Ask Lemmy
A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions
Please don't post about US Politics.
Rules: (interactive)
1) Be nice and; have fun
Doxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them
2) All posts must end with a '?'
This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?
3) No spam
Please do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.
4) NSFW is okay, within reason
Just remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either [email protected] or [email protected].
NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].
5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions.
If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email [email protected]. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.
Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.
Partnered Communities:
Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu
view the rest of the comments
It has potential but everyone is going about it wrong.
What would it mean to go right about it in your opinion? Using proof of stake instead of proof of work seems obvious to me, but I have a hard time thinking of an actual use case for crypto
Crypto currency, as we know it, is mainly analogous to the concept of rai stones. There's a misconception that it's "money in a device" like a kind of credit card, but how it works is you have digitally-produced objectively existing entities which can be "dedicated" to its current owner. This combination of modernism and improvisionism also gives crypto inherently authoritative connotations.
And there lies the issue. Trade and trade systems are a universal concept, but government is not, so I can confirm it's a given that combining them just inherits the instability of the latter.