AI:

computers will change the world for the better and will put humans on the sidelines

Crypto:

computers will change money for the better and will make a free market for small investors to be tossed around

To amazing technologies, two idiotic mindsets

#ai #crypto

What nostr:npub1szel7k75h0vnjn3mdyjgnd0eet9szc7scqqlmfa2t8zzy8l2jqgqf2l4zg brings is beyond digital assets and AI. It's a foundation for an economic system whose main beneficiaries are the people. We are now many steps closer.

https://atomflow.ai

#ai #crypto #decentralization #atomflow

If value produced matches invested amount, the world would be a better place

Thanks for letting me know. All the best with Vector!

I think humans are far more complex than machines.

For TPF-grade hardware, there is none I know of. It is only z/TPF when it comes to what it does. Though, for always-encrypted database workloads, some non-x86 servers do well indeed. But, that's out of the question I guess.

Though, even technically, you can't decentralise everything as efficiently or elegantly. IBM z/TPF is one of these.

When it comes to social matters, it is even more complex.

Learn more about Atomflow private coins distribution.

#crypto #ai #atomflow nostr:nevent1qqsgern7y6eamj3nngsjprmmtdw8kpjmzjh0f4vymmxer3qhyjfjl6cvtna2z

A layered framework. Technical decentralisation is a means to an end. The end being decentralised economic output and returns. In turn, this decentralises power. It is a balancing force and a way to ensure economic and social justice to ensure a healthy society and drive equitable growth.

You can find out more details on how I think of decentralisation in practical terms, together with others, on https://atomflow.ai

And you can find another side of how I think of it in this article on Nostr or on nprofile1qqsgjfz980r7nqpqnv8n2du9sexhfss29666dql7htlc6dthc7quudcfc4ej7's website

Nostr

nostr:naddr1qvzqqqr4gupzpzfyg5au06vqyzds7dfhskry6axzpghttf5rl6a0lrf4wlrcrn3hqq2nv7nf94e8zknjfpv5cejptfq5yjj0x455xeeyrqd

Website

https://kareemalkaseer.com/articles/the-humanist-and-machine-societies

Maths is an expression of ownership nostr:nevent1qgs8ypd2zh8sk7x2a4cvltpsfjtlc5efyd5zudmvtszyjxn6tyzamxqpzamhxue69uhhyetvv9ujumn0wd68ytnzv9hxgtcpr4mhxue69uhkummnw3ez6vpj9eukz6mfdphkumn99e3k7mf0qqsfqdazvf5k72f3wuup4k56ygz9mlln630pukvuh5u6pz63yerxqngu403ae

Decentralisation is the core, all else is detail.

#crypto #decentralization

Freedom is great but it is not the only thing. It comes with duties. We all can vibe until we get tired of it or get too far removed from reality. For me, the course of action is to build a better reality not only for myself and likeminded people but a sustainable one for as many people as it gets.

It's funny when a side that oppresses freedom of speech in one way lectures another side that oppresses freedom of speech in another way about freedom

Ban vs shadow-ban

Law vs secretive surveillance

Agencies vs corporates

Two sides quarrelling over controlling people at large

Thanks for sharing. I am not sure that double-spending, proof-of-work and supply cap have any morality in them. The first two are technical and the third is arbitrary. The supply cap just needs to be there for bitcoin to work and is not really set in stone.

It's difficult for the whole network to agree that something is spam on the spot. Email spam filters work sometime and do not work some other times. You can then define categories for what's spam but that would be your definition of right and wrong. You may change your mind later, people can agree with you or not, people can settle on the exact opposite, etc. A technical definition of "spam" would be easier to incorporate in the network, I reckon.

For changing the supply cap, I reckon that if the door is open for it, it will be determined by whichever group having more control on the network, coins and/or mining power. A more civilised way would be divergent consensus discussions followed by one or more groups forking.

I am not saying this is right or wrong. I can see your point but I hardly think that the network allows for it.

Thanks for the stimulating thought.

I am interested in understanding what you are proposing. Assuming it goes through and all somehow agree on what's moral, however difficult that is, what if the 'consensus-driven moral' becomes immoral? Are morals objective in this proposal?

#DigitalID is an entry to the #MachineSociety. Be it called digital ID, voting card, banking ID or whatever. As long as it's an identifying key into a centralised database that consolidates social, financial, biometric, professional and electoral entries.

First, with governmental partnership's with AI surveillance companies, foreign and domestic, which have their own goals, ties and shareholders, digital ID can be a monitoring and tool used for persecute people.

Second, a single hack into the system gives away crucial information about citizens of a whole country. The higher the reward, the more effort directed at it.

Digital equals no privacy whatsoever.

Current exchanges as middlemen prohibit the evolution of cryptocurrencies. Modelling crypto-markets after the stock market leads to the same result: corporate control.

#crypto #decentralization

nostr:nprofile1qqsgjfz980r7nqpqnv8n2du9sexhfss29666dql7htlc6dthc7quudcfc4ej7 concisely defines the machine society that is being built and proposes an alternative humanist society in this manifesto. The proposition is actionable and, I believe, very effective.

nostr:nprofile1qqsgpvllt02thkfefcakjfyfkhuu4jcpv0gvqq0a5749n3pzrl4fqyq2k9kcx is a foundation for the initiative.

#decentralization #AI #crypto nostr:naddr1qvzqqqr4gupzpzfyg5au06vqyzds7dfhskry6axzpghttf5rl6a0lrf4wlrcrn3hqq2nv7nf94e8zknjfpv5cejptfq5yjj0x455xeeyrqd

Hardly the case, just changing. Whether one likes the change is another story.