0
⭐ Features
67 views

A Machine Gun for Zombies: Opinion

  • Evgeny Konstantinov
    ⭐ Features

    How to ditch your inner zombie at the cluttered crypto space?

A Machine Gun for Zombies: Opinion
Cover image via u.today

Chuck Klosterman, a popular essayist, wrote a very entertaining piece on zombies for The New York Times back in 2010.

Titled My Zombie, Myself: Why Modern Life Feels Rather Undead, the article takes an off-the-wall perspective on the popularity of the zombie culture and how it can be both a reflection and an evidence of our day-to-day lives.

I suggest reading the entire article because it’s just a lot of fun, but the important bit that I’d like to focus on is the one I’m quoting in full:

A lot of modern life is exactly like slaughtering zombies.

If there’s one thing we all understand about zombie killing, it’s that the act is uncomplicated: you blast one in the brain from point-blank range (preferably with a shotgun). That’s Step 1. Step 2 is doing the same thing to the next zombie that takes its place. Step 3 is identical to Step 2, and Step 4 isn’t any different from Step 3. Repeat this process until (a) you perish, or (b) you run out of zombies. That’s really the only viable strategy.

Every zombie war is a war of attrition. It’s always a numbers game. And it’s more repetitive than complex. In other words, zombie killing is philosophically similar to reading and deleting 400 work e-mails on a Monday morning or filling out paperwork that only generates more paperwork, or following Twitter gossip out of obligation, or performing tedious tasks in which the only true risk is being consumed by the avalanche. The principal downside to any zombie attack is that the zombies will never stop coming; the principal downside to life is that you will never be finished with whatever you do.

The Internet reminds us of this every day.

It’s been eight years since the publication of the article, but the digital world —  surprisingly — hasn’t changed much for the better.

👉MUST READ

On Connecting Users and Devs And On Tapeworms: Opinion

On Connecting Users and Devs And On Tapeworms: Opinion

Collective knowledge VS individuality

When we think crypto — as in the Blockchain and crypto space — the way the information is structured (or, rather, completely unstructured and cluttered) is even lagging behind the rest of things.

There are various Blockchain courses — both entrepreneurial and from established institutions, and there are scattered wikis that are entirely dependent on the volition of those who run (or abandon) them. The sense of decentralization that flairs this space and community-centrism are a contributing factor to the information chaos that holds sway. This is not inherently bad, as this shows that community does rule this space, and every community is individual members.

And the individual members possess and spread and share the information. They also do information exchanges and this way move the crypto space forward.

Community members are knowledge bearers. At the same time, they are individuals, and individuals have their own agenda that ranges from complete selflessness for the common good to being driven by lacking knowledge to the no-holds-barred money making.

There’s an enormous amount of collective knowledge in the crypto space, but there’s an overwhelming amount of individuals. In your search for the knowledge, you very often have to rely on what complete strangers say, and you listen to what they say because they are a part of that subreddit that you are following, or a forum where you can see their badges and past messages, or a member with a weird name (and thinly veiled shill tactics) of a telegram group of a project that you support.

There’s almost always a group of people that you trust, but in your search for knowledge — and because you want to be early in the new projects and developments — you wander out of your safe closed circle and investigate and research. And when you wander out, there’s always an onslaught of zombies — people that you don’t know and can’t check their agenda or how trustworthy they are. You start going through them one by one, and you are killing off those that are suspicious or — to use the zombie terminology — braindead. The process is time- and resource-consuming, exhausting, and not incredibly effective, but it’s pretty much the only one possible right now.

Imagine if — before taking a part in a conversation with a stranger, before fishing out the information that you need from them — you were able to decide if the interaction would be constructive and of benefit for you at all. Imagine if you could immediately see how trusted they are and if they have weight and what their agenda was before they got your full attention and it was all transparent and immutable?

Time and trust are as important to an individual as they are for all the communities because these are the factors that move this space forward.

