198
submitted 1 year ago by ooli@lemmy.world to c/technology@lemmy.world
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] DestroyerOfWorlds@sh.itjust.works 171 points 1 year ago

every word of this title lowers the stakes of whatever the fuck this is about

[-] VampyreOfNazareth@lemm.ee 13 points 1 year ago

A steaming turd to be sure.

[-] optissima@lemmy.world 13 points 1 year ago

Streaming turd more like

[-] ThePantser@lemmy.world 131 points 1 year ago

What is, phrase that would sound like jibberish 15 years ago

[-] PapaStevesy@midwest.social 57 points 1 year ago

I'm reading it now and I still don't understand it. Was the league hiding?

[-] aleph@lemm.ee 36 points 1 year ago

They didn't disclose the fact that the passes would be using blockchain technology, apparently. Quite why they thought this was necessary is not clear, but it's not inherently a bad thing.

Unfortunately for them, however, blockchain/cryptocurrency/NFTs are all interchangeable according to the general public, so this has created a bit of a backlash.

[-] QHC@lemmy.world 19 points 1 year ago

From the quotes in the article, they didn't just "not disclose" so much as "lied". Regardless of subject matter, when someone cares enough to make sure something they don't want to be associated with isn't involved and then they find out it actually is, they have a right to be upset.

[-] aleph@lemm.ee 12 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

They didn't lie, though.

The quote you refer to said:

"Aware of the crypto thing," he tweeted. "We were told there was no NFT/crypto component but looks like that may not be the case. Waiting for responses to our emails/phone calls like others."

Which is a misunderstanding on the part of the author of that tweet: blockchain ≠ crypto. While it is the technology that crypto and NFTs are based on, blockchain can be used for a wide variety of different purposes.

So while the organizers probably should have been more clear about how they were going to implement the technology, it appears they didn't say anything that wasn't true.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] echodot@feddit.uk 8 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I don't understand what it is about these media outlets with their allergy to the word "and"

It isn't print you don't have to say space or ink just put "and" in the title.

This time still could be easily rewritten to make more sense and if short length is there goal then you could rewrite it to be even shorter and it would still make more sense

"An influencer-based esports league has imploded over NFT controversy"

[-] gmtom@lemmy.world 106 points 1 year ago

Mr Beast really just gives me the ick. I can't really explain it and anytime anyone says anything negative about him tons of people come along to say "but he paid for people's surgery!!!!1!!" Like it makes anything else he does perfectly acceptable.

I just really don't like him and feel like he would be a shitty person IRL.

[-] slumlordthanatos@lemmy.world 56 points 1 year ago

In my experience, people who make a big deal out of their philanthropy are typically doing it to compensate for some other moral deficiency.

What really started to bother me was when he started to make a game out of his giveaways, like "Last person to stop touching the Lamborghini gets to keep it!" and things like that. It just feels wrong, and I can't quite explain why.

I hope I'm wrong, and so far there is no evidence he's a secret dickhead, but something about him seems off.

[-] Zeron@lemmy.world 71 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

It just feels wrong, and I can’t quite explain why.

It's essentially throwing a slab of meat into an arena and watching the starved poors fight to the death over it, then watching while you're served the equivalent of thanksgiving dinner by your butler/maids in a safe climate controlled room.

There comes a point where "philanthropy" simply becomes rich people making games for the poors to win a "prize" and seeing how they react for their own entertainment rather than any sort of benevolence. The lambo example seems pretty much spot on for that.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] books@lemmy.world 21 points 1 year ago

I'm indifferent on the guy.

Glad he's using his money to do shit that makes some people's lives better. Strange that he uses it as content.. but better than musk hoarding wealth and belittling people on twitter.

So I guess better than my bellwether for a shitty person.

[-] theangryseal@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

Some of these dudes doing this stuff use it as content so that they can come up with more money to do even more. Maaaaybe. I’d like to believe that.

I’ve only seen like one piece of a Mr Beast video so I can’t say much about him, but I’ve seen a lot of other folks who do that kind of stuff.

