Skip to content

Tech moguls want to build a crypto paradise on a Native American reservation

Technology
46 22 152
  • Look into the history of libertarians trying to set up paradises of like minded people to find out why this will fail. They start into the 19th century and just keep failing.

    I'm not surprised by more of this sovereign state nonsense, I'm just disgusted that they're proposing building it on a reservation.

  • You're going to call protestors "agitators" while the broligarchs keep coming up with the most outrageous, evil bullshit they could think of, just for the hell of it.

    Because they want to build and experiment without all the red tape. Of course they do and people have to relearn why regulations are written in blood.

    They hate the FDA, but one of the reasons it exists was because some folks sold radioactive beverages, mascara that caused blindness, a bunch of snake oil and medicine that killed people and/or caused deformities.

    Adventures with financial deregulation and crypto haven't been much better so far.

  • Because they want to build and experiment without all the red tape. Of course they do and people have to relearn why regulations are written in blood.

    They hate the FDA, but one of the reasons it exists was because some folks sold radioactive beverages, mascara that caused blindness, a bunch of snake oil and medicine that killed people and/or caused deformities.

    Adventures with financial deregulation and crypto haven't been much better so far.

    BTC is useful though.

    It's very easy to judge from the EU, but if you are in Russia and need to pay for something in the interwebs, it's very convenient to have an imperfect, but kinda functioning system like this.

    (Idiots replying with "go rebel" or "change location" need not bother, I happen to have family, friends, dog, ASD and BAD, my sister who's on my support every time she makes a planning mistake can change location, I can't. I'm also not a Jedi chosen one to have useful options of "rebelling".)

  • When everyone is out for themselves, the very basics of civilization collapse.

    Empathy and pro social behavior are key to our survival and evolution as a species. Oligarchs and unbridled greed are a violation and exploitation of the social contract and bottleneck progress and healthy societal functioning.

    The Bioshock games weren’t just spun up out of nowhere.

    Libertarianism doesn't deny empathy and "pro social behavior" (as an autistic person, I rarely see it toward myself, not being liked and not making right faces - apparently not deserving of it, but OK ; it's already good if those "pro social" people don't consider it normal to steal from you when they don't like you), it actually relies on those more.

    The issue is that it's something that needs scale and consistency. You can't just assemble a bunch of idealists and crooks and expect them to make a working mechanism.

    I don't think there were many more successful attempts by left anarchists.

  • Look into the history of libertarians trying to set up paradises of like minded people to find out why this will fail. They start into the 19th century and just keep failing.

    Is that different for non-libertarian paradise-building attempts?

    I swear, you guys just apparently decide nobody will ask the obvious questions, because libertarians are an allowed target.

  • Look into the history of libertarians trying to set up paradises of like minded people to find out why this will fail. They start into the 19th century and just keep failing.

    It's all fun and games until the bears show up

  • BTC is useful though.

    It's very easy to judge from the EU, but if you are in Russia and need to pay for something in the interwebs, it's very convenient to have an imperfect, but kinda functioning system like this.

    (Idiots replying with "go rebel" or "change location" need not bother, I happen to have family, friends, dog, ASD and BAD, my sister who's on my support every time she makes a planning mistake can change location, I can't. I'm also not a Jedi chosen one to have useful options of "rebelling".)

    It's the deregulated part that's an issue when people lose their life savings and nobody can help them because no regulations.

  • BTC is useful though.

    It's very easy to judge from the EU, but if you are in Russia and need to pay for something in the interwebs, it's very convenient to have an imperfect, but kinda functioning system like this.

    (Idiots replying with "go rebel" or "change location" need not bother, I happen to have family, friends, dog, ASD and BAD, my sister who's on my support every time she makes a planning mistake can change location, I can't. I'm also not a Jedi chosen one to have useful options of "rebelling".)

    BTC is useful though.

    Btc is not a reliable payment system. It is neither stable, nor is it in any way anonymous. So instead of being secure, you are quite literally a glass person

    Or in better words: ever heard about Monero?

