|
NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source. |
On May 10 2025 18:43 Excludos wrote:
Yeah, geeh, I dunno. Why don't we store state secrets in a decentralized ledger?
I've got to say, this is one of the dumber conversations I haven't been part of. "What if they used crypto?" as a reply to gamifying war is a genuine insane take. The military are not crypto bro's. This would be an awful awful use of it
[citation needed]
|
On May 10 2025 19:14 Acrofales wrote:Show nested quote +On May 10 2025 18:43 Excludos wrote:
Yeah, geeh, I dunno. Why don't we store state secrets in a decentralized ledger?
I've got to say, this is one of the dumber conversations I haven't been part of. "What if they used crypto?" as a reply to gamifying war is a genuine insane take. The military are not crypto bro's. This would be an awful awful use of it [citation needed]
For..?
|
On May 10 2025 22:33 Excludos wrote:Show nested quote +On May 10 2025 19:14 Acrofales wrote:On May 10 2025 18:43 Excludos wrote:
Yeah, geeh, I dunno. Why don't we store state secrets in a decentralized ledger?
I've got to say, this is one of the dumber conversations I haven't been part of. "What if they used crypto?" as a reply to gamifying war is a genuine insane take. The military are not crypto bro's. This would be an awful awful use of it [citation needed] For..?
Your strawman I presume.
The point was that gamifying war is terrible for humanity for pretty obvious reasons. "Crypto" was basically just a shorthand descriptor of a potentially global credit system/market that operates outside of SWIFT/BRICS Pay.
I presume people fixated on that because it is obviously really terrible to gamify war and this is inevitably a step toward the worst people imaginable developing and "playing" these "games". But Ukraine's doing it, so it's upsetting to think about how awful of an idea it is (for us as a species).
|
Northern Ireland25342 Posts
I think it’s only really an awful development if it trivialises and incentivises war.
It may indeed serve as a deterrent, depends how it develops. Do I wanna go to war with a country full of a load of drone jockeys who are rewarded for being good drone jockeys?
|
On May 10 2025 23:47 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On May 10 2025 22:33 Excludos wrote:On May 10 2025 19:14 Acrofales wrote:On May 10 2025 18:43 Excludos wrote:
Yeah, geeh, I dunno. Why don't we store state secrets in a decentralized ledger?
I've got to say, this is one of the dumber conversations I haven't been part of. "What if they used crypto?" as a reply to gamifying war is a genuine insane take. The military are not crypto bro's. This would be an awful awful use of it [citation needed] For..? Your strawman I presume. The point was that gamifying war is terrible for humanity for pretty obvious reasons. "Crypto" was basically just a shorthand descriptor of a potentially global credit system/market that operates outside of SWIFT/BRICS Pay. I presume people fixated on that because it is obviously really terrible to gamify war and this is inevitably a step toward the worst people imaginable developing and "playing" these "games". But Ukraine's doing it, so it's upsetting to think about how awful of an idea it is (for us as a species).
What strawman exactly? Have you or have you not been discussing the use of crypto for this shit for the last 2 pages? Do you even understand what a strawman is?
|
On May 11 2025 00:09 Excludos wrote:Show nested quote +On May 10 2025 23:47 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 10 2025 22:33 Excludos wrote:On May 10 2025 19:14 Acrofales wrote:On May 10 2025 18:43 Excludos wrote:
Yeah, geeh, I dunno. Why don't we store state secrets in a decentralized ledger?
I've got to say, this is one of the dumber conversations I haven't been part of. "What if they used crypto?" as a reply to gamifying war is a genuine insane take. The military are not crypto bro's. This would be an awful awful use of it [citation needed] For..? Your strawman I presume. The point was that gamifying war is terrible for humanity for pretty obvious reasons. "Crypto" was basically just a shorthand descriptor of a potentially global credit system/market that operates outside of SWIFT/BRICS Pay. I presume people fixated on that because it is obviously really terrible to gamify war and this is inevitably a step toward the worst people imaginable developing and "playing" these "games". But Ukraine's doing it, so it's upsetting to think about how awful of an idea it is (for us as a species). What strawman exactly? Have you or have you not been discussing the use of crypto for this shit for the last 2 pages? Do you even understand what a strawman is?
Your strawman is obviously "What if they used crypto?".
Hence my response: The point was that gamifying war is terrible for humanity for pretty obvious reasons. "Crypto" was basically just a shorthand descriptor of a potentially global credit system/market that operates outside of SWIFT/BRICS Pay.