I watch one dude who started off making prank videos. He only got about 5 videos out before someone left a comment telling him to do some silly thing and give a person money. He did that silly thing (I can’t remember what) and then the dude hit him with a story about why that money was going to change his life. Dude cried, then stopped the prank stuff altogether. He went out looking for people to help after that. He’s raised 10s of thousands to get homeless people off the streets, helped people with debt and medical issues, etc.

His videos weren’t that special before, but he’s ridiculously handsome so I legit believe that’s why people were watching in the first place.

Now, the cynic in me says, “Well he got a lot of views and that’s the reason for the shift.”

Still though, he doesn’t do anything mean to anyone. No cruel pranks or anything like that. Even when he was making prank content it was silly and harmless. He’s legitimately changing lives big time and he just kind of fell into it.

I watch this other dude who is a Christian and he does really good things for people too.

I don’t know. The system isn’t working or people couldn’t make a living doing shit like this. That bums me out, but I’m happy to see things get better for people.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] Jackthelad@lemmy.world 15 points 1 year ago

When people use the argument of "oh, he does a lot of philanthropic work" as a means of defending someone, I just counter it by pointing out that Jimmy Savile did too.

[-] BurnedDonutHole@lemmy.ml 31 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I usually don't watch or follow such influencer shit. But couple days back I watched it to see what's all the fuss is about and his smile gave me chills. I don't know if anyone paid any attention or if it's me but his smile looks like something plastered on to his face. Looks so artificial... His smile reminds of the movie American Psycho.

[-] GnuLinuxDude@lemmy.ml 21 points 1 year ago

I just can't stand those annoying ass youtube thumbnails. I only see them when I'm a private browser session (my logged-in suggestions are totally different). But they are so annoying and stupid looking that I never, ever click on them.

Sadly and clearly that stuff works, though, because MrBeast is the most subscribed-to individual on YouTube.

[-] Taako_Tuesday@lemmy.ca 49 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Only tangentially related to the issue at hand, but Mr. Beast's smile terrifies me

[-] Chozo@kbin.social 53 points 1 year ago

It's because he never smiles with his eyes, at all.

I don't watch his content and I'm not familiar with him whatsoever, but every photo I've seen of him with that smile just looks like it's a fake, forced smile. Maybe that's actually a genuine smile and his face just does that, I don't know. But yeah, it's definitely off-putting to me, as well.

[-] Sharkwellington@lemmy.one 35 points 1 year ago

This doesn't look like a genuine smile to you?

[-] Acters@lemmy.world 19 points 1 year ago

Those deadpan eyes

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] MossyFeathers@pawb.social 47 points 1 year ago

So, if I understand correctly, the content passes use a blockchain system for authentication, but aren't intended to be used as a currency or investment vehicle and can't be resold or traded. It just uses a blockchain for authentication. The reason why it blew up is because the payment processor was originally meant for nfts and crypto.

Soooo... Basically it sounds like a bunch of people getting upset for no reason because they think blockchain = crypto. Cool. Amazing. Absolutely wonderful. Tbh I don't really care about whatever the Mr. Beast thing is, but the fact that people are confusing the two frustrates me because I could see blockchains having legitimate uses, it's just that scam artists and get-rich-quick schemes have fucked it up.

Maybe it would have turned into an nft scheme, but as it stands right now, it sounds like they were trying to use a blockchain in a legitimate manner.

[-] yata@sh.itjust.works 21 points 1 year ago

The decision to use blockchain for this just screams bad decisions (and very likely an attempt to push NFTs or crypto later). There is no reason to use blockchain for authentification in this situation and people are right to be suspicious of a event which does that in this manner.

[-] Acters@lemmy.world 11 points 1 year ago

Right, they could just use pgp if they want some cryptographic authentication methods. Blockchain and other "crypto" shenanigans are strange and full of potential for future up selling/marketing push.

[-] realharo@lemm.ee 18 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

It's just inherently suspicious, because there is no valid technical reason to do it that way (things just end up being more complicated, more expensive, etc., for no benefit, not to mention the brand damage), unless you have some future plans for it that will involve crypto/NFT crap. The fact that MrBeast has a history with NFTs also doesn't help.

Or course it's still pure speculation.

Have they explained why they chose to use it in some plausible way?

