Spyke

Replies

science

Comment on

Men hunt and women gather? Large analysis says the long-held idea is flat-out wrong

Interesting. It makes me curious, was there no specialization at all then? If male and female humans always participated in all activities equally, wouldn't they end up evolving very similar traits?

Maybe it's a bit of a lazy explanation, but the hunting labor division sort of made sense to me, since throwing say a spear requires upper body strength, which is higher in males on average.

Comment on

What would you consider your political ideology to be?

I'd say I'm economic center left and socially extremely liberal.

I Iike maximum personal freedom. For example: I'm fine with legalizing , taxing and regulating all drugs including things like heroin: with proper labels and forbidden to sell to children. For the record I personally would never put drugs into my own body, but people should have the freedom to choose if they wish to do so.

I want a well regulated capitalism with strong employees and consumer protections. I am somewhat undecided when it comes to things like worker coops and other forms of workplace democracy, but I think I'd lean towards a somewhat mixt system. Something akin to 50% of board members in a private company elected by employees and 50% by shareholders: that way there are still some incentives to invest, but also some checks and balances by people who actually work in the company and who thus wouldn't want to vote against their own interests.

And finally strong social safety nets with public housing for all low income people. Can be even some Soviet style brutalist architecture apartments, as long as it can house everyone and is reasonably well maintained.

memes

Comment on

Jerkoff

That's why I'd rather call myself center left. By US standards I'm still probably "far left", because I'm for public healthcare, strong regulations and very robust social safety net. But unlike probably most people here on lemmy, if someone runs a business that's not completely out of control and has unionized employees, I don't think there's a problem with that.

Comment on

Why bitcoin is designed to pay less for network security each cycle?

As far as I know the fees are determined by the market, the only thing that decreases is the reward for finding a block. I believe the reasoning about it is to have a limited amount of bitcoins in circulation. If there was no cap on supply then the value of Bitcoin would crumble as essentially in the long term the miners could "print" or "mine" infinitely many of it.

Miners are still though incentivized to keep the security of the network as long as there is demand for transaction. Everytime you put out a transaction on the blockchain you pay a small fee to the miners. The higher the fee the shorter you will have to wait for the bitcoins to be transferred as more miners will be incentivized to put your transaction on the blockchain while mining.

So the reasoning about the whole system is: make at first Bitcoin scarce to encourage mining and as more and more people own the cryptocurrency the more mining will shift from creating Bitcoins out of nowhere to getting money from the transaction fees. At least that's how I understand it.