#crypto forums

[coolreallifes]

How to Choose the Best Broker for Stock, Forex, and Crypto Trading in 2024?

Navigating the world of trading can be overwhelming, especially when it comes to selecting the right broker to meet your trading requirements. Whether you’re interested in stocks, forex, or cryptocurrencies, the choice of broker can significantly impact your trading experience and success. In this post, we’ll explore the key factors to consider when choosing a broker and introduce you to ForexJudge.com, a reliable resource that offers comprehensive reviews and detailed analysis of the world’s best brokers.

Factors to Consider When Choosing a Broker

Regulation and Security:

Ensure the broker is regulated by a reputable financial authority. Regulation provides a level of security and oversight, protecting you from fraudulent activities.

Look for brokers that offer robust security measures, including encryption and two-factor authentication, to safeguard your funds and personal information.

Trading Platform:

A good trading platform should be user-friendly, reliable, and equipped with essential tools for analysis and trading.

Consider whether the platform offers mobile compatibility if you plan to trade on-the-go.

Fees and Commissions:

Compare the fees and commissions charged by different brokers. Lower fees can significantly enhance your profitability, especially if you trade frequently.

Be aware of hidden fees, such as withdrawal charges, inactivity fees, or charges for additional services.

Range of Assets:

Ensure the broker offers the range of assets you’re interested in trading. If you plan to diversify your portfolio, choose a broker that provides access to stocks, forex, and cryptocurrencies.

Some brokers specialize in specific asset classes, so make sure your chosen broker aligns with your trading preferences.

Customer Support:

Reliable customer support is crucial, especially if you encounter issues with your account or trading platform. Look for brokers that offer multiple support channels, including live chat, phone, and email.

Check reviews to gauge the quality and responsiveness of the broker’s customer service.

Education and Resources:

Many brokers offer educational resources such as tutorials, webinars, and market analysis. These resources can be invaluable, especially for beginners.

A broker that provides regular market updates and trading insights can help you stay informed and make better trading decisions.

How ForexJudge.com Can Help

With so many brokers available, making an informed choice can be challenging. This is where ForexJudge.com comes in. ForexJudge is a trusted platform that has compiled detailed reviews and analysis of the world’s best brokers. By providing comprehensive information and user feedback, ForexJudge helps traders make well-informed decisions.

Detailed Broker Reviews

ForexJudge offers in-depth reviews of brokers across various asset classes, including stocks, forex, and cryptocurrencies. Each review covers critical aspects such as regulation, fees, trading platforms, and customer support. By reading these reviews, you can gain valuable insights into the strengths and weaknesses of different brokers, helping you choose the one that best meets your needs.

User Feedback and Ratings

In addition to expert reviews, ForexJudge features user feedback and ratings. This community-driven aspect allows traders to share their experiences and provide honest assessments of brokers. This real-world feedback can offer a clearer picture of what to expect and help you avoid potential pitfalls.

Regular Updates and Alerts

The trading world is dynamic, with brokers frequently updating their services, fees, and policies. ForexJudge keeps you informed with regular updates and alerts, ensuring you have the latest information at your fingertips. This proactive approach helps you stay ahead of the curve and make timely decisions.

Making the Final Decision

When choosing a broker, it’s essential to consider your trading goals, risk tolerance, and preferred asset classes. By leveraging the resources available on ForexJudge, you can make a well-informed decision that aligns with your trading strategy.

Steps to Follow:

Identify Your Needs:

Determine what you want to trade (stocks, forex, crypto) and what features are most important to you (low fees, robust platform, educational resources).

Research and Compare:

Use ForexJudge’s detailed reviews and user feedback to compare different brokers. Pay close attention to factors such as regulation, fees, and customer support.

Test the Platform:

Many brokers offer demo accounts. Use these to test the trading platform and ensure it meets your needs before committing real funds.

Start Small:

When you choose a broker, start with a small investment to test the waters. As you gain confidence and experience, you can increase your trading capital.

Conclusion

Choosing the right broker is a crucial step in your trading journey. By considering factors such as regulation, fees, trading platforms, and customer support, you can make an informed choice that enhances your trading experience.

For a reliable resource in your broker selection process, turn to ForexJudge.com. With its comprehensive reviews, user feedback, and regular updates, ForexJudge provides the insights you need to make the best decision for your trading needs.

Happy trading, and may your investments be fruitful!

