• rysiek@szmer.info
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    3 years ago

    And yet somehow they all refuse to deal with the scammers in their midst, and many seem to react to any suggestion that this might be a problem with denialism, name-calling, and whataboutism.

    • overflow@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      3 years ago

      how can I and other ethical people possibly deal with all the scammers in the space? can you stop all criminals from using your national currency to do illegal acts?

      • rysiek@szmer.info
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 years ago

        I can recognize this is a serious problem. I can push politicians to help regulate it. I can (and I have) work with NGOs and journalists to reveal corrupt banksters. I can then demand them being punished.

        Or, I could call people names and try to change the subject to problems in some other kind of system.

        One of these is ethical. The other is called “being an enabler”.

        • rysiek@szmer.info
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          3 years ago

          Also, let’s make two more things clear:

          1. Technology is neither good nor bad, but it is also not neutral.
          2. The purpose of a system is what it does.

          How a piece of technology is designed influences what it’s good for. A butter knife and a butcher’s knife are different for a reason, and one of them is really hard to use to kill someone.

          And if a system keeps doing a thing, even if we close our eyes and insist it’s not supposed to, if for long enough this is not getting fixed, clearly it’s part of the system’s purpose.

          The whole crypto sphere has been designed very clearly with libertarian-right ideas at the base. So it perpetuates libertarian-right power structures (“rich get richer”, etc). This is not going to lead to any more “freedom” in the world, because it never meant to. It meant to allow some select lucky few get stupid rich and powerful without going through the current structures of power.

          At best, it’s a shake-up on top, not a revolution of the people. It’s sad so many idealistic people got caught in it.

          • overflow@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            3 years ago

            how can something can be neither good or bad but not neutral.All knives can be used to harm someone. Majority of the rich people in the world have gotten rich because of their closeness to the government whether the US or Cuba, it’s how close you are the government that has made majority of the world’s rich where they are today and not any true entrepreneurial skill/their own private property.

              • overflow@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                3 years ago

                maybe one day I will, you should read about all anarchist societies that have ever existed/that still exist and all works published by authors who predicted the end of capitalism

                • rysiek@szmer.info
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  3 years ago

                  Yeah, like Graeber. “Debt: First 5000 Years” is very much on-topic here. He goes deep into how pre-market societies worked and how capitalism came to be (and tears apart the founding myths of economy in the process). Fascinating read.

                  Problem is, cryptocurrencies are intrinsically capitalist. They support and perpetuate capitalist power structures. Consider this:

                  Our analysis reports that, despite the heavy emphasis on decentralization in cryptocurrencies, the wealth distribution remains in-line with the real-world economies, with the exception of Dash. We also report that 3 of the observed cryptocurrencies (Dogecoin, ZCash, and Ethereum Classic) violate the honest majority assumption with less than 100 participants controlling over 51% wealth in the ecosystem, potentially indicating a security threat. This suggests that the free-market fundamentalism doctrine may be inadequate in countering wealth inequality within a crypto-economic context: Algorithmically driven free-market implementation of these cryptocurrencies may eventually lead to wealth inequality similar to those observed in real-world economies.

                  • overflow@lemmy.ml
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    3 years ago

                    Yeah, like Graeber. “Debt: First 5000 Years” is very much on-topic here. He goes deep into how pre-market societies worked and how capitalism came to be (and tears apart the founding myths of economy in the process). Fascinating read.

                    Yay another book written by some guy that complains about modern society makes broad generalizations about human nature and money, idealizes pre-industrial societies and complains about capitalism without offering any real alternative but basically just saying we can do better just what the world needed.

                    Problem is, cryptocurrencies are intrinsically capitalist. They support and perpetuate capitalist power structures. Consider this:

                    there are not intrinisically capitalist because they use subsidies and other things non existent in a perfectly free market nor is it surprising the wealth distribution of crypto is uneven since most people don’t use them as a replacement to fiat/even know of them at all never mind the fact that you can freely purchase them from a exchange and nothing stops one from doing so

        • overflow@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          3 years ago

          The banking system is fully regulated as you’ve pointed out but it’s full to the brim with criminals many of them with the formal blessing of the state so regulation wouldn’t solve anything. No one can force people to do the right thing over and over we tell newcomers to run your node, do due diligence on development teams, read the terms and conditions of the dapps you use, don’t store your keys on exchanges/in the cloud etc and people don’t listen just like how governments have warned people for centuries about drugs and people have ruined themselves and their families.

          • rysiek@szmer.info
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            3 years ago

            You asked what can one do, I answered. I’ve been doing my part about the financial sector. Perhaps it’s time you do yours about the cryptoscams, instead of insisting nothing can be done.

            • overflow@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              3 years ago

              I can’t force developers to stop working on bad projects I can only withhold funding from them and encourage others to do the same it’s not my responsibility to ensure that no scams exist because that would be impossible I can only guide people to the information and the decision to use/not to use is up to them

                • overflow@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  3 years ago

                  fuck off it with your claims about whataboutism i just said I don’t use/nor provide support to any of the applications/blockchains mentioned just like the traditional finance world there are risks are involved and it is your responsibility to avoid scams and the best sources of information on scams what a joke there are so many well written blogs, academic papers and podcasts etc that go into detail all about what’s wrong in the space from people who are actually knowledgeable about distributed systems and economics some of what is even there aren’t scams but just news about people not/accepting crypto, bug releases and user stupidity

                  • rysiek@szmer.info
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    3
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    3 years ago

                    fuck off it with your claims about whataboutism

                    Bad form, really.

                    i just said I don’t use/nor provide support to any of the applications/blockchains mentioned just like the traditional finance world there are risks are involved and it is your responsibility to avoid scams and the best sources of information on scams

                    Sorry, whataboutism and No True Scotsman. Right, you do use both.

                    I have not seen you say which chains/solutions you do support. Every time I provided sources on how screwed up a particular popular one (Bitcoin, Ethereum, etc) is, you just move the goalposts (“I don’t support that particular one”), while hand-waving about “traditional finance”.

                    Fact of the matter is: one has way less chance of getting screwed out of their money in traditional finance than in crypto. And, if that does happens, one has way more chance of getting their money back, and of getting the scammers brought to justice. It’s far from perfect, and far too many people still get scammed. But it’s orders of magnitude safer than crypto.

                    Now, if you’d like to perhaps be explicit for once (other than dropping f-bombs) and commit to saying what exactly do you support, instead of constantly moving the goalposts, that would be great.