What I struggle to understand is why the capital can be used with no fee (dydx - 2 wei). Why would someone contribute to such a pool that pays no interest as opposed to staking or lending somewhere else?
This practice is called "Brand bidding" and is actually extremely common among competitors. Occasionally companies will mutually agree to not participate.
It's actually surprising why it's not perceived to be more hostile.
I don't know if this is still the case, but for a while the easiest way to get the best deal from Dominoes was to search Google for Pizza Hut with your adblocker turned off.
Ya this is kind of a non-story. They were probably bidding on 'Signal' prior to this current set of events anyways. And since Signal doesn't appear to be bidding on it's own name, Facebook is probably paying very little for that top spot.
Bidding on your name might be an even bigger waste of money than bidding on a competitor's name, especially for established brands. eBay's experience with this came up on a recent episode of Freakonomics - https://freakonomics.com/podcast/advertising-part-2/
Whenever I search for a brand by name and an ad for them pops up (in the rare case that I’m browsing without an ad blocker), I try to click on the non ad version right below it just to save them a bit of money.
An asset being speculated on does not rule that it does not have inherent value. Every asset has a speculative component, just look at the stock market.
> The beauty of a fiat currency is that you can maintain it's value simply by adjusting supply.
There is very little attractive about the idea that a group can devalue currency on a whim. That's exactly why people opt in to Bitcoin.
> Is there any sign that there is an over-supply of dollar which would justify leaving the dollar until it is crashed?
>There is very little attractive about the idea that a group can devalue currency on a whim.
You can turn this around: There is very much attractive about the idea that a group can maintain the value of a currency on a whim.
>> Is there any sign that there is an over-supply of dollar which would justify leaving the dollar until it is crashed?
> Yes. Have you seen M1[1] this year?
There is definitely more supply, but is it too much? Can't this be the result of decisions that maintain the value?
If that money is just somewhere on the books, but people don't have more money to spend, then the value of things remains stable.
The value of money depends not only on the amount of available money but also on the velocity with which it is spent. As far as I know, credit cards have increased the velocity by which people are spending money which increased the supply of money and stimulated the economy.
Now, during this crisis, do people spend money with the usual velocity? If not, then that reduced speed has to be compensated by supplying more money.
Should we take this approach, there would be nothing left, including the internet on which we conversate here. There were these exact arguments present against it.
It's unfortunate but the reality is that every advancement in society can and will be used for illegal and immoral activity. It is a matter of the greater good.
We've seen wikileaks deplatformed and there are many more instances that don't come with a legal power.
Not hard to imagine the same happening to "a platform promoting dangerous misinformation" as is the justification from YouTube.
But that's actually predictable. Banking is built on trust. Trust is a societal construct. "It's hard to open my porn shop because the banks won't give me a loan and the town won't zone for it" is an issue older than the Internet.
Bitcoin doesn't appreciate on news. It's not a company and it doesn't necessarily have a product that is being constantly worked on. There is the odd software upgrade every few years but the core function never changes.
The value to which people are bidding is primarily 2 things.
1. Tolerance to threats, social or technological. This reduces with time.
2. Its increase in demand (yes, a lot of speculation) relative to the constant reduction of supply. I.e. scarcity.
Content with a certain age threshold triggers login. The last time I looked at this, embedding these videos was still possible without logging in. So there are definitely ways in accessing the content without authentication.
Hm. If embedding works maybe my ad-blocking is sufficient; or I just haven't come across any that require it. I mostly just watch woodworkers/machinists/electronics/etc. Sort of conceivable it could be age restricted but would also be surprising.
The maintainers have no power over federated instances. The code of conduct is pertaining to the repository and official Funkwhale communities (such as the Matrix chat and discussion boards).
