Обратите внимание на пример неверного понимания закона Грэшема:
https://stacker.news/items/212698
Когда говорят, что плохие деньги вытесняют из оборота хорошие, имеют ввиду что хорошие деньги оседают у людей в качестве сбережений.
Люди охотнее расстаются с плохими деньгами, таким образом они заполняют рынок.
Товар монетизируется тогда (и только тогда), когда люди используют его в качестве сбережений. Находясь в постоянном обороте, плохие деньги подвергаются инфляции пока вскоре и вовсе перестают быть деньгами.
Ответил там. Продублирую комментарий здесь:
Gresham's law requires two currencies to be a legal tender at the same time. One good, one bad. Legal tender means that all businesses must accept it as money. In that case people think "this first thing is actually better than another thing, but the state forces the grocery store to accept both at the same rate, so I will spend the bad thing and collect the good thing".
So, the business has to be forced to accept both. I think, this is what happens in El Salvador. We can check the statistics on how frequently people pay with dollars and BTC. The business is forced to accept both, as is required for Gresham's law to apply.
What if you bought an expensive car? You can buy an insurance against damages or theft. Otherwise stupid drug addict can damage your car or steal it just for fun and you would have to pay from your pocket!
Not to buy a house. To build one! There is a plenty of land. Everyone can build a house in a year even manually (upper bound). Why to subscribe to 30 year mortgage? Or to work more than a year to save money on a house. Just build it on your own, if it is too expensive to buy or to take mortgage
Wait! If your house burns down, you are better off to have nothing to pay the mortgage and just go bankrupt, then pay the mortgage with saved money. When you not saved, you spent it somehow and they can't take that consumed pleasure away from you.
For example, you spent money on education or beautiful journey in tropical countries. Then come back and discover that the house burned down. Ok, you have no money to pay the mortgage, so you go bankrupt. You take away good emotions from the trip and your education.
Alternatively, you saved the money, then the house burned down and you pay the mortgage with the sawed money. You are worse off now. You could have received education and the trip, but instead gave the money to bank!
GM 🌻
We can check. I just liked your comment with ⚡ emoji. Did you receive such a notification?
IMHO we need a client side flag "nsfw" which can be assigned manually for a followed account. It is easy to mark all of them. Images and videos from those accounts should not be automatically preloaded.
New wave of content creators in nostr are sex workers. Dozens of them joined recently! Zappable content 😋
My first #zapathon successfully completed!
I'm about to go for groceries ...
Need to participate in #zapathon first!
#zapathon soon ...
Let's see what it is 😉
Is there other way to temporarily hide nsfw profiles from feed? I.e. when I scroll amethyst on public. Like mute them temporarily
Good night 💤
So nostr:npub1qny3tkh0acurzla8x3zy4nhrjz5zd8l9sy9jys09umwng00manysew95gx gave an absolute masterclass on the problems with Musk's current Twitter approach on WBD, starting at the 17m mark. It's a great advertisement for Nostr and I recommend everyone watch it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Ms-dE6aasA
I've been retweeting or reposting Odell's various observations on this topic for a while and so I'm happy to share this too, including on Twitter today, even as a filthy blue-check myself.
Where I disagree with Odell (slightly) is on tactics. He thinks people should give up blue checks in protest. And that's a very fair position. I don't disagree, especially for someone like Odell with a purist position and a generally cypherpunk audience.
But I think there are multiple successful paths on this. I have always been a Twitter fan, and my normie audience is there. I wanted to be able to pay for better UX and anti-impersonation defenses for years before they became available. Just because Musk is running it doesn't mean I won't pay for helpful services, especially if they protect my audience. Real people lose money to Lyn Alden impersonation scams if they can't tell my account from others, and I directly hear from them when it happens. It's always heartbreaking.
So, I'm on the offensive, not the defensive. The way I view it, unless or until someone censors me on Twitter, they're locked in there with me, rather than me being locked in there with them. If having a blue check reduces the success rate of impersonation scams and amplifies my reach at calling out Twitter's problems, I'll have the blue check. What I absolutely *won't* do is change what I say based on a blue check. If anything, I purposely overdo it to the opposite and exaggerate my criticisms on purpose to push back against platform incentives.
Two simultaneous approaches:
1) Call out the problem on Twitter. Don't give Musk a pass. Point out that a pro-freedom, pro-anonymity view doesn't match with what is going on there. Don't let his rhetoric disguise his inaction. If Twitter cares about freedom and anonymity then they will offer a paid option that doesn't require identity (e.g. the "orange check" bitcoin payment.) Until something like that, they are LARPing and are fair to criticize as such.
2) Have your foot here on Nostr and on decentralization technologies generally. In the long run, I think this is the future. And more importantly, I hope it is.
Scammers can still create fake Lyn Alden profiles on other networks where there are many users who know who is Lyn Alden 🤗
✅ done