[thefreethoughtprojectcom]

UN's agenda 2030? ✅ World Economic Forum's biometric digital IDs ✅ IRS & DOJ arresting crypto users? ✅ It's not a conspiracy, it's a coordinated attack on your financial future. Wake up, folks!

Learn More: https://thefreethoughtproject.com/podcast/podcast-aaron-day-cbdc-rollout-hits-defcon-1-roger-vers-arrest-is-just-the-beginning

#TheFreeThoughtProject #TFTP

[adventist-angels-watchman-radio]

UN chief Antonio Guterres human rights Globally are being “suffocated” : 7,000 killed since January in fighting in DRC, prime minister says

Story by Reuters  1 minute read Updated 12:21 PM EST, Mon February 24, 2025 Residents cast their shadows as they observe members of the Congolese Red Cross conduct a mass burial for victims of the clashes in eastern Democratic Republic of Congo at Musigiko cemetery in Bukavu on February 20, 2025. Luis Tato/AFP/Getty ImagesReuters —  Some 7,000 people have died since January in fighting in…

[jacklesraised]

finally got s/abrina c/arpenter tickets 30 mins ago but damn was that almost as stressful as eras tickets

[methodman13]

Exploring Depeche Mode’s Legacy in LA: Reflections from the Memento Mori World Tour

Exploring Depeche Mode’s Legacy in LA: Reflections from the Memento Mori World Tour

[daminouspurity]

EU passes Data Act including smart contract regulation

I think it's funny how the past three days have happened, including the #SVB paying out bonuses, the woke bank's CEO cashing out three days before the whole thing wen to sh*t, and mysteriously $25,600 per #Bitcoin happens.

So all out of the Blue, Bitcoin, up 25% since this weekend, the weekend were 3 banks collapsed. Also let's not forget the WEF's digital bank and digital coin agenda and most importantly the EU passed the "reset switch" bill.

The European Parliament adopted legislation under the Data Act on March 14, which includes provisions on smart contracts and the internet of things (IoT).

The legislation was passed with 500 votes in favor and 23 against it, aiming to boost business model development to create new industries and jobs. Article 30 of the Data Act includes provisions on “essential requirements regarding smart contracts for data sharing.”

The new rules will come into force in 2024 and companies must adhere to them if they want to provide services or products to EU-based consumers. Provisions under Article 30 mandate that smart contracts must have the same level of “protection and legal certainty as any other contracts generated through different means.” The bill also includes requirements around protecting trade secrets, data archiving and ensuring that "transactions can be interrupted and terminated" as needed.

Additionally, it mandates that smart contracts must be protected through “rigorous access control mechanisms at the governance and smart contract layers.” Under the new rules, smart contracts will be subject to “harmonized standards” defined in the Data Act. All under the radar and with the US bank distraction in place, all the countries and corrupt politician's just voted to unlock every person's bank account and bring in the "obey or we turn off your access to money" bill.

[mostlysignssomeportents]

UK publishers suing Google for $17.4b over rigged ad markets

THIS WEEKEND (June 7–9), I'm in AMHERST, NEW YORK to keynote the 25th Annual Media Ecology Association Convention and accept the Neil Postman Award for Career Achievement in Public Intellectual Activity.

Look, no one wants to kick Big Tech to the curb more than I do, but, also: it's good that Google indexes the news so people can find it, and it's good that Facebook provides forums where people can talk about the news.

It's not news if you can't find it. It's not news if you can't talk about it. We don't call information you can't find or discuss "news" – we call it "secrets."

And yet, the most popular – and widely deployed – anti-Big Tech tactic promulgated by the news industry and supported by many of my fellow trustbusters is premised on making Big Tech pay to index the news and/or provide a forum to discuss news articles. These "news bargaining codes" (or, less charitably, "link taxes") have been mooted or introduced in the EU, France, Spain, Australia, and Canada. There are proposals to introduce these in the US (through the JCPA) and in California (the CJPA).

These US bills are probably dead on arrival, for reasons that can be easily understood by the Canadian experience with them. After Canada introduced Bill C-18 – its own news bargaining code – Meta did exactly what it had done in many other places where this had been tried: blocked all news from Facebook, Instagram, Threads, and other Meta properties.

This has been a disaster for the news industry and a disaster for Canadians' ability to discuss the news. Oh, it makes Meta look like assholes, too, but Meta is the poster child for "too big to care" and is palpably indifferent to the PR costs of this boycott.