I presume people fixated on that because it is obviously really terrible to gamify war and this is inevitably a step toward the worst people imaginable developing and "playing" these "games". But Ukraine's doing it, so it's upsetting to think about how awful of an idea it is (for us as a species).
|
On May 11 2025 00:16 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On May 11 2025 00:09 Excludos wrote:On May 10 2025 23:47 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 10 2025 22:33 Excludos wrote:On May 10 2025 19:14 Acrofales wrote:On May 10 2025 18:43 Excludos wrote:
Yeah, geeh, I dunno. Why don't we store state secrets in a decentralized ledger?
I've got to say, this is one of the dumber conversations I haven't been part of. "What if they used crypto?" as a reply to gamifying war is a genuine insane take. The military are not crypto bro's. This would be an awful awful use of it [citation needed] For..? Your strawman I presume. The point was that gamifying war is terrible for humanity for pretty obvious reasons. "Crypto" was basically just a shorthand descriptor of a potentially global credit system/market that operates outside of SWIFT/BRICS Pay. I presume people fixated on that because it is obviously really terrible to gamify war and this is inevitably a step toward the worst people imaginable developing and "playing" these "games". But Ukraine's doing it, so it's upsetting to think about how awful of an idea it is (for us as a species). What strawman exactly? Have you or have you not been discussing the use of crypto for this shit for the last 2 pages? Do you even understand what a strawman is? Your strawman is obviously "What if they used crypto?". Hence my response: Show nested quote +The point was that gamifying war is terrible for humanity for pretty obvious reasons. "Crypto" was basically just a shorthand descriptor of a potentially global credit system/market that operates outside of SWIFT/BRICS Pay.
I presume people fixated on that because it is obviously really terrible to gamify war and this is inevitably a step toward the worst people imaginable developing and "playing" these "games". But Ukraine's doing it, so it's upsetting to think about how awful of an idea it is (for us as a species).
So you just don't know what a strawman is, gotcha
A: in the event of me somehow misunderstanding your argument (which I didn't), it still isn't strawman
B: I never argued for bitcoin, I argued for the stupidity of crypto in this application. A "potential global credit system that operates outside of swift/brics" is still the exact same as crypto. So my earlier argument stands exact
C: Why anyone still bothers to engage with your schizophrenic ass is beyond me. I lose braincell every time I read any of your comments
|
On May 11 2025 00:21 Excludos wrote:Show nested quote +On May 11 2025 00:16 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 11 2025 00:09 Excludos wrote:On May 10 2025 23:47 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 10 2025 22:33 Excludos wrote:On May 10 2025 19:14 Acrofales wrote:On May 10 2025 18:43 Excludos wrote:
Yeah, geeh, I dunno. Why don't we store state secrets in a decentralized ledger?
I've got to say, this is one of the dumber conversations I haven't been part of. "What if they used crypto?" as a reply to gamifying war is a genuine insane take. The military are not crypto bro's. This would be an awful awful use of it [citation needed] For..? Your strawman I presume. The point was that gamifying war is terrible for humanity for pretty obvious reasons. "Crypto" was basically just a shorthand descriptor of a potentially global credit system/market that operates outside of SWIFT/BRICS Pay. I presume people fixated on that because it is obviously really terrible to gamify war and this is inevitably a step toward the worst people imaginable developing and "playing" these "games". But Ukraine's doing it, so it's upsetting to think about how awful of an idea it is (for us as a species). What strawman exactly? Have you or have you not been discussing the use of crypto for this shit for the last 2 pages? Do you even understand what a strawman is? Your strawman is obviously "What if they used crypto?". Hence my response: The point was that gamifying war is terrible for humanity for pretty obvious reasons. "Crypto" was basically just a shorthand descriptor of a potentially global credit system/market that operates outside of SWIFT/BRICS Pay.
I presume people fixated on that because it is obviously really terrible to gamify war and this is inevitably a step toward the worst people imaginable developing and "playing" these "games". But Ukraine's doing it, so it's upsetting to think about how awful of an idea it is (for us as a species). So you just don't know what a strawman is, gotcha
One of us doesn't...
Just to be clear, you do understand that "crypto" isn't the part that's terrible (or even very relevant in this context), it's the gamifying war that's the problem that was supposed to be the point in discussion?
There's an effort to defeat the strawman of "what if they use crypto?", instead of confronting that it's bad to gamify war, because Ukraine is the only one (we know of) doing it (for now).
EDIT: Because I've thought about it a bit more, I'd amend my position to note that this has in some ways always been a thing with various symbols/medals/awards/bonus pay structures.
However, that was not the highly refined crack version of addiction manipulation we have nowadays with lootbox/gacha mechanics, achievements, and decades of research about how the right sounds, colors, etc can amplify their effectiveness.
The foundational work that growing up gaming does combined with the modernization/digitalization of these sorts of motivation manipulation strategies is devastating for us as a species.
