Gregory's ServerIt's frustrating how cryptocurrency has poisoned all conversation about decentralization.
 28 comments
 @Gargron idk I guess it is annoying that decentralisation is now mainly associated with like, dim libertarians and people in the money fandom, but could still be made a positive -- if those people sign up en masse for decentralised services it does weaken centralised stuff, even if they're not really the first people you'd choose to have aboard your ship @tomharris That's the thing though, they won't sign up unless there's a pump and dump scheme involved   @Gargron Hey Eugen! As someone who is new and is just learning about decentralization. Can you elaborate on this? @Gargron it seems to me that decentralization has less traction because it can protect against the extraction of value from public goods. If mlms can still operate with impunity, it must be that cryptocurrency is preferred because it's one more tool to manipulate and coerce individuals into supporting more extractive enterprises without any liability to the public. I could almost say the two ideas oppose each other, even though the two are supposed to compliment each other. My 2 cts thoโ๏ธ  @Gargron I tent to agree. For example, the common idea that a decentralized censorship-resistant social network would need to run on a blockchain is just stupid, and I say that as someone who really likes blockchain and cryptocurrency...  It's also funny to see how 100% of everything that involves a blockchain ends up being a literal cryptocurrency with some additional functionality awkwardly tucked on top. You know, those "decentralized social networks" where you pay to post and to like. Blockchain is truly an overhyped solution looking for problems.  @davidpetersonharvey @Gargron Imagine telling someone today that e.g. "ssh took the existing usage patterns of rsh and rlogin, but added a layer of crypto for authentication and privacy".
A person in 2005 would have basically understood what ssh is from that description, but I bet you 100 Satoshi that a person from today would be just as likely to ask if that means the user information is on a distributed ledger. @Gargron Just like when someone talks about blockchain, then somebody shift the topic to Bitcoin. @Gargron You have every right to feel salty here. We all saw the potential that the technology offered, and still does to an extent, but the follow-through from those who benefitted most has been lacking. I personally see De-cent/Centralization ideologies to be extremes who could both benefit from acknowledging the what necessitates the other's existence, and how best to co-exist without any form of dominion overlapping. Tall order, but not far fetched~ ::)  |
@Gargron and the meaning of "crypto" has totally shifted from "-graphy" to "-currencies"