Frustrated lawmakers are now trying to figure out what to do next. The most common proposal is to order Meta to carry the news. Canadians should be worried about this, because the next government will almost certainly be helmed by the far-right conspiratorialist culture warrior Pierre Poilievre, who will doubtless use this power to order Facebook to platform "news sites" to give prominence to Canada's rotten bushel of crypto-fascist (and openly fascist) "news" sites.

Americans should worry about this too. A Donald Trump 2028 presidency combined with a must-carry rule for news would see Trump's cabinet appointees deciding what is (and is not) news, and ordering large social media platforms to cram the Daily Caller (or, you know, the Daily Stormer) into our eyeballs.

But there's another, more fundamental reason that must-carry is incompatible with the American system: the First Amendment. The government simply can't issue a blanket legal order to platforms requiring them to carry certain speech. They can strongly encourage it. A court can order limited compelled speech (say, a retraction following a finding of libel). Under emergency conditions, the government might be able to compel the transmission of urgent messages. But there's just no way the First Amendment can be squared with a blanket, ongoing order issued by the government to communications platforms requiring them to reproduce, and make available, everything published by some collection of their favorite news outlets.

This might also be illegal in Canada, but it's harder to be definitive. The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms was enshrined in 1982, and Canada's Supreme Court is still figuring out what it means. Section Two of the Charter enshrines a free expression right, but it's worded in less absolute terms than the First Amendment, and that's deliberate. During the debate over the wording of the Charter, Canadian scholars and policymakers specifically invoked problems with First Amendment absolutism and tried to chart a middle course between strong protections for free expression and problems with the First Amendment's brook-no-exceptions language.

So maybe Canada's Supreme Court would find a must-carry order to Meta to be a violation of the Charter, but it's hard to say for sure. The Charter is both young and ambiguous, so it's harder to be definitive about what it would say about this hypothetical. But when it comes to the US and the First Amendment, that's categorically untrue. The US Constitution is centuries older than the Canadian Charter, and the First Amendment is extremely definitive, and there are reams of precedent interpreting it. The JPCA and CJPA are totally incompatible with the US Constitution. Passing them isn't as silly as passing a law declaring that Pi equals three or that water isn't wet, but it's in the neighborhood.

But all that isn't to say that the news industry shouldn't be attacking Big Tech. Far from it. Big Tech compulsively steals from the news!

But what Big Tech steals from the news isn't content.

It's money.

Big Tech steals money from the news. Take social media: when a news outlet invests in building a subscriber base on a social media platform, they're giving that platform a stick to beat them with. The more subscribers you have on social media, the more you'll be willing to pay to reach those subscribers, and the more incentive there is for the platform to suppress the reach of your articles unless you pay to "boost" your content.

This is plainly fraudulent. When I sign up to follow a news outlet on a social media site, I'm telling the platform to show me the things the news outlet publishes. When the platform uses that subscription as the basis for a blackmail plot, holding my desire to read the news to ransom, they are breaking their implied promise to me to show me the things I asked to see:

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2023/06/save-news-we-need-end-end-web

This is stealing money from the news. It's the definition of an "unfair method of competition." Article 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act gives the FTC the power to step in and ban this practice, and they should:

https://pluralistic.net/2023/01/10/the-courage-to-govern/#whos-in-charge

Big Tech also steals money from the news via the App Tax: the 30% rake that the mobile OS duopoly (Apple/Google) requires for every in-app purchase (Apple/Google also have policies that punish app vendors who take you to the web to make payments without paying the App Tax). 30% out of every subscriber dollar sent via an app is highway robbery! By contrast, the hyperconcentrated, price-gouging payment processing cartel charges 2-5% – about a tenth of the Big Tech tax. This is Big Tech stealing money from the news:

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2023/06/save-news-we-must-open-app-stores

Finally, Big Tech steals money by monopolizing the ad market. The Google-Meta ad duopoly takes 51% out of every ad-dollar spent. The historic share going to advertising "intermediaries" is 10-15%. In other words, Google/Meta cornered the market on ads and then tripled the bite they were taking out of publishers' advertising revenue. They even have an illegal, collusive arrangement to rig this market, codenamed "Jedi Blue":

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jedi_Blue

There's two ways to unrig the ad market, and we should do both of them.

First, we should trustbust both Google and Meta and force them to sell off parts of their advertising businesses. Currently, both Google and Meta operate a "full stack" of ad services. They have an arm that represents advertisers buying space for ads. Another arm represents publishers selling space to advertisers. A third arm operates the marketplace where these sales take place. All three arms collect fees. On top of that: Google/Meta are both publishers and advertisers, competing with their own customers!

