@punk6529 @ReadyPereOne @NYDoorman Eg. for Sudan, 3x GDP loss from today is the same position as it was in in the 1990s. And these aren't "mere numbers", they reflect in real things like comfort and safety and health.
The past *sucked*, especially for children. https://t.co/MwxMDeXv4D
@punk6529 @ReadyPereOne @NYDoorman 例如。对于苏丹来说，从今天起 3 倍的 GDP 损失与 1990 年代的情况相同。这些不仅仅是“数字”，它们反映在舒适、安全和健康等真实事物中。
过去*糟透了*，尤其是对儿童而言。 https://t.co/MwxMDeXv4D
@punk6529 @ReadyPereOne @NYDoorman To add on to this, climate change really can be very bad. This piece I randomly found on google just now projects possible 3x GDP losses to vulnerable countries:
https://reliefweb.int/report/w...
But what this misses is that the magnitude of gains from progress is even larger...
@punk6529 @ReadyPereOne @NYDoorman 除此之外，气候变化确实可能非常糟糕。我刚刚在谷歌上随机找到的这篇文章预测脆弱国家可能遭受 3 倍的 GDP 损失：
https://reliefweb .int/report/w...
但这遗漏的是，进步带来的收益幅度更大……
@chomksyll @punk6529 @ReadyPereOne @NYDoorman Climate change can still be extremely terrible, much like WW2 was extremely terrible. But WW2 never came close to eradicating humanity.
@chomksyll @punk6529 @ReadyPereOne @NYDoorman 气候变化仍然非常可怕，就像二战非常可怕一样。但二战从未接近消灭人类。
@chomksyll @punk6529 @ReadyPereOne @NYDoorman Oh, disagree on that utterly. Eradication of the entire human species is an incredibly high bar.
@chomksyll @punk6529 @ReadyPereOne @NYDoorman 哦，完全不同意这一点。消灭整个人类物种是一个令人难以置信的高标准。
@punk6529 @ReadyPereOne @NYDoorman I'd go further. Climate change is terrible but the idea that it can literally outweigh a century of revolutionary medical progress, sanitation, physical infrastructure, etc is a psyop.
@punk6529 @ReadyPereOne @NYDoorman 我会走得更远。气候变化是可怕的，但它可以从字面上超过一个世纪的革命性医学进步、卫生设施、物理基础设施等的想法是一个心理学家。
@Austen I mean, just walk into some crypto circles *today* and say "Bill Gates's politics don't seem to be especially evil", and see what people say.
@Austen 我的意思是，*今天*走进一些加密货币圈子并说“比尔盖茨的政治似乎并不特别邪恶”，看看人们怎么说。
@zengjiajun_eth https://www.ribbonfarm.com/201...
@zengjiajun_eth https://www.ribbonfarm.com/ 201...
@DanielFein7 @tszzl AI being important doesn't necessarily mean crypto is unimportant. It could even mean crypto is more important!
https://www.sohu.com/a/3147158...
(This thing needs to be translated btw. @EthereumCN @zengjiajun_eth @UnitimesHQ 你们知道吗，这个文章有没有英文翻译？）
@DanielFein7 @tszzl AI 重要并不一定意味着加密不重要。这甚至可能意味着加密货币更重要！
https://www.sohu.com/a/3147158...
（这个东西需要翻译一下。@EthereumCN @zengjiajun_eth @UnitimesHQ 你们知道吗，这个文章有没有英文翻译？）
@gwern @GarrisonLJ The replacement for .com already exists and is mainstream. It's called .io, .me, .co, etc.
The initially allocated scarce "land" was retroactively diluted.
@gwern @GarrisonLJ .com 的替代品已经存在并且是主流。它被称为 .io、.me、.co 等。
最初分配的稀缺“土地”被追溯稀释。
@nicksdjohnson @ViktorBunin If cost(100y) < 100 * cost(1y), someone can register for 100y and resell ownership at a cost of cost(100y)/100 < cost(1y) per year plus some profit
@nicksdjohnson @ViktorBunin 如果成本（100 年）
@ViktorBunin In my proposed schemes, the new renewal cost would depend on how high the available bids were, so the benefit of paying a superlinear cost would be to lock in a price.
@ViktorBunin 在我提出的方案中，新的续订成本将取决于可用出价的高低，因此支付超线性成本的好处是锁定价格。
@nicksdjohnson @ViktorBunin But yeah, that is an argument for not making short ownerships disproportionately cheap. Though I suspect it applies more at short scales (1 month vs 1 year) vs at long scales (10y vs 100y)
@nicksdjohnson @ViktorBunin 但是，是的，这是不让空头所有权不成比例地便宜的论据。虽然我怀疑它更适用于短期（1 个月对 1 年）而不是长期（10 年对 100 年）
@nicksdjohnson @ViktorBunin Would just lead to people making and selling wrapper NFTs
@nicksdjohnson @ViktorBunin 只会导致人们制作和销售包装 NFT
@punk6529 What do you mean by "set by the market"? The price of registering a domain is centrally planned, it's 0.003 ETH per year at the moment. Are you saying you expect domains to be bought up by scalpers and you're okay with whatever prices the scalpers provide?
@punk6529 “由市场设定”是什么意思？注册域名的价格是集中规划的，目前是每年 0.003 ETH。您是说您希望域名被黄牛收购，并且您可以接受黄牛提供的任何价格？
@YatMaxi The status quo will make it unaffordable for smaller players to get _anything_ interesting in 2050 because it will all be taken.
@YatMaxi 现状将使较小的玩家无法在 2050 年获得任何有趣的东西，因为这一切都会被占用。
RT: Quantum computers break:
* RSA and anything based on factoring
* Elliptic curves
* Unknown order groups
Quantum computers don't break:
* Hashes
* Lattices
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
RT：量子计算机中断：
* RSA 和任何基于因式分解的东西
* 椭圆曲线
* 未知的订单组
量子计算机不会崩溃：
* 哈希
* 格子
发表时间：3年前 作者：Vitalik Non-giver of Ether @VitalikButerin详情
Quantum computers break:
* RSA and anything based on factoring
* Elliptic curves
* Unknown order groups
Quantum computers don't break:
* Hashes
* Lattices
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
量子计算机崩溃：
* RSA 和任何基于因式分解的东西
* 椭圆曲线
* 未知的订单组
量子计算机不会崩溃：
* 哈希
* 格子
发表时间：3年前 作者：Vitalik Non-giver of Ether @VitalikButerin详情
Many of you got this one very wrong btw. Quantum computers with Shor's algorithm break elliptic curves completely. Hashes (like SHA256) survive quantum computers just fine, though security degrades somewhat and longer hash lengths become recommended. https://t.co/z6wnG2Id1F
顺便说一句，你们中的许多人都把这个弄错了。使用 Shor 算法的量子计算机完全打破了椭圆曲线。散列（如 SHA256）可以很好地在量子计算机中存活，尽管安全性有所降低，并且建议使用更长的散列长度。 https://t.co/z6wnG2Id1F
@punk6529 Have a proposed mechanism that would let the market decide a fair price to maintain ownership?
(I do! My various Harberger tax schemes)
@punk6529 是否有提议的机制让市场决定一个公平的价格来维持所有权？
（我愿意！我的各种 Harberger 税收计划）
What is a fair price that someone should have to pay to register and unconditionally guarantee ownership of a 5-letter .eth domain for 100 years?
注册并无条件保证拥有 5 个字母的 .eth 域名 100 年的合理价格是多少？