k3d

Data minimalism = a human right. Escape default over-sharing of your personal data by adopting technologies that utilize Zero Knowledge Proofs: the future of data verification, privacy, security and sovereignty. Zcash is only the beginning: $ZEC #ZKP #zksync #dataminimalism

@hyperonline copilot works great until u realize it just makes up random numbers instead of using the data u fed it otherwise practically flawless

Corporate America always gets the most cartoonishly nightmarish outcome possible from new technology. AI was no different "We allow and even encourage you to use AI as a productivity tool. In fact, we just purchased you all liscenses Let me introduce you to: Microsoft Copilot"

@schizohypehouse @hyperonline dont get lukas started on wfh lmao

@hyperonline WFH is nice in this regard because I have GPT up on my PC that I can ask all the questions to that I need

@cheese_1889 @VitalikButerin definitely nope

@VitalikButerin we are not beating the Peter Thiel allegations with this one. milady.

This is a good post on the impact of surveillance in Iran: myprivacy.blog/the-digital-ir… It's worth reading. IMO one mistake that freedom advocates often make is that we talk about privacy violation and surveillance as "dystopian", using the word as a semantic stop sign: we know it means "bad", we nod along, and don't really go further to clarify why it's bad. I worry that this approach is long-run unhealthy: when we criticize various companies and countries for being "dystopian" and stop there, then to someone who's not already in the same memeplex, it sounds like we're basically criticizing companies and countries for not complying with our culture's aesthetic preferences. Which is ... duh, companies and countries are *supposed* to not comply with each other's aesthetic preferences, that's the whole point of the "pluralism" thing. What the above article makes clear so well is that "dystopian" surveillance is not bad because it's "dystopian", it's bad because it makes a concrete property of the world worse: the power balance between individual and state. Surveillance enables an outcome where basically everyone other than police and security forces has no opportunity whatsoever to challenge the political status quo without being punished. This means an outcome where a political regime can remain in power forever, without satisfying more than a very small coalition of people who have the eyes and the guns (now drones). The Dictator's Handbook talks about "large coalition" and "small coalition" governments; large coalition governments are the ones that are more pro-human, because they, well, have to keep a large coalition happy. Small coalition ones are the really nasty ones. Here is the near-term dark outcome of dictatorship + automated warfare + surveillance: a regime can literally survive with a coalition of size 1, because an army of all-seeing eyes and robots can defeat the entire populace in battle if needed. In Iran, we see what *just* dictatorship with surveillance can do, once you add automated police, you get to the unholy trifecta. I don't know of a good solution to this. Privacy technology, as well as more work on censorship-resistant internet (I think we should strive for at least basic-quality internet, eg. 1 Mbps, being a global human right outside the domain of nation-state sovereignty), can help somewhat to reduce the possibility of total government control. But what else? --- BTW one implicit frame in the article I take some issue with is framing Iran + Russia + China as the unique antagonists (both in surveillance they do internally, and in the technology they export to other countries). They do a lot of dystopian shit of both types. However, Israeli and US tech companies, and undoubtedly tech companies from other Western nations, also do a lot of dystopian shit. Perhaps one key difference between the surveillance described above, and the Western type, is: * The surveillance in the above article is about exercising *great control over a medium area*: you can see everything, but it requires active participation of the government of the territory being surveilled. * The Israeli / US / Western flavor is about exercising *medium control over a great area*: there are more limits to how much they can do, but their surveillance is global: they know what people are doing even in countries and territories they have no presence in. The distinction is not absolute: Israeli surveillance backstops a lot of its human rights abuse in Palestine, US surveillance reinforces ICE abuses (see the recent article about Homeland Security demanding social media firms reveal names of anti-ICE protesters), etc, and "transnational repression" is done by anti-Western countries. But *on average*, the above seems to be the pattern. The two are differently scary. The former for the reasons I described above. The latter because it allows global projection of power: a politician or civil servant in one country now has to worry about being blackmailed, droned or otherwise attacked from other countries. The USA has shown willingness to go after individual EU officials, ICC officials (see recent articles on both), and others. Ultimately, I suspect that even democratic governments will want more privacy to protect themselves, and we will have to have deep conversations about what "democratic accountability" means: how can a civil servant be accountable to the people, but not accountable to foreign spooks? My high-level frame is: privacy generally helps whoever is weaker. "Weaker" does not mean "moral": sometimes the weaker side is criminal. But in the 21st century, we are at serious risk of stronger factions using modern technologies to establish unbreakable lock-in to power. And so on average, reducing the gradient of power, giving the weak a fighting chance, is something that the world desperately needs.

south side homie always got my back

digital marketing surveys = visa gift cards = vibecoding credits

@mert @Justin_Bons jesus

@Justin_Bons Sol is not more decentralized, its NC is not even close to 21, and it's certainly not scarce

