[-] doylio@lemmy.ca 5 points 3 months ago

I don't like it

[-] doylio@lemmy.ca 2 points 3 months ago

Online market places to be jointly and severally liable for anything on their sites

This should be something AI can do now. Give it a list of what kinds of ads are not allowed, and ask it if the contents of this ad are acceptable

[-] doylio@lemmy.ca -1 points 3 months ago

It's anti-tech propaganda. The same is happening with crypto. Certain groups don't like it, so they try to convince the public that it is bad for the environment so it will be banned

[-] doylio@lemmy.ca 9 points 3 months ago

This isn't a good situation, but I also don't like the idea that people should be banned from using energy how they want to. One could also make the case that video games or vibrators are not "valuable" uses of energy, but if the user paid for it, they should be allowed to use it.

Instead of moralizing we should enact a tax on carbon (like we have in Canada) equal to the amount of money it would take to remove that carbon. AI and crypto (& xboxes, vibrators, etc) would still exist, but only at levels where they are profitable in this environment.

[-] doylio@lemmy.ca 2 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)
[-] doylio@lemmy.ca 6 points 7 months ago

It seems to be a lightweight alternative to Mastodon that is easier for individuals to run on a private server

[-] doylio@lemmy.ca 0 points 7 months ago

Yes, of all the problems in the healthcare system, the problem of letting AI help patients diagnose their own problems is definitely top of the list /s

[-] doylio@lemmy.ca 0 points 7 months ago

That would be great! And I'm sure there are people doing it. And if 2.3% of the US Power grid were dedicated to that I'm sure some people would be upset about it too

My basic point is I don't think there is anything morally wrong with Bitcoin miners using energy, even though this is a narrative that is very popular now. There are plenty of other valid criticisms of Bitcoin, but I don't think this one stands up to scrutiny.

[-] doylio@lemmy.ca -4 points 7 months ago

I would love if this were an option, but it's not. The current battery technologies don't have the scale for grid level storage capacity. The only grid scale storage solution that is really being done is to build very expensive infrastructure that moves water between two dams of different heights, and building more of those doesn't seem politically likely at the moment

The reality is that there is much a whole bunch of excess energy supply that is produced because power plants can't cycle up and down with demand. So they have to keep producing at peak demand 24/7 (there is some nuances based on the type of power plant, NatGas is faster to turn on/off, but this is broadly true)

I have my qualms with Bitcoin. As a currency it has significant transaction speed problems, and potential security ones after a couple more halvenings. But I don't see a problem if Bitcoin miners want to pay energy producers to use energy that would be produced anyway and earn the producers nothing.

[-] doylio@lemmy.ca 1 points 7 months ago

I agree with everything you've said

Pretty much the only things Bitcoin has on Ethereum today is a better brand and Lindy effect

[-] doylio@lemmy.ca -5 points 7 months ago

Oh yeah there are many criticisms of Bitcoin one can make, I just don't think the energy one is very convincing if you think about it a bit

-2
submitted 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) by doylio@lemmy.ca to c/fediverse@lemmy.ml

EDIT: I know many people have a knee-jerk aversion to anything crypto, but this is not a scheme to make money. I would be happy to see this done with fiat as well, but IMO this is much easier to do with smart contracts.

I am very excited about the possibility of the Fediverse, and the potential for many experiments in instance governance. A problem that all instances must content with is trolling and spam. It seems very difficult to impose a cost on these bad actors without harming honest users as well. Either instances have minimal signup friction and are vulnerable to being overwhelmed with bad actors & defederated (see the recent defederation decision from Beehaw), or they present frustrating barriers such as manual approval or waitlists for folks who just want to have fun

A possible solution comes from the blockchain space, which has been dealing with anonymous bad actors since its inception. Many blockchains and blockchain apps require users to stake some asset in order to gain certain privileges (basically a deposit). If the user is determined to be a bad actor, they lose some or all of their stake.

An instance could be integrated with a smart contract to manage membership could be very effective at dissuading trolls and spammers. A user could stake a small amount of money (say $10) in order to create an account on the instance. This could be done very quickly and would require no manual approval from admins. If the admins determine they are acting poorly, they could ban the user and slash their funds. If an honest user decides they don't want to stay on the instance, they could delete their account and recover their deposit.

(EDIT: An important part of this is that the funds are destroyed when slashed, not given to the admins or mods. This prevents a profit incentive to ban)

I've got a prototype smart contract for this. Would be interested in working with someone on this if there's anyone with experience with the instance management

view more: next ›

doylio

joined 1 year ago