If you’ve been doing it this long you know that you’re the outlier. Bicyclists are terrifying to be near.

Only half?

You want 25 mph for 70 miles of road in some places, not reasonable given how the US has built itself. Places that can achieve this (dt San Francisco, dt Boston,dt Oakland, dt New York) already do this.

Not having safe infrastructure doesn’t make bikers any less dangerous to be around. My specific citation is the bay area, other places I’ve lived have not had the sheer quantity of bikers (and drivers) with a death wish/complete lack of spatial awareness.

I did, and am still

That’s a unique interpretation

yeah i dont think anyone seriously buys into bitcoin=private in 2024 thankfully. they are still deluded on monero, but its only a matter of time.

It is similar to open source social media.

thats federation, not open source. reddit was open source for a while, but not federated – and now we are here. whatsapp uses an open source protocol, but isnt federated – some asshole hawaiian (resident of hawaii, not the other option) controls it. Signal is open source, but won’t federate, its controlled by people who are way more into crypto than helping their users (moxie was actively against federation, using such examples as email to prove how federation is a failure)

You are 100% sure that data is not getting sold?

lol no, im 100% sure its being sold in some way, no matter how many things I opt out of. while i do have a lot of privacy focused things in my life, from email to chat to phone, i just can’t find myself caring that much about someone tracking my gasoline consumption or knowing that I go to the same bar every week for game night.

the obvious downside to something like XMR is that its a ticking time bomb from a privacy perspective. at some point the security will fail as all security does, and then the data is totally public.

don’t recall, it covered both bitcoin and etherium and investigated who owned what. ill see if i can’t find it. edit: this seems to be the academic version of it, but theres a prettier journalism version with more stories and pictures: https://arxiv.org/abs/2206.02871

in this case i seem to have misremembered owners vs miners, but I’ll keep poking around. this one is also older than i remember.

Like the rest of society, some people get ridiculous wealth by luck of being at the right place at the right time. That is no reason to not have open source money.

thats not the point, there have been studies that show bitcoin is fairly vulnerable to 50% control due to early adopters and other wHaLeS controlling the currency. and the studies can show this because bitcoin isnt private.

Bitcoin Core is MIT licensed.

the software is, but what relevance does that have to people using it as currency?

Why can’t I access Google’s individual transactions but they should have access to mine?

why are you giving google access to your transactions to begin with? all my credit card transactions are between me and visa and my credit union and the federal government, but not google.

I can’t find the case study, but this blockchain project by IBM was implemented in Singapore and was shown to reduce customs processing times from several weeks to just several hours.

the real question is what part of this was specific to blockchain, something that would be difficult or impossible to do without it. if you want to put forward this argument you need to at least provide a simple, clear, coherent answer to that.

in this case, i could easily argue a sqlite db hosted on gitea would work better and theres no way to prove im wrong.

the technology itself has its use cases.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=15RTC22Z2xI I would love to hear the counterarguments. video is <15 mins, academic setting.

Open source everything except the money.

this is a truly perplexing statement. what about a currency that is controlled predominantly by early adopters has anything to do with open source?

we’ll just do the same shit we did with self driving (“that was just regular self driving, you can upgrade to self-driving-plus or ‘full’ self driving or self-driving extreme definitive edition”) or networking (“that was just regular 4g which was actually just slow 3g we lied to you about, so now we have to call it 4g lte even though everyone else just calls it 4g” - att).

cloud is just a marketing term for someone elses computer, so calling gmail the cloud is perfectly reasonable. Im not disagreeing with your overall point that commenter is ridiculous, but I can’t think of a worse example than cloud.

if you mean “a useful stage where I have to learn nothing and do nothing” then sure, but if you mean “a useful stage where interested parties can hack on cool things” then Im pretty sure we’ve had an early version of that for almost a decade now and my prediction is its only going to get better (in the same way computing resources always ebb and flow between server and client). right now we are in a very heavy server-oriented stage because bringup costs are high.

skipping over the part where calling AI an algorithm is kind of weird, it seems very weird for you to expect every twitter post about AI is going to be completely serious and focused on the correct sequencing and rollout of neural network based solutions. this is just not a useful or relevant take.

Having watched the ai progression from 2000 to today, I think your belief that chatgpt and its ilk will be remotely represented in any artificial mind humanity produces is pretty ridiculous. Sure, it could be, or it could be tossed in the trash tomorrow when something better comes along. ai is not linear development.