Betting places like polymarket even the playfield. The gambling industry is rigged. Decentralized venues make it fair for everyone to bet

This isn’t about an even playing field. It’s about spending too much money on gambling.

Since when betting is forbidden? It's not like they are socialists with a net worth of hundreds of millions

they just reported 1B from crypto ventures, so 57m seems like lunch money...

I wonder what those ventures actually are and how that money is made?

yeah, being a gay furry doesn't have much to do with being right-wing afaik

I'd say it makes you less likely to be right wing overall (since the right is hostile to you), but yeah, I've known some very conservative furries.

Furries are people, and any group of people is going to have a lot of different views and beliefs represented amongst its members.

highly unlikely some young guy who had a relationship with his roommate who is a transexual both being furries are right-wing. Also, highly unlikely a right-wing is going to shoot another right-wing because he is not "radical enough". Sure bud, if you want to believe so ;)

> highly unlikely some young guy who had a relationship with his roommate who is a transexual both being furries are right-wing

This is really not true. The current MAGA movement is rife with doublethink and it appeals strongly to people who feel outcast by society.

Right-wing furries are in the minority, but they do exist - which is what I thought your original comment was saying.

Again: furries are people, and any group of people isn't going to be homogenous.

Again: None of the described above makes sense. Why would a gay furry shoot someone because he is not radical enough? You have everyone who knew the guy saying that he was very left-wing. Also, try to check some of the content of Charlie Kirk, many trans students come up to him to confront him on his views, for example https://www.youtube.com/shorts/SNcVnPkZlVI

"free speech absolutists" that will defend anything that benefits their narrative but not others'

Is this like tailscale?

It has a lot of similarities and you can use it as a replacement for the core features.

Any example of something Tailscale can do that Mycoria can't, and the reverse? Just to get a better understanding of the differences :-).

Tailscale is P2P network with optional relays, Mycoria is a mesh network.

Tailscale has central policies. Mycoria is more like a collective where you can offer services to everyone else within the network.

but does mycoria work with NATs?

problems are the same but decentralized. You can't give a mortgage to an anonymous user, can you?

Money doesn't stink, but your hands might.

nah

> Too many smart people work on these pointless projects instead of useful tech that benefits society

Decentralization doesn't benefit society? umh...

"Decentralization" is a generic principle and a very selective choice in this case. What was the specific practical implementation that was so beneficial to society to this day?

Centralization is what enabled today's societies to thrive. So when talking about decentralization you have to get into the specifics to show the value.

Tell third-world countries that centralization is good :)

Centralization could be good, sometimes (if it works idk). The problem is that the financial world has been monopolized by certain entities and the barrier of entry is enormous. It is never fair to not play by the same rules when regulation favors big institutions, etc... Access to credit is difficult sometimes and unfair. But that is just a reason you could give in the US.

Decentralization ensures that countries that condemn their citizens to raising inflation can access other types of income. Some argentinians get paid in USDC, because their currency is just worthless in other countries, and they would never be able to access USD in their banks.

Decentralization (I have in mind something like Hyperliquid or even BTC) ensures that everybody in the world have access to the same economy without intermediaries asking for a fee. Which means, a person in Indian can access to income the same way a person in the US would. Or you could do a transfer overseas with less fees or regulation problems.

> Decentralization (I have in mind something like Hyperliquid or even BTC) ensures that everybody in the world have access to the same economy without intermediaries asking for a fee. Which means, a person in Indian can access to income the same way a person in the US would.

And do they? In practice? The theory is always sweet, but in practice once you take away "crime" and "hold to sell high" you'll be hard pressed to see too many, or widespread instances of usefulness. You don't make society better by just building a taller peak for a few if at the same time you're digging even deeper troughs for the many.

> Or you could do a transfer overseas with less fees or regulation problems.

Every time someone gets swindled out of their "deregulated, decentralized" money, every time someone loses a finger for their million dollar wallet, you have one more voice asking a centralized organization for protection, maybe with some regulation.

