Crypto would actually be a good idea, if we did it on a smart contract platform we could have part of the money go to the user and part go to the platform, but the platform wouldn’t be in control of how that worked, it would be up to the user to decide what % the platform got.
If this has any serious interest I will shepherd this.
Not really, the endgame is the same, the greedy corporations will exploit the planet’s resources until they’re dry and then they’ll wipe their tears with the money they made in the process, the core issue is really putting sustainability in front of everything else, because not doing so is what deals the real damage
Ok I can agree with that, I also don’t like Bitcoin specifically, but there are other cryptocurrencies which actually have a use and, at the cost of energy of course, empower the users (for privacy, currency transfers, etc.), from what I know only Monero is really worth their salt in that regard as it also uses a proof of work algorithm (RandomX) that is purpose built to be unprofitable to run on power hungry ASICs
Yeah, they do have their uses, world desperately needs some independent currency everyone can use regardless of race, nationality, borders, government interference, and corporate greed.
For now Bitcoin is kind of the only one that everyone knows well enough to trust, given how quickly everything else comes and goes, and it’s very bad because it’s the shitty one
Did you ever wonder why people spent energy for Bitcoin instead of selling it to consumers and industries? It would clearly be more profitable right? You will be surprised to learn that they do when possible. They only mine Bitcoin when it’s the most profitable use of energy, which never happens unless Bitcoin is actually the only available option. People mine with energy they can’t sell or store for technical reasons. Whether that’s because there is not enough demand for it (Africa) or the facility is not connected to the grid. That means people mine Bitcoin with energy that would have been wasted otherwise. That’s neutral for climate
Of all the wild, unsupported, and desperate claims, this is definitely one of them.
That’s not how energy production works, that’s not how supply/demand works, that’s not even how the economics works
That’s literally supply and demand. You are denying the undeniable. Review your axioms
Edit: Or you can try justifying your claims but you will fail. You can maybe point out the simplifications that I made, considering something is true when it’s true more than 95% of the time
Maybe you’d use some other crypto, but that aside, while cool in theory, the whole Lemmy would probably have to be reworked from the ground up to rely on the blockchain you’re thinking of like Nostr (sorry, I don’t know what gave me the impression that it was a blockchain).
It should be possible to add the function in the current architecture instead, a bit like Misskey and others add extras such as reactions
You don’t really need Lemmy to change anything. Just have the user fill in a wallet field in their profile and Lemmy to have their own wallet address. Now, you can tip a user and have some of that go to Lemmy as well by specifying the ratio in the contract or even having it being customisable by the donor.
That sounds interesting, although I could see people creating their own instance to send awards that look the same for free, maybe they should be limited to being displayed on the same instance they were awarded from?
Bitcoin was invented exactly for use cases like this one
Crypto would actually be a good idea, if we did it on a smart contract platform we could have part of the money go to the user and part go to the platform, but the platform wouldn’t be in control of how that worked, it would be up to the user to decide what % the platform got.
If this has any serious interest I will shepherd this.
We don’t even need smart contracts. Just make the transaction have 2 outputs, one to the platform, one to the user
If only it wasn’t a climate crime with the unstable value
You should be blaming the energy source
I do. I also blame wasting the energy that we got from the dangerous source unwisely. If you don’t spend it on shit, less of it will be produced.
Not really, the endgame is the same, the greedy corporations will exploit the planet’s resources until they’re dry and then they’ll wipe their tears with the money they made in the process, the core issue is really putting sustainability in front of everything else, because not doing so is what deals the real damage
Greedy corporations being the doom of humanity isn’t an excuse for you to fall for a scam that helps bringing said doom. Both can be bad.
Ok I can agree with that, I also don’t like Bitcoin specifically, but there are other cryptocurrencies which actually have a use and, at the cost of energy of course, empower the users (for privacy, currency transfers, etc.), from what I know only Monero is really worth their salt in that regard as it also uses a proof of work algorithm (RandomX) that is purpose built to be unprofitable to run on power hungry ASICs
Yeah, they do have their uses, world desperately needs some independent currency everyone can use regardless of race, nationality, borders, government interference, and corporate greed. For now Bitcoin is kind of the only one that everyone knows well enough to trust, given how quickly everything else comes and goes, and it’s very bad because it’s the shitty one
Haha, that’s painfully true
Did you ever wonder why people spent energy for Bitcoin instead of selling it to consumers and industries? It would clearly be more profitable right? You will be surprised to learn that they do when possible. They only mine Bitcoin when it’s the most profitable use of energy, which never happens unless Bitcoin is actually the only available option. People mine with energy they can’t sell or store for technical reasons. Whether that’s because there is not enough demand for it (Africa) or the facility is not connected to the grid. That means people mine Bitcoin with energy that would have been wasted otherwise. That’s neutral for climate
Of all the wild, unsupported, and desperate claims, this is definitely one of them.
That’s not how energy production works, that’s not how supply/demand works, that’s not even how the economics works
That’s literally supply and demand. You are denying the undeniable. Review your axioms
Edit: Or you can try justifying your claims but you will fail. You can maybe point out the simplifications that I made, considering something is true when it’s true more than 95% of the time
Maybe you’d use some other crypto, but that aside, while cool in theory, the whole Lemmy would probably have to be reworked from the ground up to rely on the blockchain you’re thinking of
like Nostr(sorry, I don’t know what gave me the impression that it was a blockchain). It should be possible to add the function in the current architecture instead, a bit like Misskey and others add extras such as reactionsWhy nostr?
You’re right, I misunderstood how it worked, corrected now
You don’t really need Lemmy to change anything. Just have the user fill in a wallet field in their profile and Lemmy to have their own wallet address. Now, you can tip a user and have some of that go to Lemmy as well by specifying the ratio in the contract or even having it being customisable by the donor.
That sounds interesting, although I could see people creating their own instance to send awards that look the same for free, maybe they should be limited to being displayed on the same instance they were awarded from?
Well, the badge can be displayed only after the transaction is confirmed on the blockchain. Easy way to verify and prevent spam awards.
That would really work great and it’s not even hard to make. 300 likes of code would do the whole thing
I’m sold, time for an RFC?