👉MUST READ

The Human Soul of Technologically Advanced Web 3.0

The Human Soul of Technologically Advanced Web 3.0

Join our Telegram channel to get news even faster!

About the author

Evgeny Konstantinov has a solid background in knowledge management and communication, works with open source and blockchain communities since 2011

👓 Recommended articles
0
📰 News
375 views

Top Bitcoin Miner Warns – Bitcoin’s Privacy Features Are ‘Quite Poor’

  • Yuri Molchan
    📰 News

    The head of a major Bitcoin mining pool says that Bitcoin privacy is weak and must be improved to prevent BTC from avoiding governments’ clampdown

Top Bitcoin Miner Warns – Bitcoin’s Privacy Features Are ‘Quite Poor’
Cover image via www.123rf.com
Contents

The CEO of one of the largest BTC mining pools, Poolin, has recently stated in an interview that Bitcoin privacy has to be improved. The current privacy features make BTC vulnerable to potential regulatory bolt tightening, says he, as reported by Forbes.

The Poolin mining company was set up by several former employees of BTC.com – a world’s major mining pool, a subsidiary of Bitmain. Among them was the Poolin’s current CEO Kevin Pan.

“Bitcoin’s privacy features are quite poor”

Over the past years, developers have suggested several ways to improve Bitcoin’s privacy. However, those were rejected by the community, since they would hard such major things as security, scalability, etc.

A good example here is Confidential Transactions that were among those suggestions. They disguise the amount of BTC sent in transactions. However, the integration of it was rejected, since it could have had a negative impact on the public verifiability of the present BTC supply.

Kevin Pan says that privacy is much more vital for a crypto asset development than scalability. Pan says:

“There is no other big question if the privacy issue is solved.”

👉MUST READ

Ripple Dispels XRP FUD Allegations, Q3 Report Blames Twitter Bots

Ripple Dispels XRP FUD Allegations, Q3 Report Blames Twitter Bots

Governments may start controlling BTC miners

The company CEO believes that in theory, authorities or law-enforcement agencies may start telling miners to block certain address from receiving funds or sending them. However, in that case that would have to be 51 percent of the BTC network.

Pan believes that unless a solution to this problem is found soon, governments will get a chance to prevent transactions to certain addresses from happenning.

“What is more troublesome now is if government or law enforcement departments begin to create a blacklist of transaction addresses, it will make certain transactions unable to be packaged.”

“In fact, these can be done. But if there is privacy, you can't know who the address belongs to, and you can't determine how much the amount is, and there is no way to control the currency system. So for me, Bitcoin is basically no problem if the issue of privacy can be solved.”

👉MUST READ

Bitcoin Block Number 600,000 Was Mined — What Does It Mean for the Crypto Industry?

Bitcoin Block Number 600,000 Was Mined — What Does It Mean for the Crypto Industry?

China plans to clamp down on BTC miners

Previously, U.Today reported that Inner Mongolia, an autonomous region of China, plans to ban all the numerous mining pools located there soon.

Since this region is one of the biggest local crypto mining areas, some believe that China is about to ban mining of all cryptocurrencies ahead of the so-called ‘China Coin’ launch.

Do you think that poor Bitcoin’s privacy features could indeed bring down regulatory control over BTC one day? Feel free to share your view in the comments section!

Only the most important posts per day. Infographics, analytics, reviews & summaries. Follow us on Facebook!

About the author

Yuri is a journalist interested in technology and technical innovations. He has been in crypto since 2017. Believes that blockchain and cryptocurrencies have a potential to transform the world in the future. ‘Hodls’ cryptocurrencies. Has written for several crypto media. Currently is a news writer at U.Today.

👓 Recommended articles

This site uses cookies for different purposes. Please set your preferences in Cookie Settings and visit our Cookie policy for more information on how and why cookies are used on this site. Click here for cookie policy

Cookie settings