Plaintext ledgers aren’t immutable, and someone has to distribute and manage them. That’s a single point of failure and vulnerability to censorship, not to mention a real pain to synchronize if it was federated ledgers.
The users will never need to redeem their LBRY tokens, thus not be required to disclose personal information, whereas if you want to donate with any non-crypto service, your credit card, address, name, etc must be disclosed. It is a many times easier to just press “donate” without having to set up anything, and give away tokens to a content creator just like that.
Also, you can purchase mullvad VPN services for example, without ever having to transfer crypto into Fiat or disclosing your name. I would for example never want my credit card linked to a VPN. That defeats the entire purpose of a VPN.
There are a ton of online services, subscriptions, etc that accept cryptocurrency, so it isn’t exactly useless until turned into Fiat.
You can also transfer it all to a Monero wallet and after that the thread ends.
Immutability is irrelevant if the point is to maintain a record of posts to prevent censorship. The only thing that matters is that some instances keep the record. Bad actors could try to lie about the posts, but that doesn’t delete the ledger from other instances.
And no, no single instance is responsible, that’s what it means to have a distributed ledger. Distributed ledgers are already a proven technology that is extremely robust against censorship. You may have heard of them, they’re called bittorrents.
In fact, federation is also a kind of distributed ledger since once content federates a record is kept by any instance it is distributed to. It’s a solved problem and not even that hard. Synchronisation consists of, “here’s my latest posts, keep a record of them please”. This is such a basic concept and I don’t know why you called it a “single point of failure”. It is exactly the opposite of a single point of failure.
Privacy is not guaranteed even with Monero, and you’re still getting paid in crypto which is inherently unstable because the only thing it is worth is what you can sell it for, so it goes through boom-bust cycles constantly, and the immutability - when forks aren’t happening - only serves to enable scams. To defeat that crypto people have created banks, defeating the point of a zero-trust system.
There’s no public trust in it and it takes enormous carbon footprints to run, so it’s unsustainable on so many levels. I don’t want to support crypto on any level on principle, so no, I don’t want LBRY tokens. A lot of people feel the same way, and looking at the population of Odysee, a large number of the people who are on board are a bunch of right wing assholes.
Plaintext ledgers aren’t immutable, and someone has to distribute and manage them. That’s a single point of failure and vulnerability to censorship, not to mention a real pain to synchronize if it was federated ledgers.
The users will never need to redeem their LBRY tokens, thus not be required to disclose personal information, whereas if you want to donate with any non-crypto service, your credit card, address, name, etc must be disclosed. It is a many times easier to just press “donate” without having to set up anything, and give away tokens to a content creator just like that.
Also, you can purchase mullvad VPN services for example, without ever having to transfer crypto into Fiat or disclosing your name. I would for example never want my credit card linked to a VPN. That defeats the entire purpose of a VPN.
There are a ton of online services, subscriptions, etc that accept cryptocurrency, so it isn’t exactly useless until turned into Fiat.
You can also transfer it all to a Monero wallet and after that the thread ends.
Immutability is irrelevant if the point is to maintain a record of posts to prevent censorship. The only thing that matters is that some instances keep the record. Bad actors could try to lie about the posts, but that doesn’t delete the ledger from other instances.
And no, no single instance is responsible, that’s what it means to have a distributed ledger. Distributed ledgers are already a proven technology that is extremely robust against censorship. You may have heard of them, they’re called bittorrents.
In fact, federation is also a kind of distributed ledger since once content federates a record is kept by any instance it is distributed to. It’s a solved problem and not even that hard. Synchronisation consists of, “here’s my latest posts, keep a record of them please”. This is such a basic concept and I don’t know why you called it a “single point of failure”. It is exactly the opposite of a single point of failure.
Privacy is not guaranteed even with Monero, and you’re still getting paid in crypto which is inherently unstable because the only thing it is worth is what you can sell it for, so it goes through boom-bust cycles constantly, and the immutability - when forks aren’t happening - only serves to enable scams. To defeat that crypto people have created banks, defeating the point of a zero-trust system.
There’s no public trust in it and it takes enormous carbon footprints to run, so it’s unsustainable on so many levels. I don’t want to support crypto on any level on principle, so no, I don’t want LBRY tokens. A lot of people feel the same way, and looking at the population of Odysee, a large number of the people who are on board are a bunch of right wing assholes.
Hard no.