die hard
The fools talk much more than the wise. I wonder about just blocking most of the people I don't find interesting. Then I could only see writings from sensible and interesting people.
Maybe there is a technical solution, which doesn't require so much effort by the user.
Yes block chains predate bitcoin and are very useful. Git uses them. A currency is a perfect use case for a block chain. You need to robustly store balances and transactions so they can't be tampered with.
I would say it's insane to have a currency which is not block chain based. Too easy to fiddle your finances.
Proof of work isn't a necessary part of it. You need to answer the question "how does money get created". Proof of work is a very robust way to create and allocate new money. Fiat currencies just answer " i nominate one entity who is allowed to create as much money as he likes”. Other answers are possible.
It's also possible to use a proof of work algorithm which doesn't consume much energy. The usual proposal is for a "proof of doing work and allocating RAM and storing something on disk". Bitcoin just chose the most robust and simplest algorithm, which does consume a lot of energy.
In a future currency, the proof of work algorithm could allocate money to people who sequester carbon or plant trees. The thing about inventing a new type of money is that you can do anything. Bitcoin is a great leap of progress for humanity, but has a couple of flaws. Those flawed features can be reinvented, while still keeping all the benefits.
is there any evidence that this actually happens, or would happen?
all i ever see is humans being blocked or frustrated by the bot. i have never seen any kind of malicious spamming that could have been prevented by such a bot. spammers are normally thwarted by human mods.
the bot seems obsolete.
it's in the article. diverting around weather patterns where an AI said contrails were likely to form.
it's hard to judge how real the result is. it's early days.
people have lots of different reasons. some don't like the idea of killing a big animal with feelings and expressiveness. some because of how farms abuse or torture animals in some countries. some think Anibal farming is worse for the environment. some have religious prohibitions. some think it's bad for your health. some people don't like the taste or can't afford it but don't want people to think they are weird so they tell people they have a principled argument for it.
Yes you are right. In southern Ireland the same thing happened, but in 1921, and in very different circumstances.
I am over-simplifying, a lot. But I encourage you all to read more. The Irish struggle is a good modern example that the French should learn from.
The French are not putting any real pressure on their dictator, yet.
In Ireland the protest movement was much better organised, and multi-facetted.
Is it really safe to give your real full name and address to a random website, also your ID card number and DOB? It really looks legit, but it could easily be a scam. Is there some way to check?
If the EU really requires all this personal data, it's an effective guarantee that no petition will ever succeed. You'll never find 1M EU citizens you are foolish enough to reveal all that to a random bot.
This is a great project. I had the same idea myself, and posted about it, but never did anything about it! It's great that people like you are here, with the creativity, and the motivation and skills to do this work.
I think this project is as necessary as Wikipedia itself.
The criticisms in these comments are mostly identical to the opinion most people had about Wikipedia when it started - the it would become a cesspool of nonsense and misinformation. That it was useless and worthless when encyclopaedias already exist.
Wikipedia was the first step in broadening what a source if authoritative information can be. It in fact created richer and more truthful information than was possible before, and enlightened the world. Ibis is a necessary second step on the same path.
It will be most valuable for articles like Tieneman square, or the Gilets Jaunes, where there are sharply different perspectives on the same matter, and there will never be agreement. A single monolithic Wikipedia cannot speak about them. Today, wiki gives one perspective and calls it the truth. This was fine in the 20th century when most people believed in simple truths. They were told what to think by single sources. They never left their filter bubbles. This is not sustainable anymore.
To succeed and change the world, this project must do a few things right.
The default instance should just be a mirror of Wikipedia. This is the default source of information on everything, so it would be crazy to omit it. Omitting it means putting yourself in competition with it, and you will lose. By encompassing it, the information in Ibis is from day 1 greater then wiki. Then Ibis will just supersede wiki.
There should be a sidebar with links to the sane article on other instances. So someone reading about trickle down economics on right wing instance, he can instantly switch to the same article on a left wing wiki and read the other side of it. That's the feature that will make it worthwhile for people.
It should look like Wikipedia. For familiarity. This will help people transition.