On 11/12/19, Punk-Stasi 2.0 <punks@tfwno.gf> wrote:
maybe watch this video?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l0q37IJi-CQ
that's ryan lackey talking about
About his nice long deep employment with CloudFlare? Now he's talking a lot about blockchain "Governance" through "voting" PoS as CSO for Tezos which is "capable of modifying its own set of rules with minimal disruption to the network through an on-chain governance model." How far or easily could such rule modifications go? To censoring and or seizing "bad political" speech AP addresses? Versus other cryptocurrency blockchain models that resist or would take longer or be harder or nearly impossible to do that? To be fair, one would have to check such potentials against at least some sources... https://tezos.com/ https://tezos.foundation/ https://www.wired.com/story/tezos-blockchain-love-story-horror-story/ https://www.wsj.com/articles/a-232-million-cryptocurrency-fight-comes-to-a-c... Further, all sorts of adversarial reviews should be performed against all blockchains. So little of that is being done in the global race to have the slickest most easily shillable and investible onesheets and whitepapers.
he mentions AP as part of the 'bad politics' of the list...
Such words could perhaps be throwing FUD at both free speech and at different new ideas and change for the world. To be fair, the context should be reviewed.
"I ran one of the first mailing archives for this...which became really interesting legally later" (whatever that means...)
And if his archive is shown via comparison with other archives to have holes in it... were they perhaps caused by [extra]legal interactions? Volunteership? Bias? Something completely mundane and innocent?