I'm more curious as to what bologna you eat that doesn't taste like hotdog.

This was actually the original idea of non-fungible tokens, but because you need special legislation to tie an object to this digital receipt (there is nothing legally tying one thing to the other), they just skipped over it completely and said the NFT itself was the commodity, which is why they could only do it for digital art with the a web link. (we could, for example, see this more useful for a title to a car or house)

In fact, many NFTs don't even contain any language about copyright or licensing, they don't even attempt to pretend that the NFT holder owns the copyright. The owner of the NFT in these cases only owns the NFT, and not the copyright. Of course, you have to transfer the copyright separately from transferring the NFT, which makes this whole thing redundant for buying/selling on secondary markets, but they could have at least tried to pretend they could.

Apparently, smart contracts are not contracts at all... they are friendly suggestions. Unsurprisingly a contract needs a mechanism to enforce it, which makes decentralized contracts redundant at best (as you still need institutions outside of the blockchain to monitor and enforce the contracts), and or worse, completely useless if there is no legal way to enforce them.

It was the Bush administration that used their cultural differences as a justification for their hatred of the west. Of course, Bush could have just mentioned what Al Qaeda actually said, which was that they were a reaction to the US military, money, and support meddling in the Middle East. But then that might draw negative attention from legitimate concerns the Middle East has, which means the terrorists win according to their tortured logic, so instead "they hate us for our freedom".

No, ex as in former sexual partners, because you aren't doing them any more.

Just a friendly reminder: The Stanford Prison Experiment was not an experiment. There was no control group, there wasn't even proper procedures set up. It was just some professor off his rocker that had a dumb idea, made shit up as he went along, forced the outcome, then publicized the results. People always compare it to Milgram. This idiot can't hold a candle to Milgram.

I actually just made the experience worse and worse without adjusting the nicotine. Switched to unflavored, then switched to freebase, then my vape broke and I started using my shitty old vape. It became a chore to smoke so it was easy to stop.

Although, I've usually been pretty good at controlling my nicotine when needed, so I would not describe myself as some highly addicted even when I was vaping a lot.

Unionization is pitifully low in the US. To suggest they are booming is like someone saying they got a massive raise this year because their boss almost matched it to inflation.

Am I the only person that washes hands before putting the belt back on?

I just wanted to say, I am by no means technical but your position is exactly what I was thinking, if an open source project can't survive when it's competitors start using it, then it's never going to survive. The whole point is for it to be interoperable, resilient, and antifragile, and there are plenty of open source projects that achieved that. Competitors switching over to open source is a natural progression of any open source project if one assumes it is successful.

I would always downvote pun trains. I struggle to understand why anyone would upvote them. Incredibly cringe.

Yeah the name sounded the most inviting. It's Lemmy... That's the name of what I want... And it's world, that sounds like a generic description of "everything". But at the end of the day I just clicked a link in a comment. Seemed to me to be the more popular one suggested.