homelessn
390.
by darawk 5y ago
> If the objection is to surveillance of the students, I don't see how it would be any better to inform parents about participation in LGBTQ clubs There's a difference between simply not informing them and actively hiding the i

More ›