Governance is really work in progress but I'm happy to see that people are taken this on. Many crypto projects are building in governance into their tokens and networks. I think we will see voting on the blockchain within in the next 5 years -- probably done by smaller countries or municipalities first. We will get more data and information about tech. vs social rite. Moreover, being on the blockchain doesn't mean that people can't exp. the social rite by going to vote.
Interestingly, all of those either use cryptocurrencies as an investment, or merely provide cryptocurrency-based tools (of questionable utility), and leave the problem-solving to their users.
Protocol Labs seems to be one which is actually trying to solve a problem rather than just being a tool to buy or use cryptocurrency. Your description is probably apt for the rest.
Most Crypto projects are raising money via ICO route without dealing with VCs, cap tables, and board seats. Most of these projects will fail, just the nature of innovation. Few will succeed and change the world, I will argue that Eth (one of the first ICOs) already changed the world.
The same physical infrastructure that is also used for transporting just about everything else? Anyway, most currency transfer these days is digital, so even that doesn't hold much water.
We use armored cars and people licensed to carry firearms for the transport of "just about everything else"?
Also, most currency transfer being digital is a non-sequitor Businesses still need to move the money from their location to the bank regardless of the volume of transfers done digitally.
A few months ago, I disabled all of that stuff, so that YouTube only recommends videos based on my subscriptions and liked videos. I guess it's still personalization, but it's personalization that I have control over, which seems to have drastically improved both the privacy and the quality of recommendations.
I don't use Google for search, though, so I can't comment on that.
I think they mean that people keep coming along and saying "the existing N competing standards suck, let's make a new one everyone can use" and now there's N+1 competing standards.
English is neither a programming language nor a formal logic. When we see an "if" statement that would otherwise seem irrelevant, it is common to interpret it as an insinuation.
@hu3's misunderstanding is entirely understandable.
Well one alternative representation really took off, that one where code is is a dataflow graph, whose nodes are all one-liners on a massive grid. I wonder what led to its success, where so many other interesting ideas have failed?
Yes; the Mill architecture's (I'm beginning to think it'll never be released) answer to that is to make compiling the code from an intermediate representation either just before runtime or at install time a normal part of the process.
> there have always been business models to support publishing and providing services that do not rely on adverstising and these models are well known
I am sure that these models exist, I just don't know about them because I haven't done the research. It would be easier for everyone if you just listed a few viable funding models for a search giant.
> Push advertising is unethical and culturally toxic
That is your opinion, and not one that most people share — most people think that advertising is an acceptable trade-off for good search results. If you want to persuade people of anything, you'll have to meet them where they're at, either by convincing us first that advertising is "unethical and culturally toxic", or by using some other argument.
You have made broad, sweeping remarks about the ethics of dairy farming and it's only here that you considerably narrow the scope of your statements to farms that you deem ethical.
Yes, some farms may operate in line with an acceptable standard of ethics, but for many people, it is easier to live a vegan lifestyle than to carefully ensure that all their dairy is ethically sourced.
