Five @ Five @slrpnk.net

Admin at Slrpnk.net

---

Read more

Posts

4,529

Comments

1,232

Joined

2 yr. ago

Moderating

---

Maybe that's why there so little overlap between respected cryptography researchers and crypto developers?

If you like tipping sex workers online it's okay, but don't spread a documented scam.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchism_and_capitalism

Anarchism and capitalism are mutually exclusive.

Cryptocurrency whitepapers are the source of all truth.

Monero is still built on the blockchain. Using Monero for privacy is like playing casino blackjack as a monetary investment because the odds are better than the lottery.

Cringe AF. Please stop abusing the anarchist symbol.

Really? Bitcoin: Worse Than a Ponzi

For the money laundering and human trafficking that he specifically was not accused of?

Cryptocurrency is the enemy of privacy, and its use in this situation would increase the appearance of illegality, possibly opening up the accused to tax fraud allegations. Advocating for its use by people who can't afford to lose thousands of dollars in a pyramid scheme is absurd.

It seems you're spreading false information about what degrowth represents. In case you or anyone else is interested in what it stands for, here are some resources to help you better understand the movement.

Wikipedia

Degrowth is an academic and social movement aimed at the planned and democratic reduction of production and consumption as a solution to purported social-ecological crises. Commonly cited policy goals of degrowth include reducing the environmental impact of human activities, redistributing income and wealth within and between countries, and encouraging a shift from materialistic values to a convivial and participatory society. Degrowth is a multi-layered concept that combines critiques of capitalism, colonialism, patriarchy, productivism, and utilitarianism, while envisioning more caring, just, convivial, happy, and democratic societies.

Degrowth.info

Essential for Degrowth is:

• Striving for a self-determined life in dignity for all. This includes deceleration, time welfare and conviviality.
• An economy and a society that sustains the natural basis of life.
• A reduction of production and consumption in the global North and liberation from the one-sided Western paradigm of development. This could allow for a self-determined path of social organization in the global South.
• An extension of democratic decision-making to allow for real political participation.
• Social changes and an orientation towards sufficiency instead of purely technological changes and improvements in efficiency in order to solve ecological problems. We believe that it has historically been proven that decoupling economic growth from resource use is not possible.
• The creation of open, connected and localized economies.

Nature: Degrowth can work — here’s how science can help

Researchers in ecological economics call for a different approach — degrowth. Wealthy economies should abandon growth of gross domestic product (GDP) as a goal, scale down destructive and unnecessary forms of production to reduce energy and material use, and focus economic activity around securing human needs and well-being. This approach, which has gained traction in recent years, can enable rapid decarbonization and stop ecological breakdown while improving social outcomes. It frees up energy and materials for low- and middle-income countries in which growth might still be needed for development. Degrowth is a purposeful strategy to stabilize economies and achieve social and ecological goals, unlike recession, which is chaotic and socially destabilizing and occurs when growth-dependent economies fail to grow.

The Guardian: ‘These ideas are incredibly popular’: what is degrowth and can it save the planet?

“It is bad economics and it is also anti-scientific,” says Jason Hickel, the author of Less Is More. “People need to understand that ‘growth’ is not the same as social progress.”

Hickel is one of the leading lights in a growing post-growth or degrowth movement. Its proponents argue that economic success cannot be measured through the crude metric of gross domestic product (GDP) and that there needs to be a managed reduction in growth in carbon-intensive countries and industries.

“Growth simply means an increase in aggregate production, as measured in market prices,” says Hickel. “So, according to GDP growth, producing £1m worth of teargas is considered exactly the same as producing £1m worth of affordable housing or healthcare.”

That doesn’t mean China’s gone completely renewable. It’s still the biggest greenhouse-gas emitter and continues building thermal plants that burn fossil fuels.

Yet even after a sweltering July, thermal generation is down this year in what may be the start of a long-term decline in air pollution.

The U.S. / China tariff war began in January of this year. I wonder how much furlows in production has played a role in those numbers.

Are you getting those numbers from Xinhua? You don't have a lot of credibility given you think degrowth is cannibalism and your embrace of Chinese propaganda:

They’ve been aggressively surrounding themselves with US military outposts this whole time!!! Much aggression.

But for those who haven't drunk the kool-aid, Xinhua claims 50% capacity, not 50% generation. Renewable energy generation according to the National Bureau of Statistics of China remains at 25.9% - and nuclear is included in that number. Many observers have noted that China overbuilds housing capacity, only to demolish empty or nearly finished buildings - suggesting a scheme to over-report GDP and other favorable numbers. They are experiencing an ongoing property crisis as a result of poor economic planning. Given that context, their report that the state is celebrating reaching 50% capacity solar energy goals while using much less than half of that capacity should be alarming. There is no indication that their coal infrastructure is meant only for backup power - the use of coal is being subsidized by the state, and the existing infrastructure is under constant use.

Both capitalism and whatever you call the economic system China is using are extremely ecologically destructive. While the small improvements in renewable energy technology under these systems can benefit humanity, it's important not to ignore the deep inequality and inefficiency inherent in these modes of production. Things made under these regimes will never be truly "green" -- and it benefits only the powerful to pretend that they are.

I'm not asking you to read a book, but if you've never heard of CGP Grey before nor seen his short Rules for Rulers video, you're missing out.

Autocrats are perfectly capable of prioritising the people, and there are many cases in history of them doing so.

There's a reason this is always the exception and not the rule. Let me introduce you to The Rules for Rulers by CGP Grey, based on the book The Dictator's Handbook.

You can absolutely critize the CCCP for lots of things, but greener than the USA?

The US gets 15% of its energy capacity from coal. China gets nearly 60% of its energy capacity from Coal and while a new coal fired power plant hasn't broken ground in the United States this century, China approved at least 5 GW of new coal power plants in the last five years.

Despite coal power being more dirty and expensive for China than renewables, they continue to subsidize energy from Coal and set quotas to limit renewables. China is the largest producer and consumer of coal and is the largest user of coal-derived electricity.

While in the United States the historically recognized limited freedom of the people to resist corporate power with popular direct action has lead to concessions and checks on industrial power, any similar dynamic in China is stunted. In order to save the planet, we must seek new political horizons beyond belligerent national tyrannies. Autocrats will not save us.

S06E12 Ocarina

China will lose for the same reason the United States is losing. Making decisions that benefit people generally, either short term or long term, is exactly what autocracies are terrible at. For all the 'green washing' of China's domestic policy, they are tacitly supporting and funding a war of aggression in Ukraine, and expanding their military in order to annex Taiwan. If their goal was ecological harmony, neither of those things would make sense.

China's central leadership will burn their nation's children to fuel their expansionist ideology, not to mention coal or petrol. Incandescent lightbulbs and disposable plastic is peanuts compared to incandescent diesel tanks and disposable jets.

The 'China is winning' headline is effective clickbait for jingoistic nationalists, but it's misguided to think fanning a national spirit of competition will change US government policy against the will of US national corporate interests. The United States and Chinese government are the same parasite with different flags.

It's nice to see someone publicly admit their mistakes, criticize the inherent autocracy in building new utopian cities, and move away from corporate idealism toward participatory politics.

Come on, bring your friends!

This text is a classic; it has been deeply influential in anarchist circles. Despite the title and the author, it is not an attack on anarchist philosophies or tactics. It is a very effective critique of groups that are doing something hierarchical and masking it as anarchist when it merely lacks visible structure to outsiders.

Alan Ritchson for B.J. Blazkowicz