I didn’t realise you wrote the article. I just wanted to quickly express how articulate and well written it is. And I completely agree with your points on the free market, government intervention and how unsustainable our current system is.

Though my view with algocracy is more to do with the types of individuals that are running the show. The wealthy, powerful and influential. The types that will stop at nothing to get what they want.

I feel that these people will always find opportunities to bend and manipulate systems in their favour. If it threatened their status, they’d destroy it. If they were somehow pushed into a corner they’d find ways to manipulate it.

It may be pessimistic but I really believe that in a dog eat dog world, there is no such thing as a system that is truly fair. You say an algorithmic system solves that. But I believe we’ll never reach it… Not in a way where these people would lose their influence. They would never allow it.

The problem with algocracy is someone has to define the laws in which the algorithm has to base it’s decisions. And if someone is writing those laws, how can we know they’re impervious to corruption.

YouTube Vanced was shut down because they tried to monetise it by releasing their own crypto NFTs, sparking Google to shut it down. I think for now Revanced is safe.

Honest question here. Could it be possibly that as they improved their DRM with more triggers and methods that it has started to impact performance since 2016?

As Empress was cracking Denuvo, I wouldnt be surprised if they started to quickly add extra defencive measures compromising what could have been optimised in the past.

I guess it depends on how you define inflation. To me inflation is the ratio between goods and services and the money supply. Inflation isn’t rising prices. Price rising is a symptom of inflation. I just don’t think it’s beneficial to use inflation interchangeably with supply and demand and price rises, it just creates confusion. I very much favor the macroeconomics view of inflation because through that lens a lot things start making sense.

Since this is your field, obviously you’d know that if you have more goods, you get deflation. And funnily enough when you look up the definition of deflation it’s very strongly tied to that ratio between goods and services and the money supply.

I just feel that over time people have changed the definition of inflation. It’s no surprise that the term Greedflation has popped up because the topic surrounding it has been convoluted, confusing a lot of people.

Inflation is the devaluation of the currency. The definition has been muddied for a time now but ultimately inflation refers to the expansion of the money supply.

As people/corporations borrow more and governments print more, prices increase. Not because those items have more value but because the money has lost its value needing more of it to pay for the same stuff.

If tomorrow everyone’s wages would double. Prices would double as demand would increase and the market balances itself out.

Greedflation is a term that shifts that narrative. You could argue that yes there are bad actors for sure. But the term greedflation is redefining inflation, making you focus more on corporations raising prices instead of the main contributor, an expanding money supply.

I’ve heard that the value of your loot depends on how ‘perfect’ you are at killing it. If you sturggle with it, you won’t be rewarded as much.

deleted by creator

Yes it’s bad. Competing for market share should be balanced and free of government intervention. How does a company (small or large) hope to compete against a company that is being subsidised.

Tesla can then undercut their competitors as they don’t need to make a profit. They’re subsidiesed.

Then the government has also imposed regulations for car manufacturers, that if they don’t sell enough EVs in the year, they have to pay a penalty by buying carbon credits.

Well Tesla sells those carbon credits. So they can undercut their competition, entice consumers with lower prices and recoup the losses through subsidies and selling these credits. All thanks to government intervention.

Basically screwing competition and screwing you. As these have knock on effects.

NFTs could have a useful case of keeping online records of ownership. Being cars, homes and even cattle. Which coulld also make it easier and cheaper to sell or buy these things.

Ignoring privacy concerns of course.

I still feel that silicone is more reliable than dealing with organic matter that can die.

How do they keep it alive. Do you need to feed it or keep it in special conditions? With time, as the cells age, would you lose performance?

“Show me the man and I’ll show you the crime” Lavrentiy Beria, Stalin’s secret police chief bragged that he could prove criminal conduct on anyone, even the innocent.

Before Hitler, why wouldn’t you put down you were Jewish.

You may have nothing to hide now. But who knows how it’ll be used against you in the future. The less people know about you, the better.

It’s the path of least resistance. If public transport was more effiencent and faster, people would opt for that.

But then you’re also dealing with the weather, or some people like the privacy or they enjoy driving their own car. Or not having to worry about time tables and waiting.

All these factor in, and that’s why many prefer cars.

I no longer recommend 1password. I purchased their life time guaranteed license, only for them to change to a subscription service and gave a middle finger to anyone who bought it. They didn’t even honour their original customers, they offered one or 2 months free. Nah, no thanks.

I would rather try KeePass. That service is open source and free.