grampos and others on today's post (#556)

* grampo: of of

* "request" perm is clearer on the authority source

* star-dot won

* plural states, for the pun

* standard-er words

* bow out, thanks

1 files changed, 5 insertions, 5 deletions

diff --git a/blog/cryptocurrency-ownership.markdown b/blog/cryptocurrency-ownership.markdown
index 9e51289..b9c0ded 100644
--- a/blog/cryptocurrency-ownership.markdown
+++ b/blog/cryptocurrency-ownership.markdown
@@ -147,7 +147,7 @@ It's also widely understood that having a hat, weapon skin, announcer voice, or
 
 The furry fandom's social norms are a bit weird to outsiders. One of the big things that people have trouble with is the fact that there's no actual "source material" for the furry fandom. It's entirely self-standing and dates back to cartoonists wanting to draw funny animals. There's no real cohesive universe for the furry fandom, but we all like to pretend there is for our own collective amusement.
 
-One of the things you will see people do in the furry fandom is create their own Original Characters (OCs). The rationale for these can boil down to a number of things, including roleplay, characters to use in fiction, sexual fantasies, an idealized version of the self, or any number of of other things you can do with characters. For example, here's a shark typing on a split keyboard that you've seen before:
+One of the things you will see people do in the furry fandom is create their own Original Characters (OCs). The rationale for these can boil down to a number of things, including roleplay, characters to use in fiction, sexual fantasies, an idealized version of the self, or any number of other things you can do with characters. For example, here's a shark typing on a split keyboard that you've seen before:
 
 <xeblog-sticker name="Mara" mood="hacker"></xeblog-sticker>
 
@@ -205,11 +205,11 @@ There's also NFTs called [Proof of Attendance Protocol](https://medium.com/new-t
 
 To be honest though, _if implemented correctly_ NFTs could really help the furry community. Ownership of "adoptables" or the right to use a "closed species" character would be unambiguous. They could even have resale value that gives a commission back to the original creator (provided the relevant smart contracts have a clause to factor this into the equation); and there would be a neutral registry that _anyone_ can read from and confirm ownership of characters in cases where that is relevant to the participants.
 
-<xeblog-conv name="Open_Skies" mood="snug">I could argue that adoptables and closed species and OCs and such are *already* de facto NFTs, just without any automation or engineered resistance to bad actors. Most artists will require the permission from the “owner” of the OCs before they draw the character. Adoptables are sold like NFTs, with an artist creating them whenever they feel like and putting them up for sale in a gallery that users can purchase from and they then “own” that unique art and rights to the character, though the artwork itself is still freely available online for anyone who likes to view or download.</xeblog-conv>
+<xeblog-conv name="Open_Skies" mood="snug">I could argue that adoptables and closed species and OCs and such are *already* de facto NFTs, just without any automation or engineered resistance to bad actors. Most artists will request the permission from the “owner” of the OCs before they draw the character. Adoptables are sold like NFTs, with an artist creating them whenever they feel like and putting them up for sale in a gallery that users can purchase from and they then “own” that unique art and rights to the character, though the artwork itself is still freely available online for anyone who likes to view or download.</xeblog-conv>
 
 <xeblog-conv name="Numa" mood="delet">Or just right-click on the art and put it into the hypercloud. Take that, liberals!</xeblog-conv>
 
-<xeblog-conv name="Open_Skies" mood="idle">So, in practice, furry artwork is *already* NFTs, just implemented as an ad-hoc, undocumented, unverifiable social contract with bad actors, punishing the non-punishers, no way to actually check claims of wrongdoing or see if they’ve been resolved, and multiple incompatible social norms that people can’t just accept federation and say which section they’re in because none of them are documented and that person is the enemy and must be brought into line. Oh, and also beholden to the capricious whims of puritans putting pressure on payment processors or Patreon or whatever to rugpull artists and keep their money. This is *NOT GOOD.*</xeblog-conv>
+<xeblog-conv name="Open_Skies" mood="idle">So, in practice, furry artwork is *already* NFTs, just implemented as an ad-hoc, undocumented, unverifiable social contract with bad actors, punishing the non-punishers, no way to actually check claims of wrongdoing or see if they’ve been resolved, and multiple incompatible social norms that people can’t just accept federation and say which section they’re in because none of them are documented and that person is the enemy and must be brought into line. Oh, and also beholden to the capricious whims of puritans putting pressure on payment processors or Patreon or whatever to rugpull artists and keep their money. This is *NOT GOOD*.</xeblog-conv>
 
 We can't use any of that in furry-land because the NFT bros pissed off furry artists by scraping twitter, deviantart, and e621 to flip into cheap NFT grifting so much that the entire technology space has become wrongthink to some people. By doing all of this research and writing this article I have probably made some people block me, _even though I'm ending up concluding that all of this space is a bad thing as currently implemented_. It is difficult to describe the level of contempt that a lot of furries have for this technology. I have seen communities with previously irreconcilable differences come together to try and destroy scammers flipping their art into NFTs. So yeah, this entire tech would be _revolutionary_ to the furry community, but nobody wants anything to do with it because idiots pissed in the pool and now it just smells like aging piss.
 
