Copied from another reply I made a few days ago, here's some projects to check out:
- Lens Protocol [https://lens.xyz/ (one example implementation: https://lenster.xyz/)] is an early social network built on top of Polygon.
- Farcaster [https://farcaster.xyz/] is another one, that takes a more hybrid approach of using Ethereum for trustless identity, but stores social stuff in a "sufficiently decentralized" way.
- ENS [https://ens.domains/] is a universal username system.
- Unlock Protocol [https://unlock-protocol.com/] uses NFTs for tradeable subscriptions, event tickets, etc.
- Radicle [https://radicle.xyz/] is a decentralized Github basically, that (optionally) uses Ethereum to store the Git HEAD of a "project" essentially.
- Arweave [https://www.arweave.org/] stores files permanently using a cool "endowment" mechanism. Currently, the network has secured its storage for like 1000 years in theory.
2 issues spring to mind:
- What happens when someone puts illegal content on it? Eg child porn. It claims to be censorship-resistant (not censorship-proof), but I imagine any system that cannot expunge data like this won’t be around for long.
- Where are the details on the 1000 years of storage? Have they got financing arranged (and already in trust funds/isolated from the rest of the business) for this storage, the maintenance of the software throughout the next 1000 years etc? Or are they relying on people to contribute resources? If I pay money to store data here (say precious, irreplaceable family photos), then come back in 50 years, what’s the odds that I will still be able to access them?
RE the second point: highly recommend taking a look at the arweave white paper. They use an interesting pricing mechanism that tries to account for the cost of the next 200 years of storage (dunno where 1000 came from, the spec plans for 200).
That’s a weak claim then. I wouldn’t call that censorship resistant at all. That’s no better than China imo. Wouldn’t be surprised- if this got popular- for people to publish blacklists you can subscribe to.
Re the pricing mechanism, if the project fails/people abandon it (because the arweave economy crashes for whatever reason) what happens to the data? Paying out an endowment over time to fund the storage only works if you have people who put value in the tokens. Which could no longer exist.
The spec plans for 200, but that's a minimum I believe.
Some of the best engineers and researchers I've ever worked with were in the blockchain space. Companies that do this are shooting themselves in the foot. I work for a pretty cool startup in the defense sector that appreciated the experience I've had in distributed systems from my several years working on projects like Cardano.
Not companies that care about PR and want to distance themselves from crypto space. Those engineers and researchers unfortunately have been tricked into thinking that crypto would be here to stay as were the hundreds and thousands of investors that were duped into an elaborate Rube Goldberg machine that serves no real purpose other than the monetary incentives of a closed few.
I suspect this won't change. See /r/buttcoin.
I am about as bearish on crypto as it gets but I have a very hard time believing this. It’s definitely not true at the major tech companies.
You do not want that to be the norm. It just so happens that, right now, they are discriminating towards something that you believe to be "wrong". What is "wrong" may change in the future or someone else's "wrong" may not align with your own. And considering we're talking about people's jobs and means to survive, it's not at all something to be taken lightly. At all.
The applicant might not even have an interest in what they worked for, or might even opposed to it. Maybe they worked there just to survive and the pay was good. Has that ever happened to you? I know for a fact that I could not give a single fuck about few of the sectors I worked for, some of them I actively believe to be cancerous to society. I do not have the right to discard people based exclusively on their past work experience, as I'd discard myself.
It just doesn't make sense from a moral standpoint, not to mention it also doesn't make sense from a competitive standpoint: I'd have a smaller pool of talent to choose from, and would discard brilliant minds simply by association to something I do not agree with (or simply don't understand) and ... for what, exactly? To make a point?
I get the overall point you are making, but it is just a rehash of the free speech absolutist position which, in my opinion (that you will not change), inevitably and continuously attempts to shield the worst abusers of society.
And if it turns out that I end up working on something horrible and don't get out immediately and scrub it off my resume? Then I deserve to take reputational damage
Do you believe that to be a reasonable position to have?
its also pretty common to form a resume for the job you want, omiting less helpful or unrelated things.
I went the whole decade never telling any web2 startup I worked for about crypto, who cares if its another bear market and people are yet again souring on it