Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)T
Posts
11
Comments
1087
Joined
3 yr. ago

  • Incoming Meat Canyon video

  • I would want to see some data on costs, because I think you might be overselling the difficulty and cost a bit (I don't actually know, just my good faith belief). Imagine if every content creator ran their own instance. Instead of needing to worry about every user coming to a single group of servers, the Creator only needs to worry about the cost of hosting their own content and the traffic they get.

    With the number of YouTubers who have to get sponsorships and Patreon anyway, it doesn't really seem that infeasible or unreasonable to expect content creators to run their own thing or pay to have someone else to do it. Doesn't seem like the YouTube money is that lucrative, anymore, so not like it would be all that different, either.

  • Yet. It's still very new, and as enshittification increases, so will federated development.

  • "If a product is free that should otherwise cost money, you are the product."

  • Maybe one day, when you least expect it!

  • I'm borrowing that.

  • The novelty is the fact that it's ongoing. They haven't mitigated the hack. The threat actors are still inside the networks, which is why the government is telling people to switch to E2EE apps.

  • Maybe I'm misunderstanding what you wrote, but that's not how sanctions work. It's the people within their own country who are hurt by their country's sanctions, not sanctions from other countries. This leads to domestic companies buying less exports, which is supposed to lead to more domestic production (or hurt the other country's economy), but regular people aren't typically buying exports direct from the producers. That's not a problem Bitcoin can solve, unless import companies start using it or regular people start importing themselves.

    However, it's still the wealthy who most benefit from crypto. It's the wealthy who make the barrier to entry higher, and it's the wealthy who can very easily manipulate the value of this value-less currency (just look what they can do with the stock market, and that's regulated).

    It's not that I'm against the plight of the downtrodden, I just don't see how crypto actually helps them; like I said, it's another "American Dream," a promise of wealth that will never materialize for most, because the wealthy have rigged the system.

  • Reddit habits die hard for many.

    I don't hate it, but I'm also not going to pretend it's the hot, new decentralized microblogging service, come to shake up the status quo. It maybe has the potential to be decentralized, but it's not currently. It might be a "public benefit" company now, but that's not an official or regulated classification like being a nonprofit; it's basically just a promise, and all it would take is a simple vote to change that. All the power still rests with the main corporation, and no matter how altruistic the leadership is, history has shown that every wealthy leader has a price.

    I hope it becomes what it promises it's going to be. More decentralized services are a good thing for people. However, I don't see it at this moment, and I don't have any evidence that they're making meaningful strides to become what they promise; time and inertia are not on their side.

  • Perhaps, but you gained freedom from Meta (unless you also use Instagram).

  • And less than a handful of brain cells. Influencers don't get a stupidity pass, just because they don't care to question where the money comes from.

  • A long time. AI ≠ AGI, and it's prone to errors with even the most basic tasks. We already have robots that can do various things without AI, and they mostly replace workers doing tasks that are repetitive or dangerous, yet we still have plenty of factories and other jobs with human workers.

    On top of that, these robots need maintenance (including code), and they're incredibly expensive. Replacing a human isn't a simple drop-in, and they have a long way to go before they're even close to parity with human cognition and context awareness.

  • I never said anything of the kind. I just pointed out that it didn't do anything it wasn't instructed to do. They gave it intentionally vague instructions, and it did as it was told. That it did so in a novel way is interesting, but hardly paradigm shattering.

    However, the idea that it "schemed" is anthropomorphization, and I think that their use of the term is intentional to get rubes to think more highly of it (as near to AGI) than they should.

  • When was the last time YOU have "laundered money with crypto"?

    Nice try, fed! (/j)

  • I'm with you. However, the current state of things is not what I envision when I think of decentralized currency and immutable public ledgers.

  • The Fediverse is only as good as we make it. Keep being excellent to people.

  • I like your measured view of crypto. I still am not convinced by your argument, mainly because I do not believe in capital as something to be protected, but I do think that regular people having the means to act apart from government oversight is good.

    My issue is still that it doesn't level the playing field. The benefits of privacy and decentralization for the wealthy outclass what benefits the rest of us get from the same thing. It's just another way for the rich to get richer, while the poor stay poor.

    While good things are done with it, my opinion is that it's still a net negative.

    Either way, have a lovely day. Hopefully I didn't come off too harsh.

  • I'm kinda surprised there hasn't been a foldable with an e-ink interior screen. Reading would be my use case, too, but the cost is too high to justify that single use case for me.

  • Nonpartisan doesn't mean it's not a scam.

    Anybody can use them for anything, but isn't it so convenient how easy it is to launder money with crypto? And isn't it convenient how they're happy to spend taxpayer money to set up this fund?

    We're not talking about systems like VPNs, where you could argue they hide criminals in addition to human rights activists. That levels the playing field and protects people's right to privacy.

    What rights is crypto protecting? We're talking about a vehicle where entire governments can pump up the value and reap the inflated price. We're talking about foreign billionaires who can covertly and easily "invest" in their favorite candidates without taking the roundabout way of using dark-money PACs.

    Crypto is just another empty, ultra-capitalist "American Dream" promise shrouded in tech.