@@ -280,7 +280,7 @@ So if Ethereum is no longer a proof of work chain (IE: the price of an Ethereum
 
 <xeblog-conv name="Mara" mood="hmm">This is something that we haven't really considered before. Before that argument I thought that Ethereum really just had the same worth that you get with government issued currency: everyone just agrees it has value and trading volume along with "market confidence" would dictate the value. Ethereum being worth the legitimacy of the system is a vastly different thing to think about.<br /><br />What about the Ethereum VM? Don't you use Ethereum as "gas" for the virtual machine that processes all the smart contract executions and transactions? How does that fit into it all?</xeblog-conv>
 
-<xeblog-conv name="Open_Skies" mood="wave">Not quite. You buy gas with Ethereum. The Ethereum VM is the language by which you describe the rules of how something is legitimate. If you want to make something that has legitimacy, you need to explain exactly how legitimate interactions with it go. For example, a legitimate interaction with a store is you pay a specific price and in exchange receive a specific good; if you do not offer enough, your money isn’t taken and you don’t get the good; if you offer too much you get the good and any excess back. A legitimate interaction with a voting booth is that you mark down your choice on each part of the ballot, possibly including marking abstain fields, and submit it to the vote exactly once; the voting booth guarantees that the ballot you cast will be included in the results and that no fictitious ballots that no person submitted or multiple ballots from the same person are included. These rules have to be written down to be enforced, and the more complicated the rules are to check and more state they depend on the more difficult they are to enforce: thus, the Ethereum VM is how the rules of legitimacy are written down so everyone can agree on them, and gas usage is the measure of how difficult it is to perform the transaction according to the rules so everyone agrees on it. When you submit a transaction to the Ethereum network, you include in it a marker for how much you are willing to pay per unit of gas, and how much gas you are willing to buy before you would rather not have the transaction go through. Different miners might have different amounts that they’re willing to sell gas for, and so being willing to pay more for gas means that a miner that is willing to accept that rate will be selected sooner and the transaction will complete sooner, and if you don’t pay enough a miner will never accept it. So this makes it so that you can effectively pay a premium for expedited processing of your transactions or pay lower rates for slower inclusions. Ethereum is the only thing you can buy gas with, so apart from regarding Ethereum as a speculative asset, gas is really where the value gets meaning. It’s the atomic cost of ensuring legitimacy for a single step of operation. (Things can be legitimate without the legitimacy being checked; it’s possible that the weird person on the subway with a deed written on toilet paper in crayon offering to sell the Mona Lisa for $100 actually is the legitimate owner and will honor the deal, but in order for other people to actually trust the legitimacy it needs to be checked in some way that people can trust, which takes effort and coordination and thus has to cost *something*, even if it’s "a miniscule amount of credits from a UBI or publically funded service" or "a nebulous tiny expenditure of social capital among the community" (if you’re wondering what something nebulous like that costs, just imagine that someone used and abused the thing so much that the providers had to stop them; what did they run out of that caused them to get dropped))</xeblog-conv>
+<xeblog-conv name="Open_Skies" mood="wave">Not quite. You buy gas with Ethereum. The Ethereum VM is the language by which you describe the rules of how something is legitimate. If you want to make something that has legitimacy, you need to explain exactly how legitimate interactions with it go. For example, a legitimate interaction with a store is you pay a specific price and in exchange receive a specific good; if you do not offer enough, your money isn’t taken and you don’t get the good; if you offer too much you get the good and any excess back. A legitimate interaction with a voting booth is that you mark down your choice on each part of the ballot, possibly including marking abstain fields, and submit it to the vote exactly once; the voting booth guarantees that the ballot you cast will be included in the results and that no fictitious ballots that no person submitted or multiple ballots from the same person are included. These rules have to be written down to be enforced, and the more complicated the rules are to check and more states they depend on the more difficult they are to enforce: thus, the Ethereum VM is how the rules of legitimacy are written down so everyone can agree on them, and gas usage is the measure of how difficult it is to perform the transaction according to the rules so everyone agrees on it. When you submit a transaction to the Ethereum network, you include in it a marker for how much you are willing to pay per unit of gas, and how much gas you are willing to buy before you would rather not have the transaction go through. Different miners might have different amounts that they’re willing to sell gas for, and so being willing to pay more for gas means that a miner that is willing to accept that rate will be selected sooner and the transaction will complete sooner, and if you don’t pay enough a miner will never accept it. So this makes it so that you can effectively pay a premium for expedited processing of your transactions or pay lower rates for slower inclusions. Ethereum is the only payment you can buy gas with, so apart from regarding Ethereum as a speculative asset, gas is really where the value gets meaning. It’s the atomic cost of ensuring legitimacy for a single step of operation. (Things can be legitimate without the legitimacy being checked; it’s possible that the weird person on the subway with a deed written on toilet paper in crayon offering to sell the Mona Lisa for $100 actually is the legitimate owner and will honor the deal, but in order for other people to actually trust the legitimacy it needs to be checked in some way that people can trust, which takes effort and coordination and thus has to cost *something*, even if it’s "a miniscule amount of credits from a UBI or publicly funded service" or "a nebulous tiny expenditure of social capital among the community" (if you’re wondering what something nebulous like that costs, just imagine that someone used and abused the thing so much that the providers had to stop them; what did they run out of that caused them to get dropped))</xeblog-conv>
 
 <xeblog-conv name="Mara" mood="hmm">That is a lot to think about. I don't understand money at all.</xeblog-conv>
 
@@ -322,7 +322,7 @@ In practice though, the distributed ledger usually ends up having a few big play
 
 <xeblog-conv name="Open_Skies" mood="flop">One terrifying consequence of the way people interact with Ethereum is the existence of the generalized transaction frontrunning bot. We’ll have to get into what that actually means in a future part, but here there be monsters.</xeblog-conv>
 
-<xeblog-conv name="Numa" mood="delet">The masses think they are free to send money to eachother but the rich just get richer off their backs along the way. As above, so below.</xeblog-conv>
+<xeblog-conv name="Numa" mood="delet">The masses think they are free to send money to each other but the rich just get richer off their backs along the way. As above, so below.</xeblog-conv>
 
 <xeblog-conv name="Cadey" mood="coffee">This whole thing is a mess. I only play this capitalism game because I have no other choice, not because I want to.</xeblog-conv>