←back to thread

Apple has threatened to remove Amphetamine from the App Store

(github.com)
946 points giuliomagnifico | 3 comments | 01 Jan 21 19:19 UTC | HN request time: 0.001s | source
Show context
mmaunder ◴[01 Jan 21 19:42 UTC] No.25606123[source]▶
You’re angry. I’ve felt this in a trademark lawsuit. You think the world should get behind you and change the corrupt system.

My advice is to immediately rebrand as gracefully and effectively as possible and use all that activist energy to effect the transition.

They kind of have a point which doesn’t make them right, but they hold all the cards and you will lose this one and regret the wasted bandwidth.

replies(33): >>25606208 #>>25606212 #>>25606283 #>>25606293 #>>25606297 #>>25606321 #>>25606344 #>>25606360 #>>25606390 #>>25606393 #>>25606407 #>>25606449 #>>25606498 #>>25607021 #>>25607059 #>>25607219 #>>25607787 #>>25607915 #>>25608000 #>>25608011 #>>25608017 #>>25608073 #>>25608099 #>>25608152 #>>25608166 #>>25608206 #>>25608337 #>>25608771 #>>25608889 #>>25614737 #>>25615210 #>>25618043 #>>25620562 #
sschueller ◴[01 Jan 21 19:55 UTC] No.25606283[source]▶
No, how will this ever fix a corrupt system if you play by their rules?

This is why it keeps getting worse and worse. People just comply!

replies(3): >>25606502 #>>25606548 #>>25606771 #
xiphias2 ◴[01 Jan 21 20:17 UTC] No.25606548[source]▶
You change it by going for the weakest point in a peaceful way under the radar.

I believe it's Bitcoin, which is a silent, non-violent libertarian protest against the whole central banking system that produces huge powers, but I know that I am in the minority.

replies(3): >>25606633 #>>25607013 #>>25607276 #
eecc ◴[01 Jan 21 20:24 UTC] No.25606633[source]▶
Well, I can’t help questioning the “non-violent” part: it takes incredible amounts of energy to maintain that is quite literally taken away from other - possibly more helpful at social scale - purposes.
replies(4): >>25606787 #>>25606858 #>>25607137 #>>25608548 #
1. asddubs ◴[01 Jan 21 20:37 UTC] No.25606787[source]▶
not to mention the environmental impact
replies(1): >>25607112 #
2. lukifer ◴[01 Jan 21 21:05 UTC] No.25607112[source]▶
Yet another reason to implement a Carbon Tax & Dividend [0] ASAP. There's certainly an argument that the intentional waste of Proof of Work is more efficient than the overhead of existing banks; but I suspect the whole crypto world would migrate to Proof of Stake if forced to pay for their externalities. As is it, they simply borrow against the planetary credit card (probably at a rate of ~100x interest), sticking future generations with the bill for their "innovation".

[0] https://clcouncil.org/economists-statement/

replies(1): >>25613306 #
3. xiphias2 ◴[02 Jan 21 15:13 UTC] No.25613306[source]▶
Actually not at all: the elegant design of the difficulty adjustment means that even if the price of electricity went up or down by 10x, the rate of new Bitcoin issuance would change only temporarily.

I haven't met any Bitcoiner who wouldn't want CO2 emissions to be heavily taxed.

The problem with proof of stake that it decreases the security of the system. There are many ways to trade security of Bitcoin for convenience and extra features (Ethereum is a great example), but so far it seems that the market chooses security.