it would be funny if what happens is Trump baits firms like Oracle into violating the law and then fines them hundreds of billions and they're like we had assurances and the courts are like don't you have lawyers? the money would be enough to put a dent in a year's deficit!
i'm not endorsing Tom Cotton in general, God help us. i'm not vouching for his consistency on this or any other issue. but at this moment, it strikes me as essential someone stand up and say acts of Congress are the law that the President must take care are properly executed, not cute suggestions.
they usually are!
i think we deserve a t-shirt of we make it through the inauguration without a heart attack.
you don't. and now there are lots of stablecoins (back when there was only tether, very sketchy), so people can send pretty safe dollars. 1/
there's no reason why a band can't put an ETH address as a payment destination. depending what network is used, transfers can be nearly free. (base ETH is most expensive. for the first time in a couple of years, i recently transacted there, a token transfer cost ~70¢.) 2/
if you are starting up some kind of group informally, you can avoid incorporation and bank accounts and have a crypto wallet that requires authorizations from three-out-of-five or whatever, off the shelf. people can donate with some assurance the guy with the envelope of cash doesn't walk away. 3/
maybe these ideas were just early? still, so far i've seen very little of this kind of thing. (maybe it's selection bias in what i see, what's small is not so visible!) /fin
i really don't know. for a while, at least on Ethereum, transactions got so expensive that small experiments were priced out. but recently that seems to have subsided. maybe it could still emerge, if people can still glimpse the stars behind a garish sunlight of overwhelming greed.
i always thought usurping currency was not a great idea. it was creating rails for financial flows more open to smaller and more creative actors that interested me. www.interfluidity.com/v2/7153.html
in the wake of 2008 and the bailouts, a lot of us were thirsting for alternatives. the idea of building something from scratch, making financial pipes that would be universally accessible without having to schmooze with lawyers and bankers, did seem like it might be a good thing.
we didn't actually object to the oppression. we just objected to who got to be the oppressor.
i spent a few years among idealistic cryptocurrency types. in drips and increments, the pull of payoffs drained the idealism, in my view. nevertheless, i hope to see some reflections by cryptocurrency thinkers on how $TRUMP relates to the early ideals of the community.
living in America when you consider it unethical to use products from X, Tesla, Meta, Alphabet, TikTok, Amazon, Starbucks. one thing it does is sow marital discord.
"concerns remain"
Loading quoted Bluesky post...
Wouldn't it be more compelling if they just had an image of Donald Trump looking tough and noble as a full-page splash screen on launch of the app? pixel.kitchen/@jenn/113856...
i’m not a fan of the TikTok ban as public policy, but all of a sudden i do gotta hand it to Tom Cotton because rule of law.
Loading quoted Bluesky post...
remember when the founders imagined each branch of government would be jealous of its prerogatives?
Loading quoted Bluesky post...
just for the cognitive dissonance, it’s worth noting it’s not just billionaires and greedy capitalist businesses. if you listened to his #LexFridman interview, Zelensky also was going out of his way to flatter Trump. understandable, but it always is. arguably more forgivable under the circumstances.
not with a bang, nor a whimper, but with a TikTok.
and yet. failing to do so would appear to be defying Trump. which risk will move them?
will Apple restore ByteDance apps in the app store without an Act of Congress legalizing it?