_jjkk (u/_jjkk) - Readit News

_jjkk commented on Schizophrenia linked to marijuana use disorder is on the rise, study finds cnn.com/2021/07/22/health... · Posted by u/pseudolus

Barrin92 · 5 years ago

well apathetic individuals still rely on the society they are in, most of the time anyway. I think this is where the narcissism perception comes in.

Most stoners in particular people who smoke a lot and for a long time at least in my experience become apathetic and to a degree dependent on their environment. They rely on others to organize their lives, even get simple chores done, they become sort of lethargic. And when you have an individual like that who also acts indifferently towards it you create (I think a justified) negative perception.

_jjkk · 5 years ago

Be careful not to over-generalize from personal experience... Maybe you've just met a few examples of lethargic, dependent narcissists who smoke a lot of weed?

There is selection bias at play, as someone with an admitted negative perception of stoners you probably haven't put yourself in many situations where you might meet counterexamples.

In my experience, I've met many stoners whose driving force is empathy and compassion and not narcissism and apathy.

Anyway, keep in mind any substance abuse is often an amplifier of issues that already existed.

_jjkk commented on Schizophrenia linked to marijuana use disorder is on the rise, study finds cnn.com/2021/07/22/health... · Posted by u/pseudolus

hereforphone · 5 years ago

I can only speak from personal experience, which is of course limited. I smoked occasionally in my 20s, but not since (I'm middle-aged now). I've been friends and acquaintances with many people that smoke a lot. I see a trend among these people - not necessarily schizophrenia (I'm not a psychologist and probably wouldn't even notice a mild case) - but instead a consistent arrogance and self-importance. It's peculiar - they may be contributing very little to society (or maybe a lot), but regardless there's a sense of superiority that seems to crop up among them all. Maybe even narcissism?

I could be completely wrong. I don't express this to assert it, but rather to ask if anyone else has noticed anything similar.

_jjkk · 5 years ago

> they may be contributing very little to society (or maybe a lot), but regardless there's a sense of superiority

A sober individual's brain is operating on standard (often societally installed) reward mechanism, including "succeeding" on certain self-evaluated measures like "contributions to society"

It's commonly said that weed makes you "OK with being bored". i.e. standard reward mechanisms mentioned above don't really matter much when you're high.

It has nothing to do with narcissism or sense of superiority as you call it, just that their reward mechanism doesn't include things like "how much am I contributing to society". Apathy is a better word for it.

_jjkk commented on Ethereum will use around 99.95% less energy post merge blog.ethereum.org/2021/05... · Posted by u/vishnu_ks

533474 · 5 years ago

why does it have to be a dark-web market if blockchain payments are first class citizens? I suppose the general population isn't ready for decentralised payments yet or do you have another reason for such use-case generalization?

_jjkk · 5 years ago

There are still many barriers to that "first class" status, taxes are mentioned most often.

Taxes are paid in fiat. Holding non-stablecoins would add even more of a tax headache because you'd have to track capital gain/loss as you enter/exit fiat for taxes / fees / vendors that don't accept crypto

Also the fact that general adoption has been slow so far may be a sign that there is not enough obvious value added for the average person to consider using crypto over fiat.

_jjkk commented on LSD, cargo shorts and the fall of a tech CEO bloomberg.com/news/articl... · Posted by u/1cvmask

wiz21c · 5 years ago

> Zhu believed "the company were too focused on sales and money at the expense of altruistic goals". Excuse me? You're running a company with other peoples' money at stake with the express understanding that you will seek to maximize their returns.

A guy has a cool idea, then he needs money to make it big. Some people give the money in the hope that they will maximize their return. The fact they give money doesn't give them total power.

I've been in that situation of having a cool idea with investor interested. Believe me, those with the money quickly think your idea is theirs and all of a sudden you're reduced to that : an initial idea, a starting point. As soon as money is put in, you basically don't exist anymore. I don't consider that a fair deal; it's a deal with vultures.

So, yep, Zhu got my sympathy.

_jjkk · 5 years ago

An investment is not a donation to your idea or cause.

If you "need money to make it big" you can bootstrap, take donations, or look for investors.

It's easier to raise investment than donations, because an investor expects a return in an economic/probabalistic sense(not hopes for a return)

You can't have your cake and eat it too though; once you accept investment you can't cry foul when they don't sit back and act like a donor.

_jjkk commented on Interview with Vitalik Buterin on ETH2, Scaling Plans, NFTs, etc. tim.blog/2021/03/09/vital... · Posted by u/donsupreme

capableweb · 5 years ago

For one, if I want to sell/give something to someone, I just transfer the NFT representing the agreement.