[-] Fisk400@feddit.nu 17 points 1 year ago

What is the legitimate use you see? People in this post keep saying there are legitimate uses and gives no examples of what that is.

load more comments (12 replies)
[-] aleph@lemm.ee 10 points 1 year ago

Basically it sounds like a bunch of people getting upset for no reason because they think blockchain = crypto.

Pretty much, yeah. Seems that people heard the phrase "blockchain" and instantly assumed the idea was to flog NFTs, which is unfortunate for the people behind the platform.

That said, this seems to be yet another example of people using blockchain unnecessarily. Wouldn't a centralized database/authentication server have been a simpler choice?

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] Neato@kbin.social 10 points 1 year ago

Isn't blockchain the un-editable database that tracks changes by appending new ones?

How does this benefit an authentication server? Needing it to be decentralized with multiple accurate copies sounds like a recipe for forking your auth server.

[-] echodot@feddit.uk 8 points 1 year ago

I keep saying this; blockchain is just a database and a particularly inefficient database at that. That's it, that's all it is, I wish people would stop wanking off over it.

As you say it appends changes, which is a stupidly poor way of doing it because your file size just gets larger and larger over time. It'll literally never be able to get smaller because of the way it works. It'll consume more and more resources until eventually the whole planet is either blockchain or we get bored and give up with it.

The only problem it solves is the necessity for decentralisation, but that's not really a requirement for 99.99% of projects. So it doesn't really solve that many problems. It's nice that it's an option that's there if you need it but it ridiculous the general public even know about it. It should just be one of those projects that only people who browse GitHub know about.

[-] Astroturfed@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago

It's past the point where if people want to use block chain tech for a practical purpose they just need to shut up about it and no one will even think about what's on the back end making a system work. The crypto-bros have been so loud and annoying for too long. No one wants anything to do with it now.

[-] themusicman@lemmy.world 26 points 1 year ago

Blockchain is so rarely the right tool for the job that I would be generally skeptical of any project which uses it.

Event tickets are definitely not a good use case.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[-] Supervivens@lemmy.world 17 points 1 year ago

Can someone explain to me how blockchain technology is controversial when there is absolutely no crypto or nft stuff involved? Just seems like pointless drama tbh

[-] 1bluepixel@lemmy.world 23 points 1 year ago

"Blockchain" is a red flag.

While the technology in itself is not inherently bad, it has such a limited use case in real life, and has been associated with so many scam projects in the crypto sphere, that it's an immediate alarm bell about the seriousness of the project.

[-] AbidanYre@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago

I kind of think a "'Personality-driven' influencer esports league" was doomed from the start and the blockchain is a convenient scapegoat.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] LanternEverywhere@kbin.social 13 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Shitty fucking article. I read and read and read and it kept talking about lots of stuff, but not about what the actual problem was. Downvote this waste of time.

[-] FeetiePJs@kbin.social 20 points 1 year ago

I think the article is fine. It's just the reality that makes no sense. A bunch of social media celebrities agreed to join an esports league where the celebrities would manage the teams. People could buy a pass for each celebrity that would let them vote on team decisions and give them other benefits. The company selling the passes used blockchain authentication for them. They were also, separately, involved in NFTs. People saw blockchain and NFT and thought "wait a minute, the passes are NFTs? Aren't NFTs a big scam? These passes are a scam!" Then the celebrities saw the outrage and said "What?! No one told me there would be crypto-blockchain-NFTs!" They then dropped out of the league and it was indefinitely postponed. Unless by "actual problem" you meant something that was meaningful in anyway to anyone not directly involved in this nonsense. In that case, no, there was none of that.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] dinckelman@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago

Our society could literally look like that picture with a completely chromed out city, with flying cars, and glass helices everywhere, but instead we have to watch "influencers" destroy their career in one statement, because they decided to fuck around with something that's clearly a zoomer ponzi scheme

[-] morrowind@lemmy.ml 7 points 1 year ago

Honestly when it comes to things preventing us from reaching utopia, I'd say dumb influencers are not even on that list. It's silly but it hardly affects the average person

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] QHC@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago

Flying cars are the stupidest idea, especially since helicopters have existed the entire time and everyone just refused to accept that fact.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 07 Sep 2023
198 points (86.4% liked)

Technology

59483 readers
2008 users here now

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


Our Rules


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

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS