Thank you!!

It's the same dynamic: a demagogue democratic government will buy voters the exact same way a tyrannical regime needs to keep its controlling structure alive. It ends up being the exact same kind of government spending for the exact same purpose: buying enough of the population in order to be able to subjugate and exploit the other part. In both cases, due to the unproductive nature of the strategies, both a democratic and a tyrannical regime end up needing to emit more and more to support an ever increasing controlling structure in order to keep control under an ever increasing economic crisis. It's the exact same death spiral every single time.

Results tend to be much worse under tyrannical regimes actually. Better said, tend to arrive to the same final state much faster. So it has nothing to do with democracy, it's all on fiat's merit.

Nothing good will come out of this. People who work and pay for that "UBI" will become increasingly resented, and this will backfire in the form of social tensions and political warfare.

That's a fundamentally flawed comparison, as explained, so the argument do not makes sense.

The exact same can be said about people who is paid to post, as they can afford more time to do it, amplifying their content. That's why it's all about costs at the end, be it directly or indirectly.

You DARE deny The One True Language, YOU INFIDEL???!?!?

As I said, then cost is implied one way or another. There's people paying per post, directly or indirectly.

In no way, otherwise we would all be famous here in SN. It's like saying that paying the fee for your bitcoin transaction makes you rich.

It's like saying that the fee scheme of bitcoin is proof of stake.

But that's exactly what I'm saying. Cost is implied. One way or the other. You're validating my take there, just burying it deep down the argument.

It's fundamentally different. Proof of Stake applies to emission-based protocols (that's why stacking is possible in them), so things can be paid for at no cost out of interests. If you pay with, say, bitcoin, there's work implied in one way or another (to mine it or to buy it), which is what gives bitcoin its worth.

You yourself said it. Corruption is born from game theory: if one side can move the pieces at will at any time, as many times as he wants, and you can move yours as long as said side gets to dictate what piece, when, where, and how many times... and said side can not make any wrong moves, and all of his moves are victories, and has full authority to judge if a move of yours is wrong, and what's the punishment... the outcome is pretty obvious...

Cost, that's the only thing that matters. Any peer-verification scheme is as hackable as any current social media algorithm. If it's costless, needed numbers are granted. Otherwise if identity could be verified at no cost, Bitcoin would need no PoW, but could use that same peer-verification algorithm. It's not the case for a reason.

Any of those solutions are as sloppy as AI itself. There are only two solutions to this, which are the ones that will reign by the sheer weight of their pragmatism:

As simple as that.

Been talking nobody.

Yeap, this one wins for me.

Not really, if you´re in bitcoin, will be a nice ride ;)

Brilliant

Yes, he's exactly right.

Exactly right.

Thank you! Clearly two approaches with their own strengths.

Interesting! How do it compares to Flotilla?

Exactly.

Antartica goes brrrrrr => Antartica is a FED's plot