Technology

60123 readers

3423 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

Follow the lemmy.world rules.
Only tech related content.
Be excellent to each another!
Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
Politics threads may be removed.
No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

1149

I wish there were more articles about tech not tech biz (lemm.ee)

submitted 1 year ago by [email protected] to c/technology

154 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Just seems like everything is "this company did this to their employees" and less about "this novel messaging protocol offers these measured pros and cons." Or similar

And yes, I could post things, but I'm referring to what hits the top, 12h.

Can anyone rec communities with less of a biz and politics and wfh vs in-office vibe?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

so vulnerable to buying by anonymous accounts and then reselling.

Make the smart contract that forbids multiple transfers, or make transfer more expensive after the initial purchase (unless authorized by some pre-approved address and/or an address that has an associated real ID)

why is that needed?

Because we'd like to have a system that can not be manipulated or controlled by a single entity?

[–] Womble 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Because we’d like to have a system that can not be manipulated or controlled by a single entity?

You still do though, that's the entire point. Whenever your token interacts with the real world who ever is doing that is a single entity controlling the process.

Make the smart contract that forbids multiple transfers, or make transfer more expensive after the initial purchase (unless authorized by some pre-approved address and/or an address that has an associated real ID)

So less protection against reselling than a ticket with the name of the person who originally bought it, while also milking large amounts of transfer fees to now have a much larger token with code in it. Why would you you want to have a more complex, more expensive, less good system?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

that is a single entity controlling the process.

At any given individual event, yes. But if there is any abuse, it is easy to change said entity.

What I have in mind would be that we can take all these separate functions performed by a large company and break them apart. A centralized organization could be broken apart, but that would require a lot more political power than by simply designing up the system in a way that all functionality is spilt and has to conform to a specific interface.

transfer fees... more expensive

Are you talking about the blockchain fees or the ones established by the "smart contract"? If the former, those can easily be avoidable by using a separate blockchain (specific for the use case and backed/supported by the participating venues, which would be glad to pay anything reasonable compared to the racket run by Ticketmaster), or like I said, not even use a blockchain at all and just stick with a permissioned consensus system.