21st century civil disobedience to secure monetary sovereignty of Indians
So many more people would've already been here if it weren't for the unfamiliar onboarding process.
It's a leap to go from email and password logins to a lengthy random string of characters (nsec) or a browser extension. The browser extension method is especially unfamiliar even for constantly online folks.
I see many more discussions about why a change is needed than the merits of the existing proposed changes.
Which in my interpretation means that there is no emerging consensus about anything at all. Is it really worth paying attention to this whole thing in that case?
I doubt I'd tolerate someone like that in real-life though. The fact that it's online allows me to think about the ideal response and check my impulses.
On a different note, Nostr in general feels so much more welcoming than Twitter to be honest. But idk if that's a good thing as it might indicate that it's an echo chamber.
Nostr fixes this.
People promoting Dollar-backed stablecoins are Feds in disguise that are promoting a neo-colonial system.
They are a threat to the sovereignty of India and Indians and are way worse than the crypto/web3/blockchain scammers.
Be gone colonial thots.
Bitcoin only.
Oh he did get hostile later yeah, but I gave him the benefit of the doubt that he was interacting with me in good faith and wanted to point out what he thought were flaws in my reasoning, which I always welcome.
The outcome was that I got a really good book recommendation so I don't mind.
Got a recommendation from him to read 'For a new liberty' by Rothbard in that exchange, which seems like an important book I'll have to read based on the first few pages I've read so far.
Beautyon rightly pointed out certain contradictions I have with my thought process right now. I recognise that.
Here are my shortcomings:
Calling for internet access to be a 'human right' will mean I will eventually tend towards wanting government intervention in the market in the form of subsidies.
That would fuck with the market because the price discovery and capital creation process in the telecom market gets disrupted which in the long term would be counter-productive to the end goal I want, which is universal internet access.
It is clear that letting the free market do its thing is the best means towards that end, as has been seen in India, where the internet tariffs are among the cheapest in the world. It became so because corps invested in new telecom tech and competitively reduced prices.
Hence, declaring it a human right is not the ideal way to achieve the end goal of universal internet access which would necessitate collectivist intervention.
The better way is to progressively minimise government intervention in the telecom market.
