"Musk himself may have crossed a certain kind of line with statements" ... Elon thinks he's Teflon like Don, but he's just deaf-lon. It's clear he's a successful salesperson. But you need to have rallies where you affect people on a primal level via sensory/emotional manipulation into believing equally-primal us-tribe-vs-them-tribe convenient narratives. And you need to be constantly on cable news due to your salacious depravity which equally relies on a primal level of sensory/emotional manipulation because you are part of a process with an outcome that has a built-in large audience (a national election). And then you have to deliver giant-ass tax cuts as soon as you are in office so billionaires like you will then think you are a badass that deserves millions per month. (As for Musk's supposed backpedaling of that millions per month, see SBF and one should only publicly disclose donating to liberal causes and use dark money for the rest)
"Don’t get me wrong, Kamala..." Curious as to why you think that. Her Senate voting record is almost as liberal as Bernie Sanders (according to my limited research which seems to support this recent talking point). Which is something I like to hear, at least. Also, I know the intent is not there, but the word I supplanted with that previous ellipsis has its genesis as a slur against gay men. And can in fact can sometimes be used as a slur against women. And, well, this: https://www.npr.org/2024/06/15/nx-s1-4966583/trump-t-shirt-maga-merch-joe-biden-kamala-harris-vulgar .
"I’ll let you read Jason’s meticulous reporting in detail, but in sum this demands we ask: should the people who created Synapse and Juno, and maybe the people who applied pressure to bypass AML controls, be criminally prosecuted for negligence?" No, not the people who created it. Because squishy-fleshy organizations are not immutable smart contracts. So you don't just "create" the organization and off it goes on its own like a runaway trolley. But, yes, the people who ran it probably should be prosecuted. Which are likely the same people as the creators, but it's important to specify their fault is from their roles as operators. Note also that you can't on-ramp and off-ramp between crypto and fiat via completely autonomous, immutable smart contracts either. Which is important as I think fundamentally the real buck stops there, at the ramps. Especially ramps that might be connected to US banks. Because US banks are backed by FDIC insurance, and what's mishandled but not backed by FDIC will often get bailed out anyway, and taxpayers are who ultimately pay for it all. And thus, yeah, likely "was a lot worse," indeed.
"You’re just doing Hitler." Well... Maybe some of what he did. But I think he kind of went a little further. Watercolor paintings are also Hitler shit, if we want to be pedantic. Eugenics is definitely more Hitlery than watercolor, of course, I'll give you that.
"Despite misrepresentations so bad they look like a conspiracy involving New York Times reporters with undisclosed familial ties to the Bankman-Fried clan, FTX victims have actually been compensated for roughly 25% of the value of their stolen assets." I'm surprised DZM wrote this. It kind of goes against the entire point of the link within this quote, which I think posits very well that writing something like "25% of the value" without qualifiers is simply misleading when the events do not contain like-for-like assets and/or there has been significant time between events, for which there is both in this case. Maybe the link counts as a qualifier.
"For what it’s worth, I predicted this specific failure back in 2021, because Worldcoin’s methods aren’t scaleable. Their use of a device to scan eyeballs to prove humanity requires staff and equipment at a scale that don’t make economic sense, and never did." And in 2021 we didn't really have zk-proofs would have at least helped make this a bit more sensible. But what makes the most sense is letting people keep private the very last of their data that they can keep private (until/unless a company for finding out your heritage via your DNA that your sibling uses gets bought out by an entity that is beholden to an authoritarian government, or is used by police to do more than just stop you from serial killing). Solutions for Proof of Humanity that get it generally right / close enough based on your transactional history and the online activity you choose to connect to your account I think work well enough, can scale, and will likely only get better.
"Musk himself may have crossed a certain kind of line with statements" ... Elon thinks he's Teflon like Don, but he's just deaf-lon. It's clear he's a successful salesperson. But you need to have rallies where you affect people on a primal level via sensory/emotional manipulation into believing equally-primal us-tribe-vs-them-tribe convenient narratives. And you need to be constantly on cable news due to your salacious depravity which equally relies on a primal level of sensory/emotional manipulation because you are part of a process with an outcome that has a built-in large audience (a national election). And then you have to deliver giant-ass tax cuts as soon as you are in office so billionaires like you will then think you are a badass that deserves millions per month. (As for Musk's supposed backpedaling of that millions per month, see SBF and one should only publicly disclose donating to liberal causes and use dark money for the rest)
"Don’t get me wrong, Kamala..." Curious as to why you think that. Her Senate voting record is almost as liberal as Bernie Sanders (according to my limited research which seems to support this recent talking point). Which is something I like to hear, at least. Also, I know the intent is not there, but the word I supplanted with that previous ellipsis has its genesis as a slur against gay men. And can in fact can sometimes be used as a slur against women. And, well, this: https://www.npr.org/2024/06/15/nx-s1-4966583/trump-t-shirt-maga-merch-joe-biden-kamala-harris-vulgar .
"I’ll let you read Jason’s meticulous reporting in detail, but in sum this demands we ask: should the people who created Synapse and Juno, and maybe the people who applied pressure to bypass AML controls, be criminally prosecuted for negligence?" No, not the people who created it. Because squishy-fleshy organizations are not immutable smart contracts. So you don't just "create" the organization and off it goes on its own like a runaway trolley. But, yes, the people who ran it probably should be prosecuted. Which are likely the same people as the creators, but it's important to specify their fault is from their roles as operators. Note also that you can't on-ramp and off-ramp between crypto and fiat via completely autonomous, immutable smart contracts either. Which is important as I think fundamentally the real buck stops there, at the ramps. Especially ramps that might be connected to US banks. Because US banks are backed by FDIC insurance, and what's mishandled but not backed by FDIC will often get bailed out anyway, and taxpayers are who ultimately pay for it all. And thus, yeah, likely "was a lot worse," indeed.
"You’re just doing Hitler." Well... Maybe some of what he did. But I think he kind of went a little further. Watercolor paintings are also Hitler shit, if we want to be pedantic. Eugenics is definitely more Hitlery than watercolor, of course, I'll give you that.
"Despite misrepresentations so bad they look like a conspiracy involving New York Times reporters with undisclosed familial ties to the Bankman-Fried clan, FTX victims have actually been compensated for roughly 25% of the value of their stolen assets." I'm surprised DZM wrote this. It kind of goes against the entire point of the link within this quote, which I think posits very well that writing something like "25% of the value" without qualifiers is simply misleading when the events do not contain like-for-like assets and/or there has been significant time between events, for which there is both in this case. Maybe the link counts as a qualifier.
"For what it’s worth, I predicted this specific failure back in 2021, because Worldcoin’s methods aren’t scaleable. Their use of a device to scan eyeballs to prove humanity requires staff and equipment at a scale that don’t make economic sense, and never did." And in 2021 we didn't really have zk-proofs would have at least helped make this a bit more sensible. But what makes the most sense is letting people keep private the very last of their data that they can keep private (until/unless a company for finding out your heritage via your DNA that your sibling uses gets bought out by an entity that is beholden to an authoritarian government, or is used by police to do more than just stop you from serial killing). Solutions for Proof of Humanity that get it generally right / close enough based on your transactional history and the online activity you choose to connect to your account I think work well enough, can scale, and will likely only get better.
My beef with Kamala is mainly rooted in her record as a prosecutor, but I'm willing to accept she can change her stance if she addresses it. In the spectrum of all candidates, she's far from the worst option, and she definitely looks exciting by comparison, just not without her flaws: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/article/2024/jul/24/kamala-harris-california-record-election