Lionir [he/him] @ Lionir @beehaw.org

About me on lionir.ca

---

Read more

Posts

43

Comments

310

Joined

3 yr. ago

Moderating

---

Bringing this topic back up here in this manner is really inappropriate.

Honestly, I agree. I've cleaned up the thread a bit but it still seems pretty nasty.

I've personally had the opinion that we should go for a more isolationist approach with an allow-list when we move away from Lemmy and into Sublinks. I think it's worth trying.

Personally, I really wish we could have an invite system, I feel like it'd be better than asking a friend to fill a form - that feels a bit rough. It would also encourage word of mouth and organic growth imo. And people tend to have likeminded friends so it would probably help form culture.

As a side note, I think we need some new blood in moderation teams, I think some people have moved on.

Don't call people "incredibly fucking stupid". Be(e) nice.

This reads eerily close to reverse-ism. Please don't do that.

I explicitly chose that term because it’s not considered subjective by anyone, but especially not by the people who think gender-neutrality is somehow NOT political.

All words are subjective. "Non-technical" is not really the magic word you think it is. Could you clearly define it? I can't personally.

Do you think they’d stop being bad people if they couldn’t make an honest living? Would it be better or worse if they were on the street? Do you think they might resort to criminality also?

I don't think anyone deserves living in the street. I don't think they will stop being bad people whether or not I support them. It seems you're trying to move the goal post.

Do you feel better knowing they aren’t getting your money? Even at the cost of them ever doing anything good for anyone?

I feel better that they aren't getting my money because they cannot be empowered to hurt the people I care about. I think they can do good things without my support. This seems like a weird thing to say.

Also, this is clearly sealioning. It's really not a good way to make conversation.

I mean, to be fair, Skia appears to be good - Firefox and LibreOffice also use it for example. I believe GNOME Web will also use Skia in GNOME 47. It certainly seems that people are moving away from Cairo and into Skia. For what reason? I don't know.

I don't support bad people. Those bad people can change and become good people. Until then, why would I support and pay those that hurt my friends?

What I got was that there would be no Google or Mozilla specific code/libraries, but FOSS libraries for common media formats would be included so that the project can reach a wider audience.

AFAIK They use Skia, the rendering library made by Google so this does not appear true either.

We should be promoting open source software and not have infighting when open source software doesn’t have much mass market appeal to begin with.

Just as a side note, I want open source software / free software to have appeal because it is good for people. If the way the promote it to the masses is enabling awful people, I'm really not interested anymore.

Sometimes terrible people can do good things. Those good things should be supported. Judge a project on it own merits.

The thing here is that Ladybird and SerenityOS are both the community and the code. One cannot live without the other because the code will always need its community to develop it. And in this case, it is not possible to support them without supporting the people who, y'know receive the money. I think nobody is arguing against an independent browser engine - the argument is against the implementation of it.

I think you meant that using the Autobahn does not send support to Nazis. Slight typo there :P

Based on the content of the linked post and the evolution of the thread here, the mod team has decided to lock this post. There is an important difference between standing up for people who are marginalized and harassment, which this thread has been more or less equating. Please deal with this topic in a more nuanced manner going forward.

Bitcoin is the same speed it’s always been. Blocks happen every 10 minutes. Pay a high fee? Get in on the next block. Want to save on fees? Maybe it takes a few blocks for your transaction to go through.

This is a fancy way to say that it is slower unless you pay higher fees.

Fees are much, much lower than credit card, paypal, or other similar competitors. You could send a billion dollars in a single transaction and pay $1.50 on main chain, or you could send $5 on lightning and pay <1c in fees. Lightning has been around for 5 years now, it works, I use it regularly.

The fees are fluctuating and can be much higher than you claim (https://decrypt.co/234446/bitcoin-fees-skyrocket-okx-exchange-burning-utxo)

While it is true you could pay lower fees if you send larger amounts, if we take your 5$ fee at face value, then any transaction below 147.35$ will have lower fees on a payment service like Stripe (3.4% for international transactions + 0.30$ per transaction).

The supply of Bitcoin, 21 million coins, is known and has always been known. It can’t be diluted beyond that point.

I did not claim otherwise.

Nobody owns 51% of the network. Even such an actor can’t print extra BTC or force money to move without the appropriate private key. The best they can do is temporarily delay transactions while burning north of a trillion dollars in energy and equipment doing so. Which is why nobody has ever done it.

