Nostr Web Client

The Bitcoin cultists think that Nostr could prevent Biden's handlers from making statements on his behalf. They're totally delusional, obviously.

Let's say that Biden needed to use a fingerprint to Tweet. All someone would need to do is take his finger, whether attached to him or not, to make a Tweet "as Biden". And all the delusional drones who think, "signing proves identity." are just that; completely delusional and unaware of how anything actually works:

https://medium.com/@beautyon_/beach-boy-bitcoin-64f62bed4c7e

Noster can't fix everything, and neither can Bitcoin; and there is a class of Bitcoiner that has shifted this narrative from "Bitcoin fixes this" to "Nostr Fixes this". It's the same Bitcoin Cult under a different name.

People who think software services like X, Bitcoin and Nostr are "technologies" betray their complete lack of understanding of what a technology is. Services are not technologies; they are made out of technologies.

And if you think a "signing key" will protect the launch procedure from being hijacked, you really don't understand how signing keys work, probably never used GPG, and are ignorant of the history of Cryptography.

Which is fine. No one can be expected to know everything.

These things are being said because it is important for people who prefer not to be ignorant hear them to reign in the drooling fanboyism that masquerades for insight. They throw around words like "Open Source" and "Centralized" not knowing what these things mean or whether or not practical use can be made of them. They also don't like it when "Open Source" is used against them as intended, when their work is forked and someone makes a copy of it for profit.

Publishers of books are the worst offenders in this, breathlessly talking about "Open Source" whilst protecting their books with copyright.

One of the rare exceptions is Boldrin and Levine's "Against Intellectual Monopoly" that you can download for free AND buy on Amazon. Not so clever people think they're being smart by finger pointing Boldrin and Levine for selling their books thinking they're not available for free, only to be silenced by pointing to the URL where they are. How pathetic.

http://dklevine.com/general/intellectual/against.htm

Thankfully, Bitcoin can't suffer from the delusions of these people, who are toxic and retarding of the expansion of Bitcoin's use. Once again, if Bitcoiners can't overcome the voices of these people then it was always doomed to fail.

So far. It is THEM that are failing, not YOU.

⛩oizen 1y ago

Interesting the distinction between technology and service; giving a quick think about it it'd be hard to find a precise border. A tool acquires its definition at the very moment it became serviceable for the user; but also the need might be what justifies a way to cover a service. Paradox of the measure comes to my mind...

Taking current state of X, for example, its service is digital communications, its tech it's internet infrastructure and protocols, —from which also many other services takes advantage of—... then later when looking at internet as a service, its tech might as well be human's ability to expression, —and it's need to increase the reach of preach—

Saving the medium article for later; no less than 5 clicks this Medium web service asks to properly start reading 😅

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Beautyon 1y ago

You're conflating the effect of a tool with the nature of a tool. This logic is what leads people to think, "Guns are dangerous" and even more absurd, that AR-15s are more dangerous than any other type of rifle. It's emotionalism and illogic.

Using words like "tech" as shorthand is not useful and often misleading, so I would not do that when trying to have a precise discussion.

Technology can be used to provide a service. Software can be used to provide a service also. Tools do not "acquire definitions" they are defined by what they are; people develop analogies and superimpose them on tools and services. This is a mistake, and Bitcoiners have suffered from it gravely.

⛩oizen 1y ago

I appreciate the response! Apologies for the slang; internet habits...

Reading your arguments leads me to believe I may be positioned schools of thinking apart of yours; to be more precise, in regards of logic and emotions. Even though I agree "guns are dangerous" is an absurd sentence, the fear about its existence is not at all less true. Conceded, this kind of emotions may be what leads to faulty measures lacking of rationality; however it could be argued similar absurd might be to expect for everyone to understand why that sentence is absurd... In any case, I'm intrigued some more about your read as it has the topic of experience in it 👀. Cheers!