  • BTC is useful though.

    Btc is not a reliable payment system. It is neither stable, nor is it in any way anonymous. So instead of being secure, you are quite literally a glass person

    Or in better words: ever heard about Monero?

    I know it's not anonymous.

    It has the widest reach of cryptocurrencies.

  • Is that different for non-libertarian paradise-building attempts?

    I swear, you guys just apparently decide nobody will ask the obvious questions, because libertarians are an allowed target.

    Libertarian attempts make it pretty obvious why libertarianism fails wholesale. Everybody says “live and let live” at first, but as the author notes in that article it must inevitably devolve into “arguments over who is living free in the correct way”. Which is blatantly antithetical to the concept they started from.

    And if they didnt devolve into those arguments, then they would just all drown in a sea of trash and angry bears. Libertarianism is fundamentally flawed and inherently lose-lose no matter how it plays out. Governance is actually important. Whoda thunk?

    Everyone cant just be free of their neighbor. If your neighbor feeds the bears you will deal with the consequences too. Probably worse ones, since you arent so friendly with the bears (from the bear perspective)

  • Libertarianism doesn't deny empathy and "pro social behavior" (as an autistic person, I rarely see it toward myself, not being liked and not making right faces - apparently not deserving of it, but OK ; it's already good if those "pro social" people don't consider it normal to steal from you when they don't like you), it actually relies on those more.

    The issue is that it's something that needs scale and consistency. You can't just assemble a bunch of idealists and crooks and expect them to make a working mechanism.

    I don't think there were many more successful attempts by left anarchists.

    We probably have different understandings of the word “libertarian,” from what I’m reading.

    I’m referring to the people who would also label themselves “anarcho-capitalists,” as the literal definition of libertarianism isn’t typically associated with the term. I put it in quotes since capitalism by design leads to and encourages hierarchy (private ownership etc etc). No, commerce/trade is not the same and is as about as old as written history itself.

    I’m also autistic and have been ostracized for “wrong” behavior. When I say “pro social” I mean mutual aid, genuine compassion and actually treating other humans with respect for their immutable traits (beliefs like bigotry don’t count). I do not mean masking or “fitting in.” Unfortunately we do get unfairly judged and that’s bad. But - we also are generally capable of finding and forming our own groups.

    Sovereign utopia building as a whole has its own set of issues, but that’s not what was specifically being addressed. Socialist policies in general improve the wellbeing of the respective societies they’re applied to, though.

  • It's the deregulated part that's an issue when people lose their life savings and nobody can help them because no regulations.

    It's a technical decision. There are so many things in life where you can lose everything in a moment without a fraction of your own guilt, and nobody can help you.

    Thanks to that technical decision BTC still functions the way I described.

  • We probably have different understandings of the word “libertarian,” from what I’m reading.

    I’m referring to the people who would also label themselves “anarcho-capitalists,” as the literal definition of libertarianism isn’t typically associated with the term. I put it in quotes since capitalism by design leads to and encourages hierarchy (private ownership etc etc). No, commerce/trade is not the same and is as about as old as written history itself.

    I’m also autistic and have been ostracized for “wrong” behavior. When I say “pro social” I mean mutual aid, genuine compassion and actually treating other humans with respect for their immutable traits (beliefs like bigotry don’t count). I do not mean masking or “fitting in.” Unfortunately we do get unfairly judged and that’s bad. But - we also are generally capable of finding and forming our own groups.

    Sovereign utopia building as a whole has its own set of issues, but that’s not what was specifically being addressed. Socialist policies in general improve the wellbeing of the respective societies they’re applied to, though.

    I'm talking about ancaps as well.

  • Look into the history of libertarians trying to set up paradises of like minded people to find out why this will fail. They start into the 19th century and just keep failing.

    Err... I'm not trolling or taking any sides here but couldn't that also be claimed about communism? And the vast majority of monarchies if you start your analysis then... And I guess if we look at the current day, one could argue contemporary democracy tends to devolve into fascism...