Nobody currently does. However, it is my understanding that theu could fork the network and update it if they had 50%+1 of the network. It is not impossible.

Given that fees have continued to increase with time, this seems like not a problem. It’s not “dangerous”, it’s part of the design. If hashrate drops, it drops, but given that fees and hashrate have continued to grow despite continually minting less coins, it’s not really a problem.

It is a problem because people do not want to pay higher fees.

Anybody can have a cash wallet without disclosing their identity, yet they still pay taxes.

They can pay taxes but they don't have to. There is no system to know the identity and know the tax rate that should be applied using the raw bitcoin transaction method. This has to be applied using an external centralized service at best.

Bitcoin’s rules prevent the kind of fraud where the value of your money is printed away via supply inflation of central banks or “currency restructuring” on the global scale by the the world bank.

This is not fraud and it is not what I'm talking about.

People pay taxes because they think it’s the right thing to do and/or because the government has guns and makes them. Either way, if you run a company, if you are providing goods and services, you have a place you can send somebody with a gun and enforce those rules. All the companies currently paying taxes would keep paying taxes if they used Bitcoin.

The tax and identity layers have to be added on top. They are not built-in. While it is true a country can force things, it is not true they can force the bitcoin network to apply these rules. This is in fact one of the selling points of Bitcoin according to this video.

This video has seemingly no sources for its claims.

Here are some facts:

• Lyn Alden is part of "Ego Death Capital", a venture capital company around cryptocurrencies (https://egodeath.capital/team).
• Lyn Alden is the Board Director of Swan Bitcoin - a Bitcoin investment platform (https://www.swanbitcoin.com/alden/)
• Lyn Alden is not an economist (https://www.lynalden.com/about-lyn-alden/)

Here are some weird claims it makes:

• Bitcoin transactions happen at the "speed of light" (~27:00) REALITY CHECK: As Bitcoin has grown, transactions have become slow. It's in fact why many people do not accept it for purchases anymore.
• Bitcoin cannot be diluted (~27:25) REALITY CHECK: Bitcoin is always being diluted until it reaches its hard limit.
• The value of Bitcoin has only increased over time (~27:50) REALITY CHECK: The log scale is playing tricks. A linear graph would show how volatile Bitcoin has truly been.
• Nobody controls the network (~28:25) REALITY CHECK: If someone were to own 50% or more of the network's compute power, they could control the network.

Here are some things it omits:

• Bitcoin transaction fees (~28:15): Transaction fees that empower miners have also made it much less usable as a currency. The transactions fees for Bitcoin are so high that credit card fees are actually more reasonable.
• Bitcoin's hard limit is likely very dangerous for the network (~29:00): Once the hard limit is reached, it is unclear if people will keep pumping computing power at it. If the creation of new Bitcoin is no longer allowed, it is possible that transaction fees will need to be raised to compensate miners.
• Bitcoin's lack of rules allow for massive amounts of fraud and prevents effective taxation (~29:25): While the video paints a cute picture of financial freedom, the reality is that Bitcoin allows for fraud on a world scale and does not allow for sales tax because of the way that anyone can have a cryptocurrency wallet without disclosing their identity.

Genuinely, this is Bitcoin propaganda.

Taiwan is not recognized by most countries.

Because of the Chinese Civil War (which technically never ended), both the government of Taiwan (under the name "Republic of China") and Beijing (under the name "People's Republic of China" claim to be the 'real China'. At some point in time, most people recognized the Republic of China as the legitimate government of China, however, as the situation stagnated and the relevance of China became more important, most countries now recognize the People's Republic of China as the legitimate government of China.

As for the NATO question - no, no such rule exists and nobody would want such a rule because it is a defence pact.

The answer is yes.

Yeah, either that or [any]. I don't know why people would be offended.

Also, did you mean enby? I just realised you said nimby (not in my back yard) which is not quite the same thing lol

I know there are MSCs to make sure more data is e2ee like reactions.

As for anyone putting that in their platform pitch, it seems the closest was the representative of Gematik, the German Health service though most platform pitches are rather vague in details. You can read all of the candidates (do note that not all candidates were elected so do double check) https://matrix.org/governing-board/elections/2024/

I've seen a lot of people specify (any) or a combination in those cases but it is theoretically true, yes. (I don't think that's true here though)