>I see this when dispersed camping, simple things like cleaning up at the campsite before leaving. Most people don’t have a problem with it but there are small groups who don’t care about anything. Those small groups tend to ruin it for everyone.
As I understand it, an anarchist camping group (for lack of a better name) could still collectively agree on and enforce rules - in many ways still a "managed" campground, just with more shared ownership
Yes! But in a way that works via consensus and that doesn't establish unnecessary hierarchies. For example, you could have people coming in voluntarily agree to the penalties and have the primary stakeholders vote on penalties.
It often seems to me that when talking to people about alternative mechanisms for organizing society we end up just rediscovering our current systems from first principles. At times it feels silly but I think it's a great technique for educating.
I try to do this at work when a new engineer tries to argue that the current system is overcomplicated and there is an easier alternative. Just ask questions, point out edge cases and watch them gradually rebuild the current solution.
Doesn't always work, sometimes the current solution actually sucks. But more often than not they come to understand that by the time they're finished ironing it the details, their proposal is not meaningfully different from what we have.
Yes, in fact a managed private campground with fines is compatible with anarchy provided the owner doesn't have an effective monopoly on places to pitch a tent outside of their campground.
Even if they do have a monopoly, a large group with an effective monopoly on paying campers over some timeframe can negotiate an agreement for reduced or no fines.
Anarchy is about power relations. If they're relatively equal, it's anarchy.
For the past couple years I have been training in Pro Wrestling - it's real intense but a lot of fun!
It gives me a new set of skills that I feel complement my career, eg. I spend most time writing software trying to be thorough and spend time thinking things through (sometimes to a fault), whereas being in the ring with someone else requires you to make decisions quickly and trust your instincts. While the training itself is a great workout, it also gives me motivation to do additional work to improve conditioning / strength / etc.
I'm reading the token whitepaper, and I came across the section mentioning "proof-of-burn" as a way to gain Stacks:
With proof-of-burn mining, miners destroy a proof-of-work-based cryptocurrency (currently Bitcoin) to get tokens
This seems strange to me - in a blockchain such as Bitcoin where the total number of coins are limited, wouldn't this make the bitcoin community want Blockstack off their chain?
Maybe I am missing something, or the amount of bitcoin destroyed will be negligible?
During the programming languages course on Coursera they focused on SML for the first few weeks - while I haven't done too much with it outside of that course I really liked it
As I understand it, an anarchist camping group (for lack of a better name) could still collectively agree on and enforce rules - in many ways still a "managed" campground, just with more shared ownership