Cryptocurrency as the next significant stage for computing technology, not just an investment

[usagi]

4 hours ago, Alcofribas said:

you know, i'm something of a homomorphically encrypted anti-cloud myself.

booba

if you don't have any partial multisig timelocked revokable cold storage smart contract mechanisms in your anti-cloud, I'm simply not interested.

[Bubba69]

cryptocurrency mining's indirect effect on climate change really bums me out. I have no opinion about crypto and have never invested. But at the very least would like whatever tech "wins" to not use up so much goddamn electricity.

[hijexx]

So far my favorite part of this thread is where someone says “I know what that means” then the other person says “Obviously you don’t so here’s what it means”

[prdctvsm]

4 hours ago, Alcofribas said:

I had a good doge post and that mf did a whole ass meme

[zlemflolia]

13 minutes ago, hijexx said:

So far my favorite part of this thread is where someone says “I know what that means” then the other person says “Obviously you don’t so here’s what it means”

oops i read "word salad" and got so mad that my brain didnt finish the rest of the post

[thumbass]

Reading back my shit truly makes me never wanna touch alcohol again sometimes.

[dcom]

6 hours ago, cyanobacteria said:

Okay that just means you don't know what I'm talking about [...]

You seem to completely disregard that I already told you I've been a software engineer for almost thirty years and I'm well versed with all the technologies that you think will liberate us; you're being condescending and adding insult to injury by throwing more word salad my way:

6 hours ago, cyanobacteria said:

Homomorphically encrypted computation is a method of providing programs and data to someone else where the data is homomorphically encrypted [...]

That's like saying that a potato is in fact a potato that you can give to someone else. Although your descriptions of the concepts are in the end correct, they're very hard to read and parse. Nevertheless, those things are definitely not "the next significant stage for computing technology" - they're applications of existing technologies in service of an idea and for some, an ideology that hasn't really taken off (except for the criminals) - you'll say "yet", but I'm not holding my breath. Some of the technology will most probably be usable in other contexts and applications, but cryptocurrencies themselves are a dead end.

I'm done here, but do enjoy your chosen path.

Edited January 16, 2021 by dcom

[zlemflolia]

46 minutes ago, dcom said:

You seem to completely disregard that I already told you I've been a software engineer for almost thirty years and I'm well versed with all the technologies that you think will liberate us; you're being condescending and adding insult to injury by throwing more word salad my way:

That's like saying that a potato is in fact a potato that you can give to someone else. Although your descriptions of the concepts are in the end correct, they're very hard to read and parse. Nevertheless, those things are definitely not "the next significant stage for computing technology" - they're applications of existing technologies in service of an idea and for some, an ideology that hasn't really taken off (except for the criminals) - you'll say "yet", but I'm not holding my breath. Some of the technology will most probably be usable in other contexts and applications, but cryptocurrencies themselves are a dead end.

I'm done here, but do enjoy your chosen path.

Presently many technologies provided by the tech industry, one of the largest industries in the world economy right now, depend upon the assumption that third party cloud computation clusters and intermediary servers of various kinds are required to implement certain types of software on end-user computers, but it's in fact not the case - they can be implemented without the use of technologies like centralized servers and masses of cloud computing resources located in one place.  This is a fundamental blow to the entire industry, a pandora's box if you will of technologies which once unleashed will render them forever irrelevant and take computing technologies into the stage where the implementation of communism not only becomes much easier, but becomes the obvious choice.  Nothing I write is word salad to me and if you feel it is then it's your job to correct my language, that's how two-way communication protocols work, if you feel I'm wrong then it's possible I am and I'd like to know why that's the case so that I can be corrected, but you're not being very convincing to me

[Dragon]

i'll be interested in cryptocurrencies as soon as ullillillia gets involved. you guys just wait

[dcom]

1 hour ago, cyanobacteria said:

Presently many technologies provided by the tech industry, one of the largest industries in the world economy right now, depend upon the assumption that third party cloud computation clusters and intermediary servers of various kinds are required to implement certain types of software on end-user computers, but it's in fact not the case - they can be implemented without the use of technologies like centralized servers and masses of cloud computing resources located in one place.  This is a fundamental blow to the entire industry, a pandora's box if you will of technologies which once unleashed will render them forever irrelevant and take computing technologies into the stage where the implementation of communism not only becomes much easier, but becomes the obvious choice.  Nothing I write is word salad to me and if you feel it is then it's your job to correct my language, that's how two-way communication protocols work, if you feel I'm wrong then it's possible I am and I'd like to know why that's the case so that I can be corrected, but you're not being very convincing to me

I'm not trying to convince you of anything, I'm just poking you with a rhetorical stick to see if there's something I haven't heard before.; you probably subscribe to Bastani's idea of Fully Automated Luxury Communism, another predictive utopia from and for the techno-libertarian/techno-communist sect as cryptocurrencies are part of the revolutionary liberation of the masses from the yoke of centralized, oppressive governing of the states and the indentured servitude brought on by rampant rent-seeking extractive capitalism (see what I did there?).

Your use of the Pandora's Box allegory is opposite to what it actually is - a present that seems valuable but which in fact is a curse - in the original myth it release sickness, pestilence and death when opened; but the most obvious thing I would like to point my finger at is your use of "two-way communications protocol" to mean discussion - it's a prime example of how you shroud your rhetoric in semantic acrobatics and verbal masturbation. I did that a lot myself when I was in my late teens and early 20s, reading Baudrillard, Virilio, Deleuze, Lyotard, Barthes, Derrida, Kristeva and the rest of the post-modernists/post-structuralists - I also have a very real personal history with socialism/communism - so the linguistic register you're using might impress someone else, but not me.

If you're trying to convince me of the ideas and ideology you're disseminating, you're definitely barking up the proverbial wrong tree, something you should've picked up on by now.

It's been fun, enjoy.

Edited January 16, 2021 by dcom

[zlemflolia]

21 minutes ago, dcom said:

I'm not trying to convince you of anything, I'm just poking you with a rhetorical stick to see if there's something I haven't heard before.; you probably subscribe to Bastani's idea of Fully Automated Luxury Communism, another predictive utopia from and for the techno-libertarian/techno-communist sect as cryptocurrencies are part of the revolutionary liberation of the masses from the yoke of centralized, oppressive governing of the states and the indentured servitude brought on by rampant rent-seeking extractive capitalism (see what I did there?).

Your use of the Pandora's Box allegory is opposite to what it actually is - a present that seems valuable but which in fact is a curse - in the original myth it release sickness, pestilence and death when opened; but the most obvious thing I would like to point my finger at is your use of "two-way communications protocol" to mean discussion - it's a prime example of how you shroud your rhetoric in semantic acrobatics and verbal masturbation. I did that a lot myself when I was in my late teens and early 20s, reading Baudrillard, Virilio, Deleuze, Lyotard, Barthes, Derrida, Kristeva and the rest of the post-modernists/post-structuralists - I also have a very real personal history with socialism/communism - so the linguistic register you're using might impress someone else, but not me.

If you're trying to convince me of the ideas and ideology you're disseminating, you're definitely barking up the proverbial wrong tree, something you should've picked up on by now.

It's been fun, enjoy.

i don't believe in fully automated luxury communism in any techno-libertarian sense because it will result in slavery to technology.  i however believe in fully realized species-being and ecologically sound central planning, oriented around the democratization of the means of production, which requires democratized computational capabilities and an even distribution of computation to guarantee a lack of centralization of computation and therefore the potential to hold sway over decentralized computational processes through manipulation of communication protocols

i am not a techno-libertarian and it's not the state whose oppression needs to be removed it's capital's

i used pandora's box correctly because indeed the class character of the bourgeoisie means that proletarian freedom will bring their capital and thus their labor and service extractive capabilities in sickness, pestilence, and death

as for my language register you're just discriminating against the way i speak and the things i like to speak about by assuming they're meant to impress anyone

