pull down to refresh
21 sats \ 10 replies \ @fiatbad 5h \ parent \ on: Lots Of Riders Without Their Weapons meta
Perhaps I shouldn't speak for him...
... but I'm pretty sure he's doing it as a protest. He would prefer to see CCs disappear entirely. But if the developers insist on fiat-izing SN, then he's not going to give any real Sats to them, or this ecosystem. And he's going to abuse the shit out of it whenever he can.
Ok that seems possible and yet by only using ccs as a protest he is further fiatising SNs himself as well whereas if you have enabled wallet you are resisting the fiatisation.
My understanding is that the ccs were introduced to avoid regulatory custodial risk to the operators of SNs and that to reverse the ccs would negate the effort invested in gaining regulatory compliance.
@DarthCoin is not exposed to that regulatory risk so can protest the use of ccs but he is at the same time choosing not to use sats when he still could if he wants.
Be the revolution yourself- do not wait for others to do it.
reply
It's strange because I think there's a direct parallel with the way we interact with the fiat system.
I'm on SN regularly preaching about how we are supporting the dollar system every time we spend a dollar, so we should stop on principle. We should stop using Fold, and other CC's (pun intended). We should work our asses off building Bitcoin circular economies so we can truly escape fiat.
Yet, my instinct is to cheer on @DarthCoin for his CC protest here on SN.
Why do I support one, and oppose the other, when they are fundamentally the same thing?
I feel like a total hypocrite right now. Satoshi is frowning on me from his sky-throne :(
reply
Yes it is a crazy situation given we want to use sats and yet because of regulatory pressure, probably more from a previous US administration, SNs had to introduce CCs and now some stackers choose not to use sats but instead use CCs which were really designed only to be used by people who could not yet set up a wallet.
Just shows how sly regulatory pressure can make establishing and maintaining a Bitcoin circular economy very difficult.
I may not fully understand the complexity of Darths position but will just keep using sats here because its still one of the very few places where I can.
reply
Why do I support one, and oppose the other, when they are fundamentally the same thing?
Emphasis mine; please, stay away from fundamentals.
Practical examples are much more helpful; e.g., if you're literally off the grid, i.e. generate electricity independently, then you can feel voluntaryistically bad about accepting a free beer in a pub where the power for checking keg labels is dispensed by The Man, or at least, by The Griiddy Monopsony.
Otherwise, the fundamental equivalence is practically untenable, and you're wasting your own stream of consciousness verbalising emotions that could be better spent participating in, I dunno, heckling at an open mic in a comedy club.
reply
My understanding is that the ccs were introduced to avoid regulatory custodial risk to the operators of SNs and that to reverse the ccs would negate the effort invested in gaining regulatory compliance.
They're also hugely more efficient, in the long run, than dumping the entire database into some CRDT-in-progress or whatever the moving target named "lightning network" technically builds on top of the friendly familiar CRDT of "actual Bitcoin".
reply
Not sure what a CRDT is but Coinos works perfectly well for me :)
reply
Conflict-free Replicated Data Type
it's a strict superclass of block-chain; most examples of CRDTs are permissioned ledgers that involve lots of merkle roots although no self-respecting bitcoiner would even dream of calling anything more respectable than "stinky DLT sandwich"
reply
Thank god for Coinos making such complexities unknown and non requisite for plebs like me.
reply
Oh, you just don't seem to know what lightning network is. There is no single ledger. Each node keeps its own database and is free to join and leave (open and close channels) at will. The whole system is surprisingly robust and you don't have to "dump" any database to use it.