Wombats point about a future with a drone jockey based MAD is just one iteration of that.
|
On May 11 2025 00:42 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On May 11 2025 00:21 Excludos wrote:On May 11 2025 00:16 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 11 2025 00:09 Excludos wrote:On May 10 2025 23:47 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 10 2025 22:33 Excludos wrote:On May 10 2025 19:14 Acrofales wrote:On May 10 2025 18:43 Excludos wrote:
Yeah, geeh, I dunno. Why don't we store state secrets in a decentralized ledger?
I've got to say, this is one of the dumber conversations I haven't been part of. "What if they used crypto?" as a reply to gamifying war is a genuine insane take. The military are not crypto bro's. This would be an awful awful use of it [citation needed] For..? Your strawman I presume. The point was that gamifying war is terrible for humanity for pretty obvious reasons. "Crypto" was basically just a shorthand descriptor of a potentially global credit system/market that operates outside of SWIFT/BRICS Pay. I presume people fixated on that because it is obviously really terrible to gamify war and this is inevitably a step toward the worst people imaginable developing and "playing" these "games". But Ukraine's doing it, so it's upsetting to think about how awful of an idea it is (for us as a species). What strawman exactly? Have you or have you not been discussing the use of crypto for this shit for the last 2 pages? Do you even understand what a strawman is? Your strawman is obviously "What if they used crypto?". Hence my response: The point was that gamifying war is terrible for humanity for pretty obvious reasons. "Crypto" was basically just a shorthand descriptor of a potentially global credit system/market that operates outside of SWIFT/BRICS Pay.
I presume people fixated on that because it is obviously really terrible to gamify war and this is inevitably a step toward the worst people imaginable developing and "playing" these "games". But Ukraine's doing it, so it's upsetting to think about how awful of an idea it is (for us as a species). So you just don't know what a strawman is, gotcha One of us doesn't... Just to be clear, you do understand that "crypto" isn't the part that's terrible (or even very relevant in this context), it's the gamifying war that's the problem that was supposed to be the point in discussion? There's an effort to defeat the strawman of "what if they use crypto?", instead of confronting that it's bad to gamify war, because Ukraine is the only one (we know of) doing it (for now).
Again with you refuse to realize that people already agree with you. He knows that its bad to gamify war and he said that explicitly repeatedly. The post he made and was responded to was about crypto and you're trying to strawman a different thing into his argument to make it a weak argument. Not realizing or refusing to realize that he already agreed with that second thing you're trying to characterize himself as not being about.
The insinuation that ukraine is the first and only one doing it is a really weird and dumb strawman. fighter pilots have been putting symbols on their planes to track kills for a long time, the same as tankers panting symbols on their tanks to record kills. The only difference now is that its a digitized process.
|
Zurich15328 Posts
Can we get back on topic please. At least skip the crypto nonsense.
|
So anybody think the suggested "peace" talks on the 15:th in Istanbul will take place?
Seems the extended ceasefire after the 3 day one is not happening. So Putin still seems to think he can gain more than Russia loses by continuing.
|
Some talks may take place soon, but are unlikely to go anywhere.
Nothing has changed recently for either side to make concessions.
|
On May 12 2025 01:07 Yurie wrote:
So anybody think the suggested "peace" talks on the 15:th in Istanbul will take place?
Seems the extended ceasefire after the 3 day one is not happening. So Putin still seems to think he can gain more than Russia loses by continuing. Sure they can happen, but nothing will come of it as Russia is just stalling while pretending to care
Just like the previous dozens of times
|
On May 12 2025 01:16 pmp10 wrote:
Some talks may take place soon, but are unlikely to go anywhere.
Nothing has changed recently for either side to make concessions.
Feels like the ball is in Russia's court to make some sort of concession because right now it seems like all they will accept is total capitulation, which is obviously not going to be taken while the front lines hold.
|
United States42691 Posts
Russia still don't acknowledge that Ukraine has sovereignty which is a basic requirement before negotiations begin.
|
Not sure what these negotiations could possibly achieve, but if I'm not mistaken, this is the first time since the invasion Zelenskyy and Putin meets face to face?
Dont drink the tea
|
Negotiations could freeze the fighting at current lines.
Nobody expects them to produce more than a time out for a few years.
|
Wouldn't that be a massive advantage for Russia? I was also thinking with oil prices being low I don't think the US will want to remove sanctions anytime soon/
|
It would be weird though if both of them accept the "time out".
If both sides understand it's just a pause for a few years before resuming the war - they should understand that such time out is bound to benefit one party more than the other, right? One way or another.
Unless both parties believe they will benefit from this more than the other side.
|
Well, Russia wants out as it is too costly and they can't rearm fast enough, while Ukraine, could be interrested in security guarantees like being let into NATO.
War ends... but some end of war just prepare bigger wars behind so no one is celebrating.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
