why do some people oppose #crypto and #fiat? cryptocurrencies *are* fiat, in a sense that their value is a social construct. The difference is scarcity (or in a different way, control of fiat money supply). if anything, #cryptocurrency should be opposed to #currency, and both of those fiat IOUs to metallist money...
(PSA: nothing is perfect but, emphatically, FUCK proof of work crypto)
It's not an automatic home run. The First Amendment has exceptions, even beyond "time and manner," and has been substantially eroded by GW Bush and his successors, in the name of fighting terror, animal rights activists and water defenders.
But a lawsuit against your town council for nuking your Turner Diaries fanfic server is a hell of a lot more likely to succeed than griping about Twitter mods failing to grasp the "irony" in your Auschwitz jokes.
Which brings me back to the 1st Amendment and public sidewalks. All those people who are trying to find a way to support the "free market*" and also justify demanding that dominant platforms be ordered to carry their speech are living in a hell of their own making.
* Adam Smith popularized the term "free markets" to describe markets free from "rentiers" who collect money without adding value...such as cable monopolists. He *definitely* didn't mean "markets free from government regulation."
Interested in just politics and experimental music (football, too!)
Mamot.fr est un serveur Mastodon francophone, géré par La Quadrature du Net.