You handwave away all the obvious problems, even though technology or time won't solve any of them. Without protection most people will be screwed out of their belongings. Ask that person in India if they're eager to "access to income the same way a person in the US would" (whatever that means) if this means there's no recourse when they lose the money.

> And do they? In practice? The theory is always sweet

Yes, they have access to the same economy.

> you have one more voice asking a centralized organization for protection, maybe with some regulation

I don't want regulation, thanks. Just have backups or smth. Only looking for governments to not ban it in order to allow users to convert their BTCs to fiat currency. But that is already kinda in place, because old school investors are asking for it.

> Ask that person in India if they're eager to "access to income the same way a person in the US would" (whatever that means)

It means that they can also earn a 100K salary in USD, thus not being affected by inflation

> "Every time someone gets swindled out of their "deregulated, decentralized" money ... you have one more voice asking a centralized organization for protection, maybe with some regulation."

Regulation is key, quality decentralized finance can only happen with quality regulation. Ditto for plain old centralized banking. My question is, why we don't have anything of reasonable quality?

That lack is the reason fraudsters can peddle their fraud-coins and bait people with bombastic arguments like "the value of decentralization". Crime is decentralized, does that make it good?

>>(by grr19) everybody in the world have access to the same economy without intermediaries asking for a fee.

There is a fee, quite high in fact, and energy cost.

> There is a fee, quite high in fact, and energy cost.

Depends on the L1 that you use. If you think of BTC, yeah, fee could be high (not if you are sending 1M), if you think of a proof-of-stake L1 then not much. Also depends on the TPS. Again; thinking about Hyperliquid.

Some do, in practice.

Decentralization benefit society. Trust-less systems - don't. Trust-less systems lead to libertarianism and anarcho capitalism, both are just fancy words for feudalism. We all know how that works, there are even modern day re-enactment which all end up massive fraud and crime. I prefer semi-trusted democracy to the feudalism any time.

I don't see how a trustless & decentralized system would cause feudalism. On the other hand, I see how our current "democratic" system evokes in neo-feudalism. We are all slaves to the government and the few conglomerates they favor, paying taxes to be more restricted. No thanks, I'd rather have a libertarian system and close to 0% tax, if not zero and practically no government.

No, you don't need to worship Amazon in a libertarian system, Amazon lives thanks to regulation (Amazon supports raising the min wage), and other import fees & tax exemptions that smaller businesses can't afford to bypass.

So you don't need ANY hositals, schools, banks, police, firefighters, military, science, environment protection, construction, roads, railways and so on? Or you just want that someone else paid for all that, and instead of paying both for example 20% tax, you will pay 0% and some unlucky honest worker will pay 40% for both of you?

I personally don't to live in either possibility, neither in "nothing exist" libertarian dystopia, nor in the current normal society where i would need to pay for a bunch of selfish freeloaders who avoid taxes.

>if not zero and practically no government

The only thing keeping the billionaire class from extruding you through a nozzle, drying out the paste, and then distributing what used to be you in powdered form as a daily ration to their indentured servants is the government.

A bad government can also enable this, but examples of bad governments are far outweighed by good or at least mediocre examples to the point of absurdity.

Whenever I talk to libertarians about this they respond "we'd just band together to make rules against this to protect ourselves" -- that's a fucking government.

(or they have some fetishistic fantasy about guns and shit)

Thus, other blockchains emerged

Yes, we only need checks notes 3,500 other coins to match the clearance rate of Visa.

And adding more confusion and more problems.

Btw. Criss chain transaction is the major problem this strategy added.

requiring much higher resources to run a node and making them much less decentralized.

Which one are you referring to? What do you want to get all the freedom in the world and no effort for running a decentralized node? Staking blockchains don't require much resources.

The ones that allow hundreds of txs per second, making verification of the entire tx history orders of magnitude harder. The limited tx throughput of bitcoin is a feature, not a bug.