Imagine if you could transfer car ownership without having to deal with the government or anything else? Just a transaction away. If the seller/buyer also uses cryptocurrency, you could safely write a contract that swaps the funds for the NFT without any risk of either parties running away with both of them (funds and NFT).

_jjkk · 5 years ago

Sure, it makes sense from an "imagine a world where..." perspective. Sounds convenient.

I'm looking at it from a "why would any government on Earth choose to use a 'decentralized' blockchain as a source of truth to keep track of property deeds in their jurisdictions" perspective.

_jjkk commented on Interview with Vitalik Buterin on ETH2, Scaling Plans, NFTs, etc. tim.blog/2021/03/09/vital... · Posted by u/donsupreme

fasteddie31003 · 5 years ago

POS = "Proof of stake" here, not the more common use of POS. PoS if implemented with the correct incentives is as secure as PoW. I don't have much faith in crypto helping unbanked populations, as there is a pretty high learning curve. You can easily wipe away all your money if you do a step wrong or loose a private key.

_jjkk · 5 years ago

It is yet to be proven if it is "as secure" because no PoS network has operated at scale.

It also certainly defeats much of the original purpose of decentralization when a few stakeholders have total control of the network because they hold the most coins...

Regardless if the network has "correct incentives" or not, things can happen to those stakeholders outside their control, or other incentives could easily develop to act in bad faith against the network.

_jjkk commented on Interview with Vitalik Buterin on ETH2, Scaling Plans, NFTs, etc. tim.blog/2021/03/09/vital... · Posted by u/donsupreme

kemonocode · 5 years ago

NFTs are fine to tokenize things that are valuable because they are limited, say, like property deeds. You own the token, you own the deed, and it's possible to establish an one-to-one relationship.

Attaching a token to something that's inherently reproducible such as digital art yet with granting no means to actually enforce copyright is pretty much lunacy and it's just muddying the waters further when it comes to cryptocurrency.

_jjkk · 5 years ago

A deed? You mean, a legal document which is enforced through a centralized power i.e. government....

What advantage is gained by tying it one-to-one with an NFT or storing it on a blockchain at all?

_jjkk commented on MasterCard to open up network to cryptocurrencies reuters.com/article/us-cr... · Posted by u/ArtTimeInvestor

RhodoGSA · 5 years ago

Again, I don't think you understand crypto very well. I can buy coins on a DEX and transfer them to my hard wallet. There's no 'Verifying' or 'Knowing my address'.

Again, your government banning selling goods for crypto makes it a better investment opportunity for the world.

_jjkk · 5 years ago

I'm not sure what you mean about "understanding" crypto, the concepts here are dead simple, there's not much to misunderstand.

In this scenario it doesn't matter that you can transfer some coins from a DEX to your "hard wallet". If you haven't registered your hard wallet's address with the government and linked it to your identity, you will be unable to use those coins for anything other than trading with other unverified wallets.

If you want to exchange the coins in your hard wallet for any valuable or material good whatsoever, without disclosing your actual identity to the government, you'd have to find someone willing to do so illegally i.e. a black market.

And the receiver of your "dirty" bitcoin, which is verifiably dirty because the transaction came from your (unverified) wallet, would then have to solve the same problem of laundering the BTC if he wanted to use it to pay for his costs / employees / etc.

And if we're talking about a large economic power, I'm not sure how banning crypto and making its transactions more difficult would help anyone; if anything it would negatively impact that crypto since it is less usable as a medium of exchange.

It may seem outlandish that a government would even go to these lengths, but I'd argue that wielding a centralized currency is too powerful for governments to give it up without a fight.

_jjkk commented on Bitfinex and Tether required to end all trading activity with New Yorkers ag.ny.gov/press-release/2... · Posted by u/dgellow

hntrader · 5 years ago

Good explanation. Why do they do step (3)? Aren't they just opening themselves up to massive legal liability?

_jjkk · 5 years ago

Some believe this is an intentional Ponzi scheme to print some money for the owners of Tether and Bitfinex, others believe they had good intentions at first, but through bad investment or otherwise got underwater, and started "investing" their USDT-backing dollars to claw back up.

Bitfinex originally denied relation to Tether but it's been proven that was a lie.

The worry is, at some point there could be a "run" on Tether, when the curtains are pulled back, where all the USDT-BTC traders who happen to have USDT holdings and they suddenly become worthless because nobody wants to trade USDT-BTC anymore at 1-1.

As long as "public confidence" in USDT continues, the charade will too