    But, you know, It's almost like the systems in use are irrelevant when there are generalized hostile war scenarios with huge foreign threats that might exterminate your nation state or make it implode through sabotage... And this seems to happen roughly every hundred years or so.

    And after the horrors of war, the general population unifies to pick up what's left and swear they will never let anything like this happen again. But then they have kids and grandkids that are like "oh, gramps you so silly".

    A basic notion of history and some critical thought shows us this has happened time and time again, the only significant contemporary difference being the existence of aerial and nuclear warfare.

    Empires have life cycles, and they get old. Then they get corrupt and other empires start challenging them... And then you have a big big war, and then someone wins, and then people calm down for roughly 50 years... and on and on it goes.

  • Libertarian attempts make it pretty obvious why libertarianism fails wholesale. Everybody says “live and let live” at first, but as the author notes in that article it must inevitably devolve into “arguments over who is living free in the correct way”. Which is blatantly antithetical to the concept they started from.

    And if they didnt devolve into those arguments, then they would just all drown in a sea of trash and angry bears. Libertarianism is fundamentally flawed and inherently lose-lose no matter how it plays out. Governance is actually important. Whoda thunk?

    Everyone cant just be free of their neighbor. If your neighbor feeds the bears you will deal with the consequences too. Probably worse ones, since you arent so friendly with the bears (from the bear perspective)

    Governance is actually important. Whoda thunk?

    Some day you'll read Tao Te Ching and maybe stop thinking in absolutes.

    Where I live libertarians are the most adequate part of the social fabric suppressed by that governance. Trots are the second.

    In any case, you can have a thought experiment of the same town the same size with a group of people assuming governance and telling others what to do. They can collect taxes and tell they are using them as well as they can. The bear problem will probably be smaller, albeit sometimes someone complaining will accidentally meet a bear, the drowning in trash one - I dunno, probably the trash will move to the places furthest from where that group lives, but won't be really disposed of, because - why? No incentive.

    I've become a libertarian after watching one enthusiastic teacher organize some sort of discussion clubs. Everyone in favor of more governance eventually shifted to authoritarianism, when talking long enough, because when you are thinking as if you were the government, you just won't understand why you shouldn't surrender power and then why you should answer to anyone. Less governance - OK, I was alone in that, but the best (in their opinion) argument the others found was "so how do you host olympics in a libertarian land, or build a centrally planned new city? checkmate", and of course there's nothing I can answer to that because I don't think a society needs global projects or flag days.

  • When everyone is out for themselves, the very basics of civilization collapse.

    Empathy and pro social behavior are key to our survival and evolution as a species. Oligarchs and unbridled greed are a violation and exploitation of the social contract and bottleneck progress and healthy societal functioning.

    The Bioshock games weren’t just spun up out of nowhere.

    Both empathy and the lack of it are required. Humans are pack hunters. We work best as teams. Someone has to lead those teams. Guess what traits tend to make for people better at securing and conserving power within groups, and keeping loyalty within their ranks? Yep, you guessed it! Psychopaths! 😄

    There are benevolent leaders, yes, that exists, but in a competition where anything goes, a psychopath which is difficult ton detect will have the advantage over someone with more empathy and robust moral limits.

    There's a reason why they're roughly estimated to be around 10% of the population. Hierarchies need few leaders. The higher the ladder, the more vicious the psycho it gets, because they'll have to be competent enough to defend themselves from the other psychos that want all their tasty tasty power.

    The reason why all our leaders are psychopaths is this is the same reason why basketball players are all tall. If you don't have that trait, you just don't get the fucking job (edit: unless you're like REALLY good at it despite your disadvantage).

    This used to depress me, but I chose to stop thinking about it. I don't think there's any fixing it.

  • You're going to call protestors "agitators" while the broligarchs keep coming up with the most outrageous, evil bullshit they could think of, just for the hell of it.