[dcom]

5 minutes ago, cyanobacteria said:

i don't believe in fully automated luxury communism in any techno-libertarian sense because it will result in slavery to technology.  i however believe in fully realized species-being and ecologically sound central planning, oriented around the democratization of the means of production, which requires democratized computational capabilities and an even distribution of computation to guarantee a lack of centralization of computation and therefore the potential to hold sway over decentralized computational processes through manipulation of communication protocols

i am not a techno-libertarian and it's not the state whose oppression needs to be removed it's capital's

i used pandora's box correctly because indeed the class character of the bourgeoisie means that proletarian freedom will bring their capital and thus their labor and service extractive capabilities in sickness, pestilence, and death

as for my language register you're just discriminating against the way i speak and the things i like to speak about by assuming they're meant to impress anyone

ACK, enjoy.

[chenGOD]

psst @dcom ask him what he thinks about women stealing sperm from trash cans.

[dingformung]

Can you stop mocking him for a really dumb post he made a decade or so ago? For a Canadian who should be all about extraordinarily good manners, politeness and brown-nosing that's really bad style.

[chenGOD]

No. 

[prdctvsm]

[usagi]

2 hours ago, dingformung said:

Can you stop mocking him for a really dumb post he made a decade or so ago?

this attitude is in direct contravention of WATMM's core principles.

[auxien]

just gonna leave this here and walk away

[mcbpete]

Cryptocurrencies are just pyramid schemes for the memes generation.

[Cryptowen]

tbh i find it hard to rationally consider cryptocurrency as a potential socially transformative phenomenon because i heard about bitcoin like a decade ago & just made fun of it instead of buying any. so all my thoughts on the subject are tainted by that sense of bro you coulda been the eye floating at the top of the pyramid, man!

that & the several occassions where i've met guys who acted like they were the wolf of wall street because they owned some dogecoins

[zero]

17 minutes ago, mcbpete said:

Cryptocurrencies are just pyramid schemes for the memes generation.

that's the way I view it as well. the only IRL person I know that got into bitcoin was pushing me so hard many years ago to buy into it, it felt exactly like some sort of get rich quick scheme. grandiose promises of incredible investment returns... and it seems too hard to explain how it works exactly to make sense to most non-techie people. for it to make a wide ranging impact or the next "significant stage" or whatever, they need to dumb that shit down a notch or 2.

[purlieu]

When Audius introduced their $AUDIO tokens last year and paid them out to the top 10,000 users on the site, I cashed them in and they came to about £350 worth of bitcoins. I spent £300 because, y'know, free cash. I was left with about £25 worth after transaction fees, and they're now worth five times that. So I'm going to leave them there for a while and see how they turn out. I might even pop a few quid in at the end of each month if I have anything spare before pay day. 

[usagi]

 

[pcock]

At this point i have no idea why any internet people are not throwing a few percent of their savable income into this shit. i was sceptical from 2013 to 2016, i bought my first bitcoin in 2017, ive had ups and down, missed out on some gains, and made a fuck tonne of money since then. cashed out 0.05 at 40k  for a couple of grand to cover my corona income loss this year, but you can be sure as fuck im gonna be putting back in as soon as my income is stable again.

[usagi]

because it has no value. it is not tied to any type of "good" that can be measured for growth and thus you cannot develop any type of reasonable long-term investment strategy around it. any gains or losses you make on it are purely on wild speculation and herd behaviour, and a lot of people see that for the ballache it is and say no thanks. I get that for some it's purely a money making opportunity which might be ok (sustainability discussions aside for a moment) if you know what you're doing, if you limit your exposure and say "I'm ok with possibly losing x amount of money I'm putting in", but personally I don't want to spend any of my money propping up this goofy meaningless scheme, at least not in its current stage of evolution. I've got steady work and income, I don't need some asshole yelling in my ear about BEEEKONNAYYYYYYY