Solana is Bitcoin 3.0 SOL is more decentralized, more scalable, more programmable, more private, more secure & more scarce All based on measurable objective metrics! So, if you care about cypherpunk values, stop playing pretend with a pet rock & join the crypto revolution: 🧵 There is narrative & then there is reality. SOL deserves to be the top chain based on the facts. Let me explain: More decentralized: Decentralization is a spectrum defined by multiple metrics. We will compare the major ones here now Nakamoto Cooificient is the measure of how many entities it would take to attack the network: BTC has an NC of 3 & SOL has an NC of 21! Validator count represents the number of block producers. In the case of BTC, we therefore count the number of pools & solo miners: BTC has 92 validators & SOL has 827! Governance determines who & how the rules are decided upon: BTC has centralized authoritarian governance (Core) & SOL has decentralized stakeholder governance! More scalable: SOL has 2857x more capacity & is 1538x faster than BTC! The difference is beyond ridiculous at this point. That is what makes BTC unusable for any significant use cases Even if only current active users tried to do one TX, the network would collapse in on itself, creating a bank-run-like scenario, as the queue would be months long While the queue would be decades long if everyone in the world tried to do one TX, that is a disaster waiting to happen. Meanwhile, SOL has enough capacity to actually support the future of money & finance right now! More programmable: BTC is not programmable as it lacks a Turing-complete virtual machine. That is also why real DeFi is impossible over BTC A significant problem is that decentralized money requires good decentralized finance to support it; otherwise, most people will end up putting their BTC into centralized custodians to access financial services that way. Defeating the whole point of crypto in the first place SOL has the SVM, making it programmable, enabling it to support all manner of DeFi applications! More private: By combining scalability & programmability, SOL can support privacy at scale by leveraging third-party smart contracts. Applications such as Privacy Cash are a good example of this. Allowing users to obscure balances & transfers! BTC is utterly incapable of supporting privacy at scale, both due to its lack of scalability & programmability More secure: We can calculate the security budget of a blockchain based on the cost to attack BTC: 16.42B (inflation) + 0.14B (fees) = 16.56B x 0.51 (attack threshold) = $8.44B SOL: 74B (market cap) x 0.67 (stake partipication rate) = 49.58B + 1.42B (fees) + 7.7B (MEV) + 5.26B (inflation) = 63.96B x 0.33 (attack threshold) = $21.1B Therefore, SOL is more than twice as secure as BTC at only a fraction of BTC's market cap. Demonstrating how much more secure PoS really is! Another interesting observation is that, as a percentage of market cap, BTC's security budget is 0.47%, while SOL's relative security is 28%! More scarce: The truth is that BTC's security model is not sustainable, as it has dropped over the last five years. I project it will continue to drop over the next decade until 51% attacks become profitable to carry out At which point the Core developers will be forced to increase BTC's inflation rate, something Core devs such as Peter Todd are already preparing for by proposing a 1% inflation rate for when the security crisis inevitably comes SOL has a low long-term tail inflation (1.5%) + fee-burn design. The idea behind this design is that if fees continue to grow that the burn rate would exceed the inflation rate, allowing for a shrinking supply! Granted, this last point is more speculative at this stage, but so is BTC's long-term inflation rate! As SOL's burn would only need to exceed 0.5% to beat BTC in this metric in a decade from now. That is why I consider SOL to have a more scarce & therefore more sound economic design Conclusion: It is only a matter of time before the rest of the market figures out the truth: BTC cannot sustain itself on lies forever Rhetoric & narrative can only take BTC so far, when the facts & figures so clearly put SOL in the lead today in every single way imaginable So, if you care about Bitcoin's original vision, cypherpunk values & the crypto ethos, abandon BTC & support SOL instead. That is iteration, that is technological evolution, that is progress Staying behind on BTC is not loyalty to the cause; it is blind tribalism destroying the cypherpunk dream Thank you so much, Solana, for giving us a third chance to get the crypto revolution right! ❤️

The irony… You give a new host a chance and he literally copies my video! Didn’t even bother to change the thumbnail! Jax, do better!! youtu.be/AOaUY0JvRtQ?si…

@theralkia or u can just collect all 7 dragon balls and wish to be taller

You will get taller every time you have a spiritual breakthrough, as you are removing the energetic tension your body has been collapsing around

"but average people don't care about privacy"

muha

"WARNING: This transaction is not private, are you sure you want to proceed?"

When people compliment your looks just say As Within So Without

@theralkia there can only be one

Already cut myself and the wall with my sword. Guess it was inevitable.

'AI to Cut New Employee Onboarding Costs by 400% as Corporate Trainings Are Both Created and Taken by LLMs'

are spreadsheets demonic or just saturnian?

wow mom & pop this life is captivity one day i will break the cycle never to return

@apoorveth ethereum unlock schedule

Each cycle we unlock a new Vitalik

@theralkia coincidence theorists vs. synchronicity theorists vs. conspiracy theorists vs. ppl who use the pointing emoji on wrong side 🫵😂

You still believe in coincidences 😂🫵

the greatest music ever made wasnt recorded

i got this -> no i dont -> i got this -> no i dont -> i got this.