    No. Go build it in the ocean somewhere far, far away from the rest of us.

  • I'm not surprised by more of this sovereign state nonsense, I'm just disgusted that they're proposing building it on a reservation.

    Casinos ring a bell...

  • Governance is actually important. Whoda thunk?

    Some day you'll read Tao Te Ching and maybe stop thinking in absolutes.

    Where I live libertarians are the most adequate part of the social fabric suppressed by that governance. Trots are the second.

    In any case, you can have a thought experiment of the same town the same size with a group of people assuming governance and telling others what to do. They can collect taxes and tell they are using them as well as they can. The bear problem will probably be smaller, albeit sometimes someone complaining will accidentally meet a bear, the drowning in trash one - I dunno, probably the trash will move to the places furthest from where that group lives, but won't be really disposed of, because - why? No incentive.

    I've become a libertarian after watching one enthusiastic teacher organize some sort of discussion clubs. Everyone in favor of more governance eventually shifted to authoritarianism, when talking long enough, because when you are thinking as if you were the government, you just won't understand why you shouldn't surrender power and then why you should answer to anyone. Less governance - OK, I was alone in that, but the best (in their opinion) argument the others found was "so how do you host olympics in a libertarian land, or build a centrally planned new city? checkmate", and of course there's nothing I can answer to that because I don't think a society needs global projects or flag days.

    So they’re just not living free in the correct way, got it

  • No. Go build it in the ocean somewhere far, far away from the rest of us.

    What about letting them make another cruise ship paradise?
    i mean nothing did go wrong with a bunch of crypto bros on a cruise ship

  • 51 Stimmen
    8 Beiträge
    34 Aufrufe
    B
    But do you also sometimes leave out AI for steps the AI often does for you, like the conceptualisation or the implementation? Would it be possible for you to do these steps as efficiently as before the use of AI? Would you be able to spot the mistakes the AI makes in these steps, even months or years along those lines? The main issue I have with AI being used in tasks is that it deprives you from using logic by applying it to real life scenarios, the thing we excel at. It would be better to use AI in the opposite direction you are currently use it as: develop methods to view the works critically. After all, if there is one thing a lot of people are bad at, it's thorough critical thinking. We just suck at knowing of all edge cases and how we test for them. Let the AI come up with unit tests, let it be the one that questions your work, in order to get a better perspective on it.
  • 79 Stimmen
    3 Beiträge
    18 Aufrufe
    D
    Right? The surprise would be if they weren't doing that.
  • It is OutfinityGift project better then all NFTs?

    Technology technology
    1
    2
    1 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    11 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • Texting myself the weather every day

    Technology technology
    4
    15 Stimmen
    4 Beiträge
    23 Aufrufe
    G
    Even being too lazy to open the weather app, there are so many better and free ways of receiving a message on your phone. This is profoundly stupid.
  • Massaging the neck and face may help flush waste out of the brain

    Technology technology
    25
    1
    237 Stimmen
    25 Beiträge
    102 Aufrufe
    D
    Segue into sexy time
  • Catbox.moe got screwed 😿