This is as if you were in court for a divorce and you discovered that the same lawyer representing your soon-to-be ex was also representing you…while serving as the judge…and trying to match with you both on Tinder. It shouldn't surprise you if at the end of that divorce, the court ruled that the family home should go to the lawyer.

So yeah, we should break up ad-tech:

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2023/05/save-news-we-must-shatter-ad-tech

Also: we should ban surveillance advertising. Surveillance advertising gives ad-tech companies a permanent advantage over publishers. Ad-tech will always know more about readers' behavior than publishers do, because Big Tech engages in continuous, highly invasive surveillance of every internet user in the world. Surveillance ads perform a little better than "content-based ads" (ads sold based on the content of a web-page, not the behavior of the person looking at the page), but publishers will always know more about their content than ad-tech does. That means that even if content-based ads command a slightly lower price than surveillance ads, a much larger share of that payment will go to publishers:

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2023/05/save-news-we-must-ban-surveillance-advertising

Banning surveillance advertising isn't just good business, it's good politics. The potential coalition for banning surveillance ads is everyone who is harmed by commercial surveillance. That's a coalition that's orders of magnitude larger than the pool of people who merely care about fairness in the ad/news industries. It's everyone who's worried about their grandparents being brainwashed on Facebook, or their teens becoming anorexic because of Instagram. It includes people angry about deepfake porn, and people angry about Black Lives Matter protesters' identities being handed to the cops by Google (see also: Jan 6 insurrectionists).

It also includes everyone who discovers that they're paying higher prices because a vendor is using surveillance data to determine how much they'll pay – like when McDonald's raises the price of your "meal deal" on your payday, based on the assumption that you will spend more when your bank account is at its highest monthly level:

https://pluralistic.net/2024/06/05/your-price-named/#privacy-first-again

Attacking Big Tech for stealing money is much smarter than pretending that the problem is Big Tech stealing content. We want Big Tech to make the news easy to find and discuss. We just want them to stop pocketing 30 cents out of every subscriber dollar and 51 cents out of ever ad dollar, and ransoming subscribers' social media subscriptions to extort publishers.

And there's amazing news on this front: a consortium of UK web-publishers called Ad Tech Collective Action has just triumphed in a high-stakes proceeding, and can now go ahead with a suit against Google, seeking damages of GBP13.6b ($17.4b) for the rigged ad-tech market:

https://www.reuters.com/technology/17-bln-uk-adtech-lawsuit-against-google-can-go-ahead-tribunal-rules-2024-06-05/

The ruling, from the Competition Appeal Tribunal, paves the way for a frontal assault on the thing Big Tech actually steals from publishers: money, not content.

This is exactly what publishing should be doing. Targeting the method by which tech steals from the news is a benefit to all kinds of news organizations, including the independent, journalist-owned publishers that are doing the best news work today. These independents do not have the same interests as corporate news, which is dominated by hedge funds and private equity raiders, who have spent decades buying up and hollowing out news outlets, and blaming the resulting decline in readership and profits on Craiglist.

You can read more about Big Finance's raid on the news in Margot Susca's Hedged: How Private Investment Funds Helped Destroy American Newspapers and Undermine Democracy:

https://www.press.uillinois.edu/books/?id=p087561

You can also watch/listen to Adam Conover's excellent interview with Susca:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N21YfWy0-bA

Frankly, the looters and billionaires who bought and gutted our great papers are no more interested in the health of the news industry or democracy than Big Tech is. We should care about the news and the workers who produce the news, not the profits of the hedge-funds that own the news. An assault on Big Tech's monetary theft levels the playing field, making it easier for news workers and indies to compete directly with financialized news outlets and billionaire playthings, by letting indies keep more of every ad-dollar and more of every subscriber-dollar – and to reach their subscribers without paying ransom to social media.

Ending monetary theft – rather than licensing news search and discussion – is something that workers are far more interested in than their bosses. Any time you see workers and their bosses on the same side as a fight against Big Tech, you should look more closely. Bosses are not on their workers' side. If bosses get more money out of Big Tech, they will not share those gains with workers unless someone forces them to.

