ios testflight #[2]
good to know, thanks! #[2]
People are complaining that daily buy limits dropped from $50k to $1k and I'm over hear like "where can I smash buy with the $7.28 I dug out of the center console of my car?" #plebchain
Man, that was a hell of a game. Wish they would’ve at least got a shot off at the end. But Sparty put up a ton of fight against a hot Kstate team. #SpartyOn
Perfect. Thanks, Tim!
Can anyone tell me why void.cat links never open for me? (Damus app. Link opens to Brave browser.)
Come on, Spartans! Big second half coming up!
?cid=2154d3d7i3f2xkil90lf7l87bsu78rw1rz197o3jzv7mgn01&rid=giphy.gif&ct=g
Build the world you want to live in.
TL;DR Given my laymen's understanding of each of your primary concerns I think he would argue that the inflation problem you focus on is one of many that are downstream from other, more fundamental dynamics. In short (in my words), bitcoin may solve a series of major problems in the area of money and economics (related to #3 below), but it doesn’t matter if we annihilate ourselves in the next decade because we couldn’t solve these overarching, fundamental, global coordination problems.
---
I’m not sure to what extent he understands bitcoin. I’ve heard him talk about blockchain technology (I know, I know…) and the power of immutable ledgers, so he’s certainly aware of it.
If I had to quickly outline the differences between the two of you I think he’s thinking about how to solve the different types of existential risk we face, with exponential technology in the context of traditional economic frames being just one significant problem.
He argues that the major existential threats we face are downstream of three fundamental problems.
1) Rival/risk Games, like the tragedy of the commons and arms races, which have wide-ranging negative effects in a globalized world.
2) Unconstrained (exponential) consumption of our (linear) natural resources leads to countless bad outcomes for us as species, global warming, micro plastics, reef death, and phosphorus runoff being major examples.
3) Exponential technology both in how fast it's growing and how quickly it’s able to be spread. Democratization means that the technologies that can wipe out civilization are getting cheaper and easier to deploy. Also, this leads to a fundamental shift in economics - previously we needed people to work and needed a system to incentivize them to do so, but we are heading towards a situation in which most people won’t need to work.
This podcast is only 35 minutes (put on by the guy who made The Social Dilemma) and gives a good overview of his philosophy and concerns.
We are frequently tripped up by the conflation of empathy and sympathy to our detriment. Empathy is *necessary* if we are live with each other in at least a moderately cohesive society.
Chris Voss, author of “Never Split the Difference: Negotiating As If Your Life Depended On It,” explains it beautifully:
My god. “Authentic”. What a joke.
This is a balanced and easy to understand article from #[0] .
https://www.swanbitcoin.com/monetary-debasement-vs-supply-shocks/
“A problem we’ll-states is half solved”
Agreed. But at the same time global existential risk is increasing. While it may be the best time to be alive, it's also increasingly likely that the lights go out within a couple of generations. (To take one example, how long can Biden, Putin, and Xi manage their nuclear armaments without a mishap that puts humanity as we know it at risk?)
Do human populations *need* to grow? I realize there are “demographic problems” when a population falls below replacement rate. Is that because our economic system requires growth to continue or are there other reasons related to biology and genetics? Is there a world in which we have 8 billion people and that’s a stable number for decades or centuries?
(I’m sure someone has thought about this longer than the time it took me to drive to the donut shop. 😂)
Apparently I’m not good at tagging yet. Trying again. #[0]
https://damus.io/note1j5c7vcl6l752kva9wn7n8jhdh8mced6dkwwtkaqxxfd4a4eeextqap6r9m
jeffbooth@nostrverified.com , Are you familiar with Daniel Schmachtenberger and his thinking about existential risk? I think you are both thinking about how to solve the big problems humanity faces.
It’s not just that AI is going to eliminate the need for many jobs. It’s also how it’s going to impact the psyche of people. AI progress sends a clear message to people - your reality is unstable. Your future is unpredictable. It will be unlike anything you can imagine right now.
This sense of instability will shake people to the core. They will look for anything to hold onto. They’ll lean into ideologies and the worst kinds of tribalism. They’ll succumb more easily to black and white thinking. They’ll seek out enemies to define themselves against. They’ll be susceptible to strongmen who promise to “restore order,” whatever that means.
This is insane. We are sleepwalking off a cliff.
https://twitter.com/michalkosinski/status/1636683810631974912?s=46&t=-mus6KRMCVYiBoT8SMf7iA
I think the other things potentially extinguish humanity faster but what you’ve articulated is right in there at the top of the list.
If we can’t recognize, as a species, that our simplistic models don’t have sufficient explanatory and predictive power and that we must grapple with complexity then we’ll just continue tearing each other apart. We’ll continue to tribe up and battle it out.