    Technology technology
    40
    55 Stimmen
    40 Beiträge
    69 Aufrufe
    archrecord@lemm.eeA
    I'll gladly give you a reason. I'm actually happy to articulate my stance on this, considering how much I tend to care about digital rights. Services that host files should not be held responsible for what users upload, unless: The service explicitly caters to illegal content by definition or practice (i.e. the if the website is literally titled uploadyourcsamhere[.]com then it's safe to assume they deliberately want to host illegal content) The service has a very easy mechanism to remove illegal content, either when asked, or through simple monitoring systems, but chooses not to do so (catbox does this, and quite quickly too) Because holding services responsible creates a whole host of negative effects. Here's some examples: Someone starts a CDN and some users upload CSAM. The creator of the CDN goes to jail now. Nobody ever wants to create a CDN because of the legal risk, and thus the only providers of CDNs become shady, expensive, anonymously-run services with no compliance mechanisms. You run a site that hosts images, and someone decides they want to harm you. They upload CSAM, then report the site to law enforcement. You go to jail. Anybody in the future who wants to run an image sharing site must now self-censor to try and not upset any human being that could be willing to harm them via their site. A social media site is hosting the posts and content of users. In order to be compliant and not go to jail, they must engage in extremely strict filtering, otherwise even one mistake could land them in jail. All users of the site are prohibited from posting any NSFW or even suggestive content, (including newsworthy media, such as an image of bodies in a warzone) and any violation leads to an instant ban, because any of those things could lead to a chance of actually illegal content being attached. This isn't just my opinion either. Digital rights organizations such as the Electronic Frontier Foundation have talked at length about similar policies before. To quote them: "When social media platforms adopt heavy-handed moderation policies, the unintended consequences can be hard to predict. For example, Twitter’s policies on sexual material have resulted in posts on sexual health and condoms being taken down. YouTube’s bans on violent content have resulted in journalism on the Syrian war being pulled from the site. It can be tempting to attempt to “fix” certain attitudes and behaviors online by placing increased restrictions on users’ speech, but in practice, web platforms have had more success at silencing innocent people than at making online communities healthier." Now, to address the rest of your comment, since I don't just want to focus on the beginning: I think you have to actively moderate what is uploaded Catbox does, and as previously mentioned, often at a much higher rate than other services, and at a comparable rate to many services that have millions, if not billions of dollars in annual profits that could otherwise be spent on further moderation. there has to be swifter and stricter punishment for those that do upload things that are against TOS and/or illegal. The problem isn't necessarily the speed at which people can be reported and punished, but rather that the internet is fundamentally harder to track people on than real life. It's easy for cops to sit around at a spot they know someone will be physically distributing illegal content at in real life, but digitally, even if you can see the feed of all the information passing through the service, a VPN or Tor connection will anonymize your IP address in a manner that most police departments won't be able to track, and most three-letter agencies will simply have a relatively low success rate with. There's no good solution to this problem of identifying perpetrators, which is why platforms often focus on moderation over legal enforcement actions against users so frequently. It accomplishes the goal of preventing and removing the content without having to, for example, require every single user of the internet to scan an ID (and also magically prevent people from just stealing other people's access tokens and impersonating their ID) I do agree, however, that we should probably provide larger amounts of funding, training, and resources, to divisions who's sole goal is to go after online distribution of various illegal content, primarily that which harms children, because it's certainly still an issue of there being too many reports to go through, even if many of them will still lead to dead ends. I hope that explains why making file hosting services liable for user uploaded content probably isn't the best strategy. I hate to see people with good intentions support ideas that sound good in practice, but in the end just cause more untold harms, and I hope you can understand why I believe this to be the case.
  • 1 Stimmen
    8 Beiträge
    32 Aufrufe
    L
    I made a PayPal account like 20 years ago in a third world country. The only thing you needed then is an email and password. I have no real name on there and no PII, technically my bank card is attached but on PP itself there's no KYC. I think you could probably use some types of prepaid cards with it if you want to avoid using a bank altogether but for me this wasn't an issue, I just didn't want my ID on any records, I don't have any serious OpSec concerns otherwise. I'm sure you could either buy PayPal accounts like this if you needed to, or make one in a country that doesn't have KYC laws somehow. From there I'd add money to my balance and send money as F&F. At no point did I need an ID so in that sense there's no KYC. Some sellers on localmarket were fancy enough to list that they wanted an ID for KYC, but I'm sure you could just send them any random ID you made in paint from the republic of dave and you'd be fine.
  • Windows Is Adding AI Agents That Can Change Your Settings

    Technology technology
    26
    1
    103 Stimmen
    26 Beiträge
    89 Aufrufe
    T
    Edit: no, wtf am i doing The thread was about inept the coders were. Here is your answer: They were so fucking inept they broke a fundamental function and it made it to production. Then they did it deliberately. That's how inept they are. End of.