353 karma · joined April 13, 2020
The next big thing must flush you with probably an order or so more dopamine - maybe some free artificial/AR world with hundreds of new cool friends who aren't real but make you feel better. That would be so 2020s!
B$ still looks ridiculous, let me explain.
* world electrical energy consumption: ~25000 TWh [1] * bitcoin energy consumption index: ~77 TWh [2]
Bitcoin today consumes as much as 0.3% of the total energy available on this planet.
That's fine, if half the world would use it and would do meaningful things with it.
What is it actually used for most visibly?
As a betting ground with galactic momentum, a technology promising to be the solution to everything, and just outrageous claims that only the bovine left to be excited about.
It's not that the algorithms and data structures are not cool, the certainly are - but we can do so much more today with technology than this.
[1] https://www.vgb.org/en/data_powergeneration.html?dfid=98054 [2] https://digiconomist.net/bitcoin-energy-consumption
I saw people burning through cash in the cloud, which makes you wonder weather money is any concern at all.
Basically, the "work" has to come from somewhere. The reason FB is rich is because 2+B people choose to work for free. The reason Google is rich is because they do not have to create the content (in fact, "content creators" are pushed to the back seat). The reason Amazon is rich is because you can use cheap labor and sprinkle tech-efficiency on it. The reason all gig-companies are rich is because they can circumvent many "worker-rights". The reason Microsoft is rich is because they give a damn about compatibility and competition (the will extinguish probably even the classic "open source", given enough time).
Some hedge funds are rich, because they buy the order-flow data of poor people playing with their money - maybe they use it against them, maybe not.
I cannot see non-exploitation in any of these. Another grandiosely self-serving essay by a rich man, who thinks he has figured out how the world works.
If he really had, he would probably want to change it. For the better - which is probably much harder then just doing more of the same.
Edit: I sometimes think people who write these things are painfully aware of the kind of illusion they create and choose to create it nevertheless. Mundus vult decipi.
Would solve quite a few problems altogether - people getting more independent and following their interests. You would still have competition, but that would be moderated by actual needs, both in the private and public sector.
Not sure an end to the classic higher-ed system would be a bad thing.
Everything else is rather accidental, which is my take on the uber-exhaustion of the western world. I work hard to catch up with capital gains, which I know I cannot.
edit: What keeps me sane is that I basically reduced my life as much as I can. I life and work in a small room, have no car, I have clothing for a week, that's it. The flat I life in is about 70 years old and has hardly be modernized. I buy food and cook myself. I do not fly, my phone is old, I do not stream anything, I ad-block (otherwise I could not use the internet) and I support some core sites of the (old) internet with a bit of money.
I do not crave any of the "niceties" of today's world (I use dish washer and washing machine, do not get me wrong), let alone the tech world. No social media, except HN and a few very specific sites. Basically a modern day recluse, as it is the only way I can implement sufficient distance to this world.
When I read these studies, I'm thinking that this "fact" is disputed and low access to resource may have positive effects - which is ridiculous.
A kind of second order implication of this is that it's more important to research the problem than to solve it (I know you need to understand the problem first, but I think it is not that complicated).
As humankind, we are probably closer than ever to hassle free life and we will nevertheless go down skirmishing and fighting.
I just want to note one thing: any large community will have aspect (sometimes many) that many people will not like. That's not personal, it's just statistics. And when someone (Go team, Stack overflow a few years back, ...) appears heavy-handed, try to imagine to herd hundred-thousand creative, intelligent spirits - that's an impossible task. If you complain about the font (and others did, too) than either ask yourself, whether the stress of conflict is worth it - or leave the matter - or the community - for good.
Now my hourly rate is 100 bucks, so that's about 200M worth of labor that ended up in other peoples pockets.
I could probably retire now. In a just world, we might give people credit for this kind of work or we would organize our commons more sensibly.
But in the world today, value is siphoned up - and the siphon is a very well tuned siphon.
I wonder if we ever get back to this kind of efficient use of computers?