373 karma · joined October 11, 2018
^I'm responding to this
_If_.
I am still openly questioning the nature of blockchain and open ledgers: trivial associations with transaction activity and address history can be had or via more complex analysis with clustering, modeling, etc (ie: Chainalysis). I used to think that a simple signature confirmation claiming "this is my email address" would be okay for solicited communications but what would happen if the channel used becomes adversarial?
Apologies but I'm failing at framing my own argument here as I'm confusing the intersection and implications of the current "NFT art" craze that's been happening. For example, some Tezos-based art projects are in reality minting your signature on the blockchain with an asset they host on an external source, eg: ipfs. You own the signature but do you really want to publicly "own" something controversial and perhaps illegal within your country's jurisdiction?
Remember when satellite.earth "pioneered" this idea for their platform? (not ragging on them but some of the content posted on there were insightful and unique)
"..nodes just vote on a block to state whether or not they think it is valid. Once a block gets enough votes, then it is added to the chain."
Whereas a PoW will "just blaze". Is this correct?
A simple keyword search of "Trump vaccine" on reddit yields massive cognitive dissonance and a sociopath would conflate their bias from all the subreddits the keywords are found.
This weirdly intersects for the Right to Repair movement, or for consumers whom would rather be conservative on new device purchases and software licenses.
^So that's where this quote came from, TIL..
https://quillette.com/2017/01/12/the-blank-slateism-of-the-r...
This comic sort of represents those childhood sentiments experienced today: