so if i’m understanding… by creating unauthorized financial instruments of another’s work (here: inspired-by-but-unaffiliated NFTs) it’s trafficking the derivative value of the original work by engineering a literal derivative for capitalist ‘enclosure’ rhea.art/welcome-to-the…
hey don’t bother messing around with nfts if you haven’t yet bc the gas fees are ridic just read @timmaughan’s new short fiction “Line Goes Up” instead noemamag.com/line-go-up
“The actual work is a derivative of the value of its simulations.”
i mean we’re in web2 and i have unbearable nostalgia for web1 so im dreading nostalgia for web2 tbh
[future tweet or its future onchain equiv] remember when we could like go to a website and just block the trackers since the fraud bots were stealing traffic anyways and now there’s gas fees for everything and it’s always in a different token that needs converting (more fees)
whenever i wonder if web3 cryptochain could actually eat the world like adherents insist i do the thought experiment of an airline DAO 100% onchain
Especially considering how the real ClearviewAI endgame is SCOTUS showdown where surveillance is declared protected speech under 1A à la Citizens United
It’s basically a race against time. What happens first? An act of Congress and/or Constitutional Amendment enshrining a generalized right of data protection inclusive of biometrics as a 1A carveout to preserve privacy
or
ClearviewAI gets its shot before Trump’s Scotus
Nothing has changed. Facebook is still optimized for scamming gullibles and susceptibles with content fraud. Only thing that’s changed is internal reports have leaked that Facebook knows its platform is perfectly optimized for content farms and their fraudulent tactics.
Industry always says microtargeting is essential for small businesses in its grand self-defense—especially the foreign scam artists who profit from fomenting social disorder and chaos in the USA because Facebook wants you to do that because that’s how you make the most money.
Can’t believe so many give credence to feta leaving the EU. The real story is USA needs a generalized data protection regulation to achieve adequacy and preserve transnational data flows because Max Schrems will blast any dumb treaty that comes next.
Industry think tanks can dream of fanciful new “Schremsproof” treaties all day long because they get paid the big bucks but a GDPR for the USA is the only “durable” solution here. #DataRightsAreHumanRights
As US states go all-in on sports betting, it’s worth taking a peek at the data market for pseudonymous identifiers pulsing behind the screen in Europe and then imagine practices that aren’t worried about national general data protection laws because they don’t really exist here.
(I would guess the GDPR does not provision for such a grotesque abuse of sensitive personal data, but as you can see in the thread, my lawyer @RaviNa1k is often batsignaled when the persistent questions of data protection enforcement arise.)
But my point is the same: the USA needs a GDPR. A generalized data protection regulation that applies nationally and horizontally. We do not need a data privacy law for sports betting. That is beyond pointless but that is what Congress knows how to do (lobby a bill with industry)