Alexandre Oliva (moved to @lxo@gnusocial.jp) (lxo@gnusocial.net)'s status on Friday, 13-Sep-2024 04:11:57 EDT
Alexandre Oliva (moved to @lxo@gnusocial.jp)in our own very limited experience, every effect has a cause, that in turn has a cause, and so on, but our experience is limited. there could be (logically, there must be) some initial cause or causes that are not effects. but naming any of them doesn't really solve anything to those who insist every effect must have a cause, it would just shift the question to what caused that just-named initial cause. whereas once we accept the premise that there are initial causes that aren't effects, what would the point be of making the cause-effect chain any longer than it needs to be to explain what we observe?
I don't know specifics of ETH, but if it's anything like other cryptocurrencies, it uses a blockchain as a ledger for all transactions. adding to the chain blocks with proposed transactions has significant computational cost, so miners are allowed, by design, to add a payment to themselves to the ledger, out of thin air (as in, no payer). nevertheless, there are only so many transactions that can fit in a block, and if there are too many proponents of transactions, or if the costs of processing them are more than the built-in mining payment, miners can select transactions that offer higher payments for processing, in a sort of auction for priority in processing. given free competition among miners, I suppose the theory is that the transaction processing fee will narrow in to a fair market price, while making room for priority pricing
the distinction you're making is not between free software and open source, but between copyleft and non-copyleft. free software tends to prefer copyleft because it aligns better with our values and goals of emancipating users, whereas open source often prefers non-copyleft because it's poorly disguised exploitation of developers, but both sharealike and non-sharealike licensing qualify as free software and as open source. the assumption that free software requires copyleft is a common misconception. please don't spread or reinforce it. defending the freedoms (like copyleft does) is not necessary to respect them, and the criterion is respect, not defense.
Alexandre Oliva (moved to @lxo@gnusocial.jp) (lxo@gnusocial.net)'s status on Monday, 09-Sep-2024 03:54:01 EDT
Alexandre Oliva (moved to @lxo@gnusocial.jp)supporters of one side believe a certain set of evidence and dismiss evidence and claims from the other side and vice versa this is evidence of a dispute, not of either side's victory unless you happen to believe either side's propaganda unfortunately, western highly centralized media gives many people the false notion of so-called reputable news sources being trustworthy in matters of war and national interests. their one-sidedness on such matters screams of war propaganda gotta get even more critical and seek additional sources that bring in different narratives. the only known way of standing a chance of distilling truth is by confronting conflicting reports. that is hard to do when narratives are so centralized and uniform, but overcoming it may be a challenge when one only speaks English