Web 3.0 shit

"In a rich man's house there's no place to spit but his face"

--- Diogenes of Sinope

With time i learned that, you don't matter shit to society, they don't care if you contribute to society, they don't care if you do good stuff or bad stuff, they don't care about anything about you, they only care whether you have money or not, you can be completely evil, but provided you have money, society will blindly follow you, and they'll think you're doing a good for the world, and if someone wants to criticize a rich guy, they'll say you're crazy and shit like that. I don't really understand why they defend rich persons which won't ever know who you are, but, sure.

So now that we know that the world only cares about money and the power it holds, society has only one reason to make something popular, whether it makes money or not[0]. They don't care whether the good is useful or not, or if it is harmful to its users, they only care whether you can make money with it. A good example of this is new computers, ThinkPads were peak computing, top quality computers, great quality keyboard. But as they saw that "this shit design makes people buy more", they change the design for something way more terrible and unusable, with lower quality.

So, can you make money with the fediverse? Can you make money with XMPP? Can you make money with REAL decentralization?

The answer is "No, you can't", You cannot because there's no boss, there's no master. Only us trying to make the internet actually free and private for all. And as we are making services for the greater good of people rather than for profit, we are not making any money with this.

Yet you can make money with that fake centralization Blockchain proposes, it is a fake decentralization because, if someone, for example, bans you, it's recorded in the blockchain that you're banned, so you can't do shit, you can say "alright, i'll create a new account" which is not different from getting banned from Twitter and creating a new account. So it's still the same, in real decentralization, if you get banned, you just create an account in other server and that's it (Or you can create your own server!). With blockchain this is not possible, you'd have to create your own blockchain, which will be separated from the blockchain you were using before, it's like going from Twitter to something like Gab.

But why would people change to blockchain despite the fact it's exactly the same shit? That's exactly why, because it's exactly the same shit. When they banned Trump from Twitter and shit, people started thinking "Alright, centralization is bad, we need decentralization". So, instead of going for the real decentralization (XMPP, Fediverse...) They went for the shit "decentralization", Ethereum, Solana and God knows what else. The thing is that they made people believe that what they're using it's actually decentralizated, but in practice, it's exactly as centralizated as Twitter and similar.

And again, why did they choose the shit decentralization instead of the real decentralization? Because with Blockchain and shit, you can make money, you can't with the other kind of decentralization. But something even better is that CEOs can keep their users happy while having the same control over users, because, again, it's one blockchain per network, if you're banned from one blockchain, you have to go to another or join the same blockchain again.

I am not going to talk about NFTs.

[0]: Further reading: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commodity_fetishism

Publicar comentario


valid rss