rathermercurial.eth on Warpcast

rathermercurial.eth pfp

rathermercurial.eth

@rathermercurial.eth

"Sufficiently decentralized" Crazy that some founders don't realize that people have jobs and sometimes have to put projects on hold. Tech bro privilege really does warp reality for these dudes.

4 replies

2 recasts

2 reactions

Thumbs Up pfp

I think there’s only two options really. 1. Someone, ideally a FarcasterDAO, votes on whether or not to add or remove mods. Channels would be owned by the DAO but not moderated by it. All decisions would be taken by voting. 2. Harberger tax The problem of squatting is a big one. It shouldn’t be Dan who decides whether someone can use a channel for something they aren’t affiliated with (and especially if they don’t use it at all) but it should be someone.

1 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

rathermercurial.eth pfp

rathermercurial.eth

@rathermercurial.eth

Harberger taxes perpetuate dominance of those with more access to wealth over those who cannot afford to value their property as high, which in this case would result in capture of communities.. But otherwise agreed 100%. 🔥

1 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

Thumbs Up pfp

My understanding of harberger taxes (limited as it is) is that it should actually prevent a lot of the wealth accumulation we see in society that comes from the unrealistic valuation of non-money property.

1 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

rathermercurial.eth pfp

rathermercurial.eth

@rathermercurial.eth

Yes! For non-resources (like art, luxury goods, etc), it's a great idea IMO. However for resources, housing, medicine, food, clothing, organizations, Warpcast channels, etc., it is not. This would require people to pay rents on everything (even our toothbrushes) in the form of taxes, while also giving the wealthy a legal right to seize our personal property.

1 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

Thumbs Up pfp

I’ve never heard any case for applying these things to personal goods. Just like the argument that communism is when shared toothbrush, I think that’s hyperbole. While I don’t like market-based to housing, medicine, or utilities, as I feel these are public goods, it’s undoubted that in the case of club goods or private (in the capital sense) goods, harberger tax should at least do better than allowing for unquestioned accumulation

2 replies

0 recast

0 reaction

rathermercurial.eth pfp

rathermercurial.eth

@rathermercurial.eth

Fair, but what would you say if someone bought /cryptoleft and deleted it just because Ben couldn't afford to pay high taxes and also feed his kids. That would be bad right?

1 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

Thumbs Up pfp

Sorry, I think I forgot to mention that I think the harberger tax should be paid by a DAO/group. Also I don’t think it would be beneficial for someone to squat it. Maybe to post spoof, bot, misinformation content to make the left look bad but not to just squat. And as Dan pointed out re: channels, the canonical source is not always the one with the most predictable name. We would just create “crypto lefties” or “left crypto” and so on and so forth. But I take your point that harberger might not be the best approach.

1 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

rathermercurial.eth pfp

rathermercurial.eth

@rathermercurial.eth

Fair. My main point anyway is that carelessly-executed anti-squatting measures are classist and anti-worker as they antagonize those who have full-time jobs with little free time for side projects. Side note: it's also ironically anti-capitalist as it does not respect the property rights of those who rightfully purchased the channel. The overall takes have been explicitly feudalist / kleptocratic. In Zora's case, I agree with DWR's actions but not the unilateral decision behind them. If there is to be any values basis behind this app (as they claim), then Zora should have to make a legit trademark infringement claim. Otherwise this app has no values basis whatsoever and it's just Dan's little feifdom.

1 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

Thumbs Up pfp

0 reply

0 recast

0 reaction