That's where antitrust comes in. Antitrust is designed to strike at power, and enforcers have broad authority to blunt the power of corporate juggernauts. Remember Article 5 of the FTC Act, the one that lets the FTC block "unfair methods of competition?" FTC Chair Lina Khan has proposed using it to regulate training AI, specifically to craft rules that address the labor and privacy issues with AI:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3mh8Z5pcJpg

This is an approach that can put creative workers where they belong, in a coalition with other workers, rather than with their bosses. The copyright approach to curbing AI training is beloved of the same media companies that are eagerly screwing their workers. If we manage to make copyright – a transferrable right that a worker can be forced to turn over their employer – into the system that regulates AI training, it won't stop training. It'll just trigger every entertainment company changing their boilerplate contract so that creative workers have to sign over their AI rights or be shown the door:

https://pluralistic.net/2024/05/13/spooky-action-at-a-close-up/#invisible-hand

Then those same entertainment and news companies will train AI models and try to fire most of their workers and slash the pay of the remainder using those models' output. Using copyright to regulate AI training makes changes to who gets to benefit from workers' misery, shifting some of our stolen wages from AI companies to entertainment companies. But it won't stop them from ruining our lives.

By contrast, focusing on actual labor rights – say, through an FTCA 5 rulemaking – has the potential to protect those rights from all parties, and puts us on the same side as call-center workers, train drivers, radiologists and anyone else whose wages are being targeted by AI companies and their customers.

Policy fights are a recurring monkey's paw nightmare in which we try to do something to fight corruption and bullying, only to be outmaneuvered by corrupt bullies. Making good policy is no guarantee of a good outcome, but it sure helps – and good policy starts with targeting the thing you want to fix. If we're worried that news is being financially starved by Big Tech, then we should go after the money, not the links.

If you'd like an essay-formatted version of this post to read or share, here's a link to it on pluralistic.net, my surveillance-free, ad-free, tracker-free blog:

https://pluralistic.net/2024/06/06/stealing-money-not-content/#content-free

[bitcoinsocialcommunity]

How to Use Social Media for Crypto Marketing?

In today's fast-paced world, social media is one of the strong tools to advertise businesses and services. It is also applicable in crypto. By choosing crypto social media platforms, we can five heights to our crypto business.

If you are new in the crypto world and want to do marketing for your cryptocurrency, then you can use crypto social media for marketing. In this guide, we will learn how to use social media for crypto marketing, by which you can earn more profit.

Social media crypto marketing: top ways to use

Create a strong profile: Before joining any crypto marketing social media app, we have to create our profile. A strong profile over any social media app leads your account towards more connections and followers. It is also applicable in the crypto world. While creating an account over any crypto marketing application, try to research others' profiles. After that, you can create a profile in which you can also include your strategies, the cryptocurrency you have, and any other information. Your social media profile also showcases your brand's identity, so always try to use a clear display picture, concise information, and a perfect banner that shows your services.

Stay tuned with your connections: Everyone creates an account on social media to gain popularity and earn money. To get this, always tune in with your connections by which you can get a chance to learn more about crypto marketing strategies. Every second person posts their experience, questions, and suggestions by which users can learn more about cryptocurrency. By staying connected with people over social media crypto marketing apps, you can also ask questions and clear your doubts.

Learn from the educational videos: By uploading numerous educational videos on crypto social media platforms. Other crypto users can able to learn different things or current crypto news, crypto market trends, and many more. This educational video can lead you toward more heights, and you can be a master in the crypto world by posting educational videos, too.

Content marketing: Nowadays, content is one of the best ways to engage your customers. On the Crypto social media platform, we can create attractive content and post it over this crypto platform by which we can reach our targeted audience.

Which is the leading crypto social media platform?

Bitcoin Social is one of the best crypto media networks that provides a platform. On this crypto social media platform, users can interact with each other and ask questions about the crypto market. Along with this, users can also get to know the latest crypto trends and news by which they can double their investments. If you also want to touch the heights of the sky using cryptocurrency, then download this application now and be the king of the crypto market.

Download App Now -

Android - https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.bitcoinsocial.app

IOS - https://apps.apple.com/us/app/bitcoin-social/id1378973681

[thedialoguedilemma]

The Dilemma Bulletin: Thursday January 23rd, 2025

Keeping you informed about the daily events of the Trump Administration

A Seattle judge has blocked President Donald Trump’s end to birthright citizenship Executive Order for two weeks ripping into the order as Unconstitutional.

Trump has ordered a communications blackout for America’s top federal agencies including the CDC, HHS, the FDA and more.

