認為自己是不可戰勝的，無論是在戰爭時期或其他時期，都不是一個特別明智的策略。如果我們相信宇宙論，從尼采到印度教，時間就是一個循環，並且存在無限重複的有限的可能性——我們真正能做的就是改變我們的反應方式。
這篇文章發表在《比特幣雜誌》的「減半問題」。按一下此處以取得您的副本。
每天早上 6 點，在賓夕法尼亞州的龐克蘇托尼，憤世嫉俗的天氣預報員菲爾·康納斯 (Phil Connors) 醒來，一遍又一遍地經歷同一天。陷入時間循環的康納斯想盡辦法讓自己的生活恢復正常——他被刺傷、槍擊、燒傷、冰凍和電擊，但第二天又醒來，好像什麼也沒發生過一樣。康納斯很快就得出了唯一可信的結論：他一定是神。
認為自己是不可戰勝的，無論是在戰爭時期或其他時期，都不是一個特別明智的策略。如果我們相信宇宙論，從尼采到印度教，時間就是一個循環，並且存在無限重複的有限的可能性——我們真正能做的就是改變我們的反應方式。除非我們從錯誤中學到教訓，否則我們注定會一次又一次地經歷同樣的事情。
雖然常常以非凡的才智而自豪——我很早就發現了比特幣，我一定很聰明——但似乎即使對於經驗最豐富的「比特幣擁護者」來說，從錯誤中學習也很困難。公共話語似乎已經從討論技術挑戰和限制轉向德意志銀行下班後的聊天——一切皆有可能，我們只需要回報就能保持正軌。
2014 年德國議會首次討論比特幣時，「專家」強調了透過網路分析可以輕鬆實現比特幣支付的去匿名化，並談到廣泛採用比特幣可能導致全面金融監控的風險。十年後的今天，隨著比特幣重返德國議會，「專家」已被替換為提議比特幣作為 CBDC 替代品的影響者。目前的「比特幣政治辯論」不禁讓我們想起巴特·辛普森（Bart Simpson）在頭上敲打平底鍋。
As we continue to close in on the opportunist’s echo chamber, we have successfully swapped academic debate for cheerleading squads. Things will go great so long as you’re willing to take your tits out. ‘We’re winning!’ has long become the prevalent meme – Between ETF approvals, stablecoin issuances, and possible nation state adoption we are so confident in Bitcoin’s success that we seem incapable of realizing that this is precisely how you lose. Arrogance comes before most declines, and its exploitation has always been by design. By sowing manic delusions of invincibility, even the most trained commander will lead their sheep to slaughter.
Groundhog Day
A long long time ago, in a galaxy far away, we plugged our computers into landlines to access the three great W’s. For anyone who didn’t live alone, this practice was often doomed to reap a fair amount of havoc – Get off the computer, mom is waiting for a phone call.
So we can all agree that that sucked. But, due to a lack of technological advancements and accessibility to communicate wirelessly across distances (think of your favorite mesh network here), it was the most convenient option we had. The only problem: it led to a monopoly on web access points lying with telecommunications providers. Fast forward 20 years, and we now know that telecom providers monitor, analyze, and report anything that we do on the internet to government authorities under the guise of national security. A technology thought invincible for the liberation of the people quickly turned into its biggest enemy.
Now we can’t really talk about the success (and downfall) of peer-to-peer technologies without talking about Linkin Park. Linkin Park’s music, then still Hybrid Theory, circulated widely on the first P2P music file sharing network Napster. Downloaded from other people’s computers, accessing Linkin Park’s music was completely free. Their first studio album, Hybrid Theory, yet remains one of the top five most sold records in the world with 15 Million copies sold in the first three weeks alone.
Napster was a real world internet revolution – And the music industry was furious. As people happily infected their devices with potential computer AIDS, bands, rappers, and singer songwriters like the Arctic Monkeys, Dispatch or EMINEM were building fanbases even before breaking their first big record releases, and the musical establishment wasn’t having it. When Metallica sued the P2P platform for copyright infringement, clearly unhappy that their cult status and its consequential returns felt threatened, peer-to-peer music file sharing did not exactly die, but was quickly incorporated into more corporate friendly formats – from buying music via iTunes to music streaming via Spotify.
While it seemed unimaginable to put a technology like Napster back into the box, convenience, again, became king. Today, the majority of listeners do not own the music that they listen to, but subscribe to corporate databases of which neither artists, labels nor producers profit. Instead, the big winner of the music file sharing industry again turned out to be surveillance. Just last week, when Spotify updated its cookie
以上是土撥鼠日的詳細內容。更多資訊請關注PHP中文網其他相關文章！
