bduerst
Joined 14 years ago
Joined 14 years ago
They need a way to handle situations when bad actors take over, because other solutions handle this with centralized authorities who step in and rectify the issue.
Usually today your data is fragmented across platforms (so damage is reduced) which have centralized authorities who can step in and fix bad actor issues.
As it stands, the apples to apples comparison has any centralized, trusted network being more efficient than [attempted] trustless, proof of work like ethereum.
I feel like these are probably on two different levels, but given that you called it a theory and not a conspiracy, I think you'll also probably disagree.
The new way - blocking someone and restricting that person's ability to reply - is an aggressive UX.
If anything, that's more to the discussion of giving social security numbers to inept IT departments.
I was at a soap box derby a couple weeks back and they had to pause the entire event for fifteen minutes because someone was flying a drone down by the course area.
A couple hundred people were waiting on one person to remove their drone. Even after the announcers were asking the person to remove the drone they continued to keep it there.
In the post-tiktok era, it's not that big of an issue.
Most videos will have easily added audio overlays.
Buybacks are a valid tactic in corporate finance.
All comments represent my own (probably poorly formed) opinions and views only.
.