A North Carolina rep has introduced a bill to allow Trump to run for a third term. This would need 2/3 vote in Congress and 38 states to ratify the amendment. Republicans are far from having the votes.

Trump floats an idea of inviting the January 6th terrorists to the White House.

Nashville school shooter was a US citizen high school student who was radicalized by Candace Owens

Trump’s staff are furious with Elon Musk for trashing Sam Altman’s investment his administration provided for AI infrastructure.

Trump signs an Executive Order to declassify the MLK and JFK assassination but does not include the Epstein files.

Trump has directed the Department of Justice to order that orgs that receive federal funding for legal assistance of immigrants to stop work immediately

Trump signs an Excutive Order to ban central bank digital currencies as he abuses the crypto market with this meme coins.

A top lawyer penned to work at the ‘Department of Government Efficiency’ is exiting the coalition.

Republican senators Lisa Murkowski and Susan Collins vote no to advance Pete Hegseth.

ICE raids in Newark lead to detaining of US citizens including a military vet.

Trump threatens Canada, Mexico and foreign allies with tariffs in a virtual speech at the World Economic Forum

Trump demands the Federal Reserve to lower interest rates. The Federal Reserve is an independent body that does not take orders from the President. They balance interest rates to curb inflation

[ckret2]

I need to know: how you think bill would be in chat if he ever got the priviledge to get a phone or use a PC?What social networks would he use?

Types in all caps at all times. Punctuation optional. If someone asks him to turn off caps he instead doubles the font size. He can do this even on sites/apps that don't allow you to change the size. He won't say how.

Considering this is 2013? He's probably a pioneer in spreading misinformation and bullshit on twitter. He's one of those "MANIFEST LOVE and $$$ get your DREAM JOB through the POWER of the LAW OF ATTRACTION" cultish New Age grifters making money off a website selling self help PDFs. He's building an internet cult.

Anyone who knows him IRL gets to hear him laughing about how stupid his followers are. However it sounds like he kind of buys some of his own New Age BS to a degree that worries people.

He gets in stupid drama and then spends all night digging up something to cancel his opponent over and sic his followers on them, not because he thinks he's justified, but sheerly for the thrill of the hunt. It makes him feel powerful. His twitter has been banned four times. People run webpages dedicated to documenting his heinous bullshit. He reads them regularly.

He's waiting til 2014 when bitcoin prices drop to like $50, buying as much as he can, spending six years waiting, and selling them in 2020 for like $69,000. He runs a blog telling people to buy crypto. He can actually foresee when the prices are going to peak and fall. He doesn't share this info. He makes bank himself and gleefully ruins everyone else's finances with no regrets. (He would encourage Mabel to buy and tell her exactly what day to sell.) (He would not tell Dipper when to sell.)

He hangs out in doomsday prepper forums so that he can make up new conspiracies and see if he can make everyone even more paranoid.

He's got a youtube channel that's a mix of all of the above BS. New Age self-help buy-crypto buy-gold our-universe-isn't-real access-the-higher-planes doomsday conspiracy mishmash. You can imagine the viewers he attracts. He disdains them all and tries to make them worse on purpose. Never shows his face, every video is a slideshow of psychedelic & pseudo-religious art (mostly stolen) with a voiceover and mystical-sounding music.

Mabel gets him on tumblr, because if Mabel has any social media of course it'd be 2013 tumblr, and probably a deviantart. She's posting her art and really badly photoshopped gif edits of her favorite cartoons and musicians, and generally acts like a normal person online.

Bill's tumblr is completely divorced from all his other horrible online activity. All he posts is cryptic rhyming couplets and terrible local photos of things that fascinate him. The photos could be anything from a car with a really sweet flaming paint job to a stunningly beautiful double rainbow over pine-covered mountains to a literal pile of dog shit because he thought it was interesting how it was drying out unevenly. Once he gets investigated for arson because he posted a picture of the house in flames within three hours of the crime. (He was, in fact, guilty, but he wheedled an alibi out of friends before they knew what he was being investigated for.)

He has like eight followers. The only content he reblogs is Eye of Providence images and pyramid images, which he tags #LITERALLY ME and thinks he's hilarious for; and also every single thing Mabel posts without exception until the end of time.

[canmom]

Hypothetical Decentralised Social Media Protocol Stack

if we were to dream up the Next Social Media from first principles we face three problems. one is scaling hosting, the second is discovery/aggregation, the third is moderation.

hosting

hosting for millions of users is very very expensive. you have to have a network of datacentres around the world and mechanisms to sync the data between them. you probably use something like AWS, and they will charge you an eye-watering amount of money for it. since it's so expensive, there's no way to break even except by either charging users to access your service (which people generally hate to do) or selling ads, the ability to intrude on their attention to the highest bidder (which people also hate, and go out of their way to filter out). unless you have a lot of money to burn, this is a major barrier.

the traditional internet hosts everything on different servers, and you use addresses that point you to that server. the problem with this is that it responds poorly to sudden spikes in attention. if you self-host your blog, you can get DDOSed entirely by accident. you can use a service like cloudflare to protect you but that's $$$. you can host a blog on a service like wordpress, or a static site on a service like Github Pages or Neocities, often for free, but that broadly limits interaction to people leaving comments on your blog and doesn't have the off-the-cuff passing-thought sort of interaction that social media does.

the middle ground is forums, which used to be the primary form of social interaction before social media eclipsed them, typically running on one or a few servers with a database + frontend. these are viable enough, often they can be run with fairly minimal ads or by user subscriptions (the SomethingAwful model), but they can't scale indefinitely, and each one is a separate bubble. mastodon is a semi-return to this model, with the addition of a means to use your account on one bubble to interact with another ('federation').

the issue with everything so far is that it's an all-eggs-in-one-basket approach. you depend on the forum, instance, or service paying its bills to stay up. if it goes down, it's just gone. and database-backend models often interact poorly with the internet archive's scraping, so huge chunks won't be preserved.

scaling hosting could theoretically be solved by a model like torrents or IPFS, in which every user becomes a 'server' for all the posts they download, and you look up files using hashes of the content. if a post gets popular, it also gets better seeded! an issue with that design is archival: there is no guarantee that stuff will stay on the network, so if nobody is downloading a post, it is likely to get flushed out by newer stuff. it's like link rot, but it happens automatically.

IPFS solves this by 'pinning': you order an IPFS node (e.g. your server) not to flush a certain file so it will always be available from at least one source. they've sadly mixed this up in cryptocurrency, with 'pinning services' which will take payment in crypto to pin your data. my distaste for a technology designed around red queen races aside, I don't know how pinning costs compare to regular hosting costs.

theoretically you could build a social network on a backbone of content-based addressing. it would come with some drawbacks (posts would be immutable, unless you use some indirection to a traditional address-based hosting) but i think you could make it work (a mix of location-based addressing for low-bandwidth stuff like text, and content-based addressing for inline media). in fact, IPFS has the ability to mix in a bit of address-based lookup into its content-based approach, used for hosting blogs and the like.

as for videos - well, BitTorrent is great for distributing video files. though I don't know how well that scales to something like Youtube. you'd need a lot of hard drive space to handle the amount of Youtube that people typically watch and continue seeding it.

aggregation/discovery

the next problem is aggregation/discovery. social media sites approach this problem in various ways. early social media sites like LiveJournal had a somewhat newsgroup-like approach, you'd join a 'community' and people would post stuff to that community. this got replaced by the subscription model of sites like Twitter and Tumblr, where every user is simultaneously an author and a curator, and you subscribe to someone to see what posts they want to share.

this in turn got replaced by neural network-driven algorithms which attempt to guess what you'll want to see and show you stuff that's popular with whatever it thinks your demographic is. that's gotta go, or at least not be an intrinsic part of the social network anymore.

it would be easy enough to replicate the 'subscribe to see someone's recommended stuff' model, you just need a protocol for pointing people at stuff. (getting analytics such as like/reblog counts would be more difficult!) it would probably look similar to RSS feeds: you upload a list of suitably formatted data, and programs which speak that protocol can download it.

the problem of discovery - ways to find strangers who are interested in the same stuff you are - is more tricky. if we're trying to design this as a fully decentralised, censorship-resistant network, we face the spam problem. any means you use to broadcast 'hi, i exist and i like to talk about this thing, come interact with me' can be subverted by spammers. either you restrict yourself entirely to spreading across a network of curated recommendations, or you have to have moderation.

moderation

moderation is one of the hardest problems of social networks as they currently exist. it's both a problem of spam (the posts that users want to see getting swamped by porn bots or whatever) and legality (they're obliged to remove child porn, beheading videos and the like). the usual solution is a combination of AI shit - does the robot think this looks like a naked person - and outsourcing it to poorly paid workers in (typically) African countries, whose job is to look at reports of the most traumatic shit humans can come up with all day and confirm whether it's bad or not.

