Jack Dorsey backs diVine, a Vine reboot that includes Vine's video archive of six-second, looping videos. A new app called diVine will give access to more than 100,000 archived Vine videos, restored from an older backup that was created before Vine's shutdown.
Jack Dorsey backs diVine, a Vine reboot that includes Vine’s video archive of 6-second, looping videos.
The protocol was built to exchange cryptocurrency over it. Today, basically nobody uses it except for cryptocurrency shills. (I don’t say that as merely an insult. The people on it constantly post about cryptocurrency or use cryptocurrency-specific in-jokes.)
I asked you for counterevidence to the claims, not apologism. The fact they left the smoking gun on their own website is enough for me, but clearly you have an agenda of your own.
Unless you expect everyone here to believe that the protocol, the clients, the funders, and the creators all just coincidentally love Bitcoin, you’ve got a lot of explaining to do.
I asked you for counterevidence to the claims, not apologism.
OK. The inventor of nostr’s own wiki entry for nostr defines it as a thing for sending tweets, with zero mention of exchanging cryptocurrency.
Also, as a nostr veteran, I have no idea how you’d exchange cryptocurrency on nostr except just asking random people to trade with you. I don’t see why you wouldn’t just use bisq or haveno if you want decentralized crypto trading
I asked you for counterevidence to the claims, not apologism.
Then you don’t know how burden of proof works. Instead of demanding that you back up your claim, I accepted that you wanted to water it down and refine it into something you could better defend. Which is a very milque-toast, who-cares claim.
Do you want me to have forced you to back up your original claim and devolve into semantics?
Okay – no you didn’t. Neither of those links demonstrate that the purpose behind creating Nostr was to exchange cryptocurrency. Would you like to try again? Or accept that you didn’t mean it like that?
Will you back up your claims that the Bitcoin crap that infests the app and its community is just a coincidence?
Did you reply to the wrong person or something…? I never made any claims like that…
well in this case it was made clear they were mistaken about the whole thing and therefore the passive-aggressive tone they were using was completely unwarranted.
I thought we were talking about where they asked what was meant by “crypto powered social media” because that was vague wording that could correctly refer to all social media’s use of cryptography / nostr’s more advanced cryptography, but could also incorrectly imply nostr runs on a blockchain or something, depending whether the crypto is supposed to be short for “cryptography” or “cryptographic currency” (cryptocurrency)
I didn’t see anywhere in this thread where the user asking that question was mistaken about anything
So if someone says “the moon is made is of unicorns” and I say “what are you talking about? no it isn’t…” is that JAQing off? I’d call it challenging someone making an absurd claim.
There aren’t any concepts or domain expertise I’m hiding here – I’m merely saying “wtf are you talking about??” to someone spouting off random nonsense.
What makes Nostr like Bitcoin?
Actually, what makes nostr like Twitter? I’ll grant that the Bitcoin aspect is indeed merely tacked on the side of an otherwise unrelated protocol.
The protocol was built to exchange cryptocurrency over it. Today, basically nobody uses it except for cryptocurrency shills. (I don’t say that as merely an insult. The people on it constantly post about cryptocurrency or use cryptocurrency-specific in-jokes.)
No it wasn’t…
Can you provide any counterevidence to the claims?
To quote them: “Nostr was kickstarted mostly by a community of Bitcoiners, so it has disproportionately attracted the attention of Bitcoiners.”
The “optional” Bitcoin payment system is baked into the biggest Nostr clients.
The claim was:
Not:
The new, watered-down framing of your claim sorta just makes me think: “Okay? And?”
I asked you for counterevidence to the claims, not apologism. The fact they left the smoking gun on their own website is enough for me, but clearly you have an agenda of your own.
Unless you expect everyone here to believe that the protocol, the clients, the funders, and the creators all just coincidentally love Bitcoin, you’ve got a lot of explaining to do.
OK. The inventor of nostr’s own wiki entry for nostr defines it as a thing for sending tweets, with zero mention of exchanging cryptocurrency.
Also, as a nostr veteran, I have no idea how you’d exchange cryptocurrency on nostr except just asking random people to trade with you. I don’t see why you wouldn’t just use bisq or haveno if you want decentralized crypto trading
I don’t know why you would refer to a man who believes Bitcoin is a gift from God as evidence his protocol isn’t about Bitcoin
It’s probably not about Bitcoin (in the long run) but it’s definitely not started as a crypto exchange like the original claim said
More like started as a twitter full of people obsessed with bitcoin
Then you don’t know how burden of proof works. Instead of demanding that you back up your claim, I accepted that you wanted to water it down and refine it into something you could better defend. Which is a very milque-toast, who-cares claim.
Do you want me to have forced you to back up your original claim and devolve into semantics?
I provided proof. With links.
Will you back up your claims that the Bitcoin crap that infests the app and its community is just a coincidence?
Do you genuinely believe that? Or do you just think that everybody here is gullible?
I don’t get how you can blatantly lie like this and have vote scores that make it look otherwise.
Sigh, I guess you do want to play games.
Okay – no you didn’t. Neither of those links demonstrate that the purpose behind creating Nostr was to exchange cryptocurrency. Would you like to try again? Or accept that you didn’t mean it like that?
Did you reply to the wrong person or something…? I never made any claims like that…
instead of asking obviously leading questions, why not tell people what you know?
What’s wrong with using rhetorical questions as a response when people talk shit without expanding on it?
depends on the thing you’re asking about.
The example we were discussing
well in this case it was made clear they were mistaken about the whole thing and therefore the passive-aggressive tone they were using was completely unwarranted.
What are you talking about?
I thought we were talking about where they asked what was meant by “crypto powered social media” because that was vague wording that could correctly refer to all social media’s use of cryptography / nostr’s more advanced cryptography, but could also incorrectly imply nostr runs on a blockchain or something, depending whether the crypto is supposed to be short for “cryptography” or “cryptographic currency” (cryptocurrency)
I didn’t see anywhere in this thread where the user asking that question was mistaken about anything
That wasn’t a question…
If people are going to make wild assertions, I’m going to question them about them.
your previous two replies were. and by “just asking questions” about things you obviously know more about, you’re not adding to the conversation.
So if someone says “the moon is made is of unicorns” and I say “what are you talking about? no it isn’t…” is that JAQing off? I’d call it challenging someone making an absurd claim.
There aren’t any concepts or domain expertise I’m hiding here – I’m merely saying “wtf are you talking about??” to someone spouting off random nonsense.
false equivalency. they made a plausible claim.
Which one?