if there’s any medical conspiracy going on, it’s that the effort to destroy trust in the medical establishment is a ploy to promote eugenics and survival of the fittest by modern day Nazis.

If going from scratch, trying to get support from an acquiring bank to verify authorisation and settlement integration as a community project would be “interesting”. Things like PCI compliance, 3DS accreditation etc. also. Pretty much need to piggyback off an existing solution.

Yeah definitely. I’m sure some people in co-tech in the UK were working on something like this in a more generalised way a while back. They were running sessions for people on this for a while. Working with experienced orgs on this would be key.

Ideally each country would have a system which generates all the basic legal paperwork and a sound (if basic and intended for extension) constitution which encodes essential compliance requirements. Getting such a system verified may be easier said than done, however, especially depending on how co-op friendly the local regulatory environment happens to be.

I’d say if anything it’s hard to stop people from doing so. It’d be trivial to set up an ad-hoc exchange (e.g. I’ll PayPal you money for tokens) for instance or simply resell items purchased with the tokens in a fiat market.

Thinking more strategically, I think the aim would ultimately to get things like this provided through our co-opy marketplace.

The question then becomes when does exchange into national fiat currencies become an issue: legally of course there’s money laundering concerns. I’m hoping that the continual regular and cheap issuing of the tokens would generate a somewhat inflationary environment (which is compensated merely through dealing with everything instantly and electronically with an exchange mechanism) which would head off speculation at least.

Then maybe there is some idea that there should be an exchange to fiat currencies which is also organised as a co-op, which could allow some governance to be put in place around it and then defederate from instances which allow ad-hoc fiat exchange (again to put in a speed bump for money laundering and criminal liability).

Ok here’s the pitch: instances generate currency for each of their users on a time registered basis or some other easily verifiable metric. Each instance’s currency is different and they automatically generate exchange rates with each other instance’s currency. People buy and sell items through it using only currencies generated by the federated platform.

Also all instances have to be co-ops or they get de-federated. Maybe the license even specifies this.

???

Socialism

Yeah I used to use Ubuntu as a Linux desktop a few years ago. I just came back to install Fedora on my desktop and the whole process was super easy. Even for gaming, Nvidia drivers, Steam with proton, etc. all set up with zero command line interaction, troubleshooting or even looking up guides or anything. It was intuitive and works.

The compatibility for gaming on Linux today is generally really good. The whole experience is really polished.

Some LLMs have specific jailbreaks which including in the document may cause them to act strangely in a way that is specific to the LLM. But it’s unlikely to be robust over time as they get patched/changed/etc.

Strictly speaking these all do something similar-ish at face value but actually quite different in terms of mechanism and target. I think the unpopularity of a lot of these licensing structures is also down to lack of legal verification in a lot of cases.

The illegality possibility does warrant careful consideration, but I suspect in many cases regimes which would oppose this kind of license would be making the use and enforcement of software fairly selective in any case. If it is made illegal, it’s made illegal by the respective government, not the software author or license writer.

A question is then raised as to what degree the implied open source requirement that open source should be leveraged by e.g. Nazis actually benefits developers and users. Or whether it is in effect a kind of appeasement as no doubt use which contradicts those values (and hence promotes freedom) is illegal already. Those uses which are orthogonal to that aim may be selectively targeted for arbitrary reasons such as the identity of the user.

Strictly speaking I think such provisions would be unenforceable in those circumstances anyway so doesn’t the effect kind of cancel out? Don’t get me wrong I get where you’re coming from but why would we imagine such a license has an effect in nations that are already hostile to those ideas and probably have broken judicial systems anyway?

It is ok to question the benefits of open source provisions. They are written by humans and are fallible.

I’ve been using this for a while. It’s good, lots better than postman’s annoying attempts to force you into their cloud nonsense.

Oh great, let’s just give Farage and co. a big old back door to spy on us when he inevitably stumbles into power. Can’t see that being abused in any way.

I think there’s a balance, in that if everybody suppressed that speech and refused to take that risk of criticising then those corrupt and powerful state actors would be unchallenged.

They can then become even more powerful and may continue to encroach into private life and speech. While it may be necessary to defend yourself on the one hand, hiding entirely may also present additional dangers.