Message from @Heteronymus Bosch
Discord ID: 520616485467455508
You don't appear to, whatever you do.
cuz i don't agree with your glorious view of crypto?
But hey, get your pitchfork ready.
That's preferable to other ways of improving censorship *resistance*.
there will be billions invested to sell "web 3.0" to the gullible masses
can you also make better arguments than ad-hominems?
So far you've accused me of being a Fundamentalist, an accelarationist and a pitch-forking witch hunter
all cuz i said "I don't buy it based on what you've told me"
where "web 3.0" is some sort of crypto / blockchain bs that tracks everyone, everywhere
And you've called me a shill, without understanding what you're talking about.
this is already underway
i never said that
@paradigm Precisely.
It is already underway.
and i do understand it, but i'm not gonna bother proving to you cuz its the internet, for all i know you're Obama, and i'm a shoe-salesman
And if it is in the wrong hands (i.e. not everyone's, i.e. not decventralised) we're fucked. Permanently.
You clearly don't.
Sorry.,
thats not an argument
Yes it is.
pigeon carrier!
It is an argument that you didn't, and evidently still don't, understand the solutions being proposed to the problem of censorship./
>>> we had the solution, years ago - we spent billions to kill it
Ok.
So what do you all propose?
web 2.0 effectively concentrated control in very few hands
heres your argument
"You're obviously too dumb to understand what I an enlightened person says, so i don't have to bother explaining my sales-pitch to you"
that was COSTLY
facebook, alone, burned 600 million before turning a profit
How to we ensure that people like Tim Pool, one of the few remaining honest journalists, is not financially censored by the current monopolies?
lol, TCP/IP itself used to be hyped as censorship-resistant.
youtube, netflix, twitter, etc. burned more
My argument isn't that you're dumb. Although you may be. It's that you don'
there you go
the financial aspects will have to be the second phase
t (want to) understand.
no substance
>You're too dumb
"Then explain it to me
>I won't, cuz you're too dumb
SJW arguing in a nutshell
Where is your substance, apart from "something I evidently don't understand won't work because I say so".
first we need to extend open protocols and embrace those that truly are resistant to censorship
I esxplained it to you, with as much effort as I'm prepared to invest. You're evidently not interested in attempting to udnerstand.,
i'm not the one advocating for a supposed "holy grail" that you can get on faith