Loading activity...
Whether talking about AI, justice, democracy, jobs, warfighting, energy, policing, the environment, and more... I usually end up back at: The first step is to stop a small number of powerful actors from manipulating how we encounter and contextualize information Another lost opportunity here
Reminded me how powerful it is for atproto to separate user data from app UI. Whole categories of problems can be solved in new ways, or disappear entirely
Seeing as we're in the midst of another round of cynical "our product is so powerful it can kill everyone" marketing, I figured I'd reshare this. TLDR: It's the inhumanity of humans, not the machinations of machines, that makes me nervous.
I can't see @mu.social without thinking of en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MU_puzzle
Been thinking about plc.directory as a single-point-of-failure So as a learning exercise, I threw together DIDMARC - an example of an independent witness for the directory 🔍 This approach uses Starknet to be fully trustless, but a trusted mirror could perform similar checks to identify abuse
Just finished @laurenshof.online's powerful piece: "No Change" It is a critical read But I'd push back a bit on the history; I think the sovereignty of nations has, by its nature, always been in flux. And the desire for decentralized "sovereignty" without the state is part of the same story 1/n
