• 0 Posts
  • 18 Comments
Joined 2 months ago
cake
Cake day: August 27th, 2024

help-circle



  • Fortunately I completely disagree.

    “Imagine going back to the year 1600. Even then, Western Europe was one of the more educated parts of the planet, but back then about 20% of the population could read and write. And I suspect if you went back there and you asked someone who was capable of reading and writing—say a member of the clergy—and you said: “What percentage of the population is even capable of it?” They might have said: “If you have an incredible education system, maybe 50%.” You fast-forward 400 years to today, and we know that that prediction would have been wildly pessimistic; that nearly 100% of the population can be literate. But what similar blinders we have on today? If I were to ask you: “What percentage of the population is capable of understanding quantum physics? Or what percentage of the population is capable of contributing to medical research?” You might say maybe 5 or 10%, or with a really good education system maybe 15 or 20%. But what if the answer is a 100%? What could that mean for the rate at which human society could progress? What would that mean for the human condition? But that is just one aspect of the types of blinders we have on today, that in 400 years will hopefully seem silly.” —Salman Khan, Harvard Class Day 2014








  • Cynicus Rex@slrpnk.nettoMemes@lemmy.mlI hate these icons
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    2 months ago

    “Responsible” and “Bitcoin” is an oxymoron due to the inherent multi-level marketing pyramid/Ponzi scheme aspect of crypto“currencies”.

    First, you’re removing the next two words “financial diversification” from the statement. Your own personal opinions and emotions aside, financial diversification is not a bad idea. It’s all about percentages and risk calculations. I would agree with you if they went “all in” on crypto, but they didn’t say that.

    Gambling or buying into a pyramid scheme doesn’t belong to the category of financial diversification, let alone responsible financial diversification. Responsible financial diversification is investing in skills, property, purchasing cooperatives, official/institutional crowdfunding projects with sustainability in mind—not purely profit, ethical index funds, et cetera.

    Second, you’re lumping in bad people with good tech that has solved a very specific problem - the ability to transfer funds without relying on a central bank or authority. Is email bad because the majority is spam? No. Is the internet bad because the dark web exists and thousands if not millions of crimes are being carried out on it? No. Are encrypted messengers bad because they allow criminals to send message? No. Same concept here. There can exist a good technology that gets abused by bad people.

    All whataboutism fallacies. Crypto“currencies” incentivize greed. Not so for email, the Internet, messengers, et cetera. The only legitimate usecase for these alternative currencies is financing whistleblowers, journalists, individuals who have to break unethical laws and are therefore disconnected from the banking system.

    “Money corrupts; bitcoin corrupts absolutely.

    You can stop at “money corrupts”. bitcoin is money and money corrupts.

    Bitcoin more so because of its multi-level marketing / pyramid scheme aspect. When one buys USD or EUR one doesn’t try convincing their peers to buy it too so their own wealth goes up.

    Disregarding all of bitcoin’s shortcomings, a financial instrument that brings out the worst in people—greed—won’t change the world for the better.”

    Disregarding all of the U.S. Dollar’s shortcomings[1], a financial instrument that brings out the worst in people—greed—won’t change the world for the better.”

    Fixed it for you.

    [1] The US spent 877 BILLION dollars on its defense budget (as much as the next 10 countries combined!) to ensure the USD keeps its power.

    Whataboutism fallacy again.


  • Cynicus Rex@slrpnk.nettoMemes@lemmy.mlI hate these icons
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    ”Do you disagree with their reason?

    Responsible financial diversification requires holding some assets outside of the traditional government controlled banking system.

    They didn’t say they were going all in. They aren’t continuously promoting - at least not that I’m aware. They were just being open and honest about how they’re handling their finances.”

    I absolutely disagree.

    1. “Responsible” and “Bitcoin” is an oxymoron due to the inherent multi-level marketing pyramid/Ponzi scheme aspect of crypto“currencies”.
    2. Money corrupts; bitcoin corrupts absolutely.
      Disregarding all of bitcoin’s shortcomings, a financial instrument that brings out the worst in people—greed—won’t change the world for the better.” —https://www.cynicusrex.com/file/cryptocultscience.html