ericfontaine
Joined 11 years ago
Joined 11 years ago
ironically, many people joined facebook with the names they used in "real" life, only later to find their accounts suspended because they didn't use their "real name". Additionally, some people joined facebook to connect with certain groups of people they wanted to interact with but coudldn't in their real geographic area (e.g. threatened minority groups or viewpoints that are thinly scatted across the globe), so they may have been allured by facebook's promise to help connect them, only to find later when facebook changes their name policy that their account is suspended.
> Don't want your privacy violated, post only what you feel comfortable with.
Facebook's data collection go beyond the information that you post, but extends to all the metadata and interactions that many users for the most part are unaware that they are giving out and may would prefer not to reveal. Had people listened to Stallman more, these interactions would more likely be handled by people's own private or community servers running free software, allowing people to share only the information that they want to be shared publicly, and keep other information & metadata private.
Listening to RMS would mean that if you do carry a mobile device, that it would use entirely free software including all drivers and bootloaders, that it only communicates with other hardware running entirely free software (i.e. only basetowers or wifi routers running free software), and that all the internet services accessed ran entirely free software (e.g. private email servers instead of gmail, pump.io & GNU social instead of twitter & facebook, mediagoblin instead of youtube, wikipedia, yacy or some other free software for search, etc.
The trick is configuring your blog to autopost to facebook, for which I use https://wordpress.org/plugins/add-link-to-facebook/ which also automatically grabs likes and comments from the facebook post and adds them to the wordpress comments database. Maybe this is acknowledging facebook's value, but at least I don't have to personally interact with facebook, nor are visitors to my blog tracked by facebook's javascript.
It is not minutiae when someone phrases their posts in a manner that may imply they're taking credit for other people's work.
I didn't mind spending a few minutes because I respect all wikipedians who created and maintained the bitcoin article.
I wanted to help you understand, but now see it is futile. I would hope that the Wikipedia personality whose name is the abbreviation of the enlightened Pratyekabuddha ("a lone buddha", "a buddha on their own" or "a private buddha" [1]) would understand, but apparently I am talking to the personality "contingencies".
Honestly, the reason I did research was I was hoping you were one of the cool people I used to chat with on the early days of bitcoin forums. I was curious to read your early comments and eager to ask you about your experience or how you first came across bitcoin. But all I found by searching for you username on bitcointalk was someone else's post "Paying homage to Pratyeka of Wikipedia for Bitcoin's inclusion." https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=99437.0 featuring this bravado quote from your wikipedia profile of "particular contributions that your proud of":
"I argued bitterly for the restoration of the Bitcoin article from the evil hands of the deletionists, and have since been vindicated in my judgement as Bitcoin's rise to prominence has continued."
Your quote sounds like it is from a Middle Earth fantasy epic, and is just asking to be signed something like:
"-First Knight Pratyeka 'The Clairvoyant' of Wikipedia, The Creator of the Bitcoin Article, and The Protector of the defenseless Bitcoin community from the Void of Obscurity, The Hero entrusted with the Power of Wiki-Influence who rose during The Challenging Times and singlehandedly defeated the onslaught of The Deletionists."
I'm exaggerating, deliberately to give you an idea of what impression your comment and wiki profile imparts on others. I know many of us all like to speak like that on the internet in good humor, but after I combined your wiki profile quote with your HN comment, the picture of you in my head was another internet personality with a little too much ego that needs to be dampened. I'm imagining that in real life when you overhear strangers in public talk about bitcoin, you approach them to tell them that you created the bitcoin article.
Your comment feels just like the cliché first comment phenomenon that typical on sites like youtube. It offers nothing of substance or insight itself. Yes, everyone knows about the butterfly effect and how little things do make a difference. But this means every little bitcoin transaction, every little bitcoin bug report, every little bitcoin commit, every time someone explained bitcoin to their friends, everybody who made a bitcoin for ______ service, and every little anonymous wiki edit deserves some bit of credit for bitcoin's rise. And the blunt reality is that the reason the wikipedia article was reinstated was because these little interactions gradually increased the market price, causing more news sites started taking notice, so there were more 3rd party sources which is precisely what the article needed to survive. That was due to everyone's little contributions. And regarding your initial "creation", had you not made the initial stub, someone else would have made it a couple weeks later.
The good feeling of advancing human knowledge and understanding by creating and editing Wikipedia articles should be the reward itself. Posting on internet forums that you were the "first" just seems like your seeking attention or praise. And even worse, as another commentator kiro said earlier, your comment sounds like you take credit for the whole Wikipedia Bitcoin article. Regardless of the truth that factually and technically you did indeed "create" the initial stub, did a few edits, and argued to keep the article up, a humbler comment that offered insight wouldn't have provoked such a strong negative reaction.
Regardless, I am appreciative of Wikipedians like you for contributing and defending against The Deletionists.
The difficulty with getting these things going is getting enough of a user base to prime the pump. Before major arbitration decisions can be made, people need to start off arbitrating little things. Like being a referee for a small game tournament with friends.
There's a lot of poor grammar, for instance:
"Mining in Dcoin is not usual familiar mining we got used to with other cryptocurrency."
I'm having trouble parsing that sentence and can't tell if you mean mining is similar to other currencies or different.
Plenty more grammar mistakes... (you should get an English editor and make sure to get an arbiter with high dcoin reputation to protect your transaction:) ).
Also, it is always nice to have localized websites...us americans aren't used to seeing decimals reversed with thousand separators, for instance: "0,0004%"
Bitcoin is an open source peer-to-peer electronic cash system developed by Satoshi Nakamoto that's completely P2P|decentralized, with no central server or trusted parties. Users hold the cryptography|crypto keys to their own money and transact directly with each other, with the help of the network to check for double-spending.
But the stub article did not meet wikipedia's standards as it lacked references to 3rd party sources, so was marked for deletion July ~10, 2010 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=342.0 and officially deleted July ~31, 2010 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=652.0 and was only restored after the bitcoin community rewrote it fully in a manner deemed sufficient by the wikipedia community.And for the entire history, you are only responsible for 0.19% of edits to that page, according to https://tools.wmflabs.org/usersearch/usersearch.py?name=Prat...
Every little wikipedia stub and edit is important, but sorry I was off-put by you entrance displaying the mantle "Article creator here".