HerrBeter @ HerrBeter @lemmy.world

Posts

0

Comments

358

Joined

2 yr. ago

Yeah, pyroclastic ones. I know I heard some scientists and plebians advocate for releasing sulfur dioxide for the purpose of reflecting solar radiation, thereby lowering the temperature.

It's the most band-aid of solutions, suppress the symptoms.. Plant growth might stagger because less light comes through. To tie it together, that's my question about how we would fare afterwards. I imagine worse off

Food is simply too cheap, no one can raise prices because it's a controlled system. Besides, people will buy less stuff it prices go up.

And paying an honest wage for the work? Cuts into profit margins..

What happens after the dust settles? I imagine we'd just be right were we started but worse off (conjecture)

What are you on about? If anyone is interested, read my comment history

Edit: if we store the shitty pictures on blockchain, literally nothing changes, except a big and bulky blockchain. "I can just save the picture lmao" will still be the answer.. Are we supposed to store every software on blockchain too? I don't think it's viable

This article too is flawed

I don't think people thought about it too much. But it shouldn't be allowed, even if it's a joke

Maybe a size adjuster is needed

I didn't, the premise that anyone can copy the blockchain and gain access to the assets is flawed. You'll have to look up the Immutable X implementation, it was too long since I read about it, if you're curious. Like I don't think there will ever be a digital version of ownership that isn't "a url" since, well it's digital. The url and wallet is connected to the thing blabla

But you don't own your things. Steam even restricted my access to my things because I hadn't bought anything from their store in an arbitrary amount of time, I bought from other places and entered the cd key. The "web2" way of centralisation is also flawed.

Is it the one and true only answer, I don't know, probably not in its current form albeit it is functional (immutable X). But the arguments against NFTs are mostly against these ducking pictures that ruined any possibility of working towards a goal where we as consumers could get more value.

Edit: appeal to ridicule is also a fallacy

What's with the straw men? Make your point only instead.

That could be applied to anything, stuff on Steam only exist as long as Steam does or allows it to, however does the "URL" have to be accepted if it's out of network? I don't think it does. Still, there are inherent flaws in a blockchain system.

Much like I can make a fake cd key and try to use matlab, but they won't accept it

But it does work? And just fundamentally why wouldn't it as a concept?

Gods Unchained, immutable X. NFT is a back-end tech and no one should buy anything just because it is a NFT. The whole idea is to add to the value proposition for the customer/end user

How do you figure?

It's a technology, simple as. But since we're back at the start, who profits the most from not moving status quo?

What other viable and available technology options are there for a system where the consumer can somewhat freely do what they want with digital assets?

And wtf simping? Wat

To a certain extent. But aren't the countries in the near vicinity the most able?

It's unlikely I'll write a longer answer on my phone. But if all you have is ridicule again, and insults, I'll leave you with some short thoughts.

Gamestop has been doing fairly well, looking at financials. And people complain about not owning their virtual stuff, which NFT smart contracts could be a solution for. I don't necessarily agree on the the specifics for blockchain based solution though, nor did I like the picturefest which only obfuscated good use cases.

Edit: unlike of course vague half truths

Hear ye, hear ye

".. And with the potential lower profit margin for the ultra rich.."

Blatantly wrong

Why do they build universities over TNT-soil?

🤨