Avatar
Clockwerk
82bce7d21c2bea337a400e818e51544bd6edb9c396001d348b31a38265598ac2
Tick tock next block
Replying to Avatar Ethan Tuttle

hi nostr.

I'm working on fedimint (thnx nostr:nprofile1qqs8suecw4luyht9ekff89x4uacneapk8r5dyk0gmn6uwwurf6u9rusppamhxue69uhkumewwd68ytnrwgq3samnwvaz7tmjv4kxz7fwwdhx7un59eek7cmfv9kqz9rhwden5te0wfjkccte9ejxzmt4wvhxjmcp2shpv ) and have general interest in ecash.

if you don't know what that means, what's your most pressing question? if you do, when was the last time you've checked in on the space? It's quite interesting.

Unclear on the relationship between fedimint and ecash.

I listened to some pods about fedimint and feel positively toward it because we need better on ramps/custody solutions- although 2of3 multisigs seem to be moving much more quickly in that space.

The history of ecash is cool but honestly learning the tech stack for what seems like a totally different system is 🥲

Yanis Varoufakis - understands bitcoin/crypto more generally and has direct and to the point criticisms.

Of course he really doesn't understand btc- or he would buy it.

But it's still head and shoulders better than the average. His views on technofeudalism are also an interresting listen.

https://youtu.be/1JGYpDZixlY?feature=shared

kaMagoMee just sounds cool and mysterious.

Apperently the like button hasa fire animation now...but everying else is 😬

Are you an account posting over mesh network?

If I had a major take away from covid- one of them would be that I would avoid making common cause with discriminatory people while trying to uphold some finer point of freedom.

You seem like a person who tries to go by logic so let me outline a principle I heard that changed my thought process.

It's the concept of negative liberty vs positive liberty. Freedom from vs freedom to.

"Freedom from" is not having some one coerce you. Don't tread on me

"Freedom to" is expanding one's capabilities- for example, no human has a natural ability to fly- but today this is something society works together to provide freedom of movement.

To me the person who discriminates reduces human autonomy by curtailing another person's freedom to.

As you have observed the vast majority of people who engage in such behaviors do not care at all about freedom-its entirely selfish and not in good faith. "Cancel culture" is a "fafo" situation that many people had coming.

I know this is an old topic now, but I thought it would be useful to record my opinion on it somewhere.

For those who never understood the anti-anti-covid-vaccine position, this was the gist of their arguments. This is not my position. This is me "steel-manning" their argument the best I can.

1. The modern medical establishment is trustworthy and it's collective opinion should be considered more correct than any individual doctor, and especially more correct than any non-doctor, despite not being perfect. You can't do your own research and expect to do better than people who have dedicated their lives to the topic.

2. As such, when they say a vaccine is safe and effective, and that it is crucial that everybody take it in order to stop a pandemic, you should take it.

3. Those that didn't take it:

a. Caused the pandemic to rage on, rather than fade out.

b. Killed grandma

c. Aded more burden to ER staff by clogging ERs when they could have prevented their illness.

4. We care about your freedom, but are pissed off that you are using your freedom to harm all of the rest of us.

5. Therefore we find ourselves justified in:

a. Being mean to you

b. Terminating voluntary relationships (such as your job)

c. Disallowing voluntary engagements (such as entering our restaurant)

d. Shaming you and ostracizing you

e. Demonitizing your YouTube channels, and kicking your posts off of social media

6. Nothing that you lost in (5) was your right. Your rights were respected. You refused, and we exercised our rights against you in punishment.

I've always thought these arguments were valid. But I never found them to be sound. I think it is possible for a really bad pandemic to arise, and a very safe and effective cure to be available, and for these argument to be both valid and sound. But not this pandemic and not this vaccine. And I think by now, even most anti-anti-covid-vaxxers have belatedly come to that same conclusion. Because they all got sick too.

In particular, the modern medical establishment is not trustworthy. It's collective opinion should not be presumed to be more correct than any individual opinion. It is corrupt. You need to find experts that are trustworthy and trust them, not the collective opinion. Some good vaccine experts said at the beginning that "vaccinating into a pandemic" would not work because they virus would mutate faster than a vaccine could be deployed. They were right. Being proven correct in the end is a good hint as to who you should listen to. This same logic applies to other domains (e.g. listen to Alan Dershowitz on legal matters, not Lawrence Tribe). The vaccine wasn't clearly safe, even if it had harmed nobody, because it was too new and skipped a lot of typical tests, so that was clearly a lie. But now we have more data into precisely how it was unsafe and how many people suffered (about 1 in 45 had elevated troponin-I levels post-shot).

I got the shot when it was made availalbe in NZ. By the time boosters came around, I was skeptical but did some calculations based on the most recent studies at the time and decided I was a borderline case being in my 50s with several comorbidities, so I got the first boosters. After that, when more data came out, I decided I probably should not have gotten the boosters and I have not had any more shots. At this point I don't think anybody (even elderly people with comorbidities) should use the older COVID vaccine which is completely useless against new variants.

For me opposition hinged around a principle of bodily autonomy- I believe no government should have a right to force someone to get a treatment.

Most people whol oudly followed the logic you outlined above did so convinced that the shots were sterilizing and would be a magic bullet solution- which I found absurd during the later phases when it had become clear that they were merely palliative at best. Threatening jobs for people who were 100% work from home was rediculous. I also think people who took the shot had broadly better outcomes- and many people who were against the vax here (usa) were incredibly cavalier, inconsiderrte, spread the virus without consideration of risks, etc. Many of the people have immediately been vindictively curtailing autonomy here- showing they learned nothing from the experience of covid.

Even so-I think it's useful to consider how to handle this if it happens again because very likely we are facing a future with what will likely be engineered viruses in it - having no clear template for dealing with viral outbreaks is now a proven threat/issue.

I'm really kinda unclear why an nostr app HAS to be nostr only- since as I under stand t nostr is too public to be good at dms. Why can't we link say simplex to an npub, similar to a lighting address?

The energy on nostr is amazing.

What's needed is the ability to better organise communities.

Personally I don't think nostr is technically any where near the stage of being a big normie melting pot, if from no other view than the state of the system itself is not ready for that.

It's far better for it to aim first at being a very vibrant string of interconnected niche communities or a protocol for ai marketplaces

Could not agree more strongly that the ability to create niche micro communities is a key feature of decentralized social media.

Different cultural groups should be able to create their space-

However-

It also needs to be analogs to a narrow back alley bar crawl- you need to be able to exit your favorite pub and go exploring.

The reason: private chats and discords kinda suck event though they try to fill this role.

Unfollowing people because my feed has become a mess for reasons I don't quite grok.