for our purposes, the hypothetical decentralised network is a protocol to help computers find stuff, not a platform. we can't control how people use it, and if we're not hosting any of the bad shit, it's not on us. but spam moderation is a problem any time that people can insert content you did not request into your feed.

possibly this is where you could have something like Mastodon instances, with their own moderation rules, but crucially, which don't host the content they aggregate. so instead of having 'an account on an instance', you have a stable address on the network, and you submit it to various directories so people can find you. by keeping each one limited in scale, it makes moderation more feasible. this is basically Reddit's model: you have topic-based hubs which people can subscribe to, and submit stuff to.

the other moderation issue is that there is no mechanism in this design to protect from mass harassment. if someone put you on the K*w*f*rms List of Degenerate Trannies To Suicidebait, there'd be fuck all you can do except refuse to receive contact from strangers. though... that's kind of already true of the internet as it stands. nobody has solved this problem.

to sum up

primarily static sites 'hosted' partly or fully on IPFS and BitTorrent

a protocol for sharing content you want to promote, similar to RSS, that you can aggregate into a 'feed'

directories you can submit posts to which handle their own moderation

no ads, nobody makes money off this

honestly, the biggest problem with all this is mostly just... getting it going in the first place. because let's be real, who but tech nerds is going to use a system that requires you to understand fuckin IPFS? until it's already up and running, this idea's got about as much hope as getting people to sign each others' GPG keys. it would have to have the sharp edges sanded down, so it's as easy to get on the Hypothetical Decentralised Social Network Protocol Stack as it is to register an account on tumblr.

but running over it like this... I don't think it's actually impossible in principle. a lot of the technical hurdles have already been solved. and that's what I want the Next Place to look like.

[adventist-angels-watchman-radio]

2032 Coming 'Stone' : Merchant Elon Musk Calls for 'Destroying the Space Station' as Soon as Possible_Pope Words in Space!

Remove not the ancient landmark, which thy fathers have set.Proverbs 22 : 28 Adventist Angels Watchman Radio Live International 📻 Victor Tangermann Thu, February 20, 2025 at 9:42 PM GMT+32 min read Merchants of The East To SpaceX CEO and unelected White House advisor Elon Musk, the planned deorbiting of the International Space Station can’t come soon enough. Who is Responsible for…

[herofxr]

ForexJudge.com is a comprehensive platform dedicated to providing detailed reviews of forex brokers, expert market analysis, and the latest forex scam alerts. The site offers various tools including real-time charts, financial calendars, and several forex calculators. It supports a community-driven forum where traders can share experiences and discuss brokers. ForexJudge also assists victims of forex, crypto, and binary fraud in recovering funds and bringing scammers to justice. They maintain a strict policy of unbiased reviews and transparency in broker partnerships.

For more information, visit ForexJudge.

[myfandomrealitea]

Was your Safe Spaces post discord-(or any closed forum I guess) specific, or do you think the same should go for fandom-themed blogs on tumblr? Like, if I follow someone for Doctor Who content, I'd rather they didn't put real world issues on my dash, but otoh, it's their blog and they get to decide what they post on it (preferably tagged so I can curate). I've observed that people that run themed blogs that become popular often seem to feel an obligation to use their platform for activism (or, in the case of crypto-radfems, deliberately built their platform to recruit), and it stresses tf out of me for the reasons you mentioned, but it's not like the maintags are much safer because there will be spam relating to real-world issues, or antis trying to relate fiction to real world issues.

Realistically; the same outlook can and could be applied to any social setting. Be it online, private, public, face to face, ect.

Your point about obligation in terms of platform scale is something I've also noticed and have been dabbling about raising. Mostly because you see it a lot with celebrities or public content creators who receive a large following. Its often less that they feel obligated and more than they're usually bullied into it.

For example; I follow a trans (FTM) vlogger on Instagram. His entire online presence is based around being trans and helping to educate people and support people in regards to learning about being transgender, transgender health, his personal transitional journey, ect.

He's got a modest following, nothing ridiculous but I think right now he's sitting at around 75,000 followers.

And as of late, there are random people who don't follow him and aren't at all interested in what he has to say flooding his comment section with things like:

Why didn't you mention anything about Gaza?

All these followers and no shout outs for smaller creators?

What are you doing to raise awareness for X?

All these views could've been used to raise awareness for X.

And its fucking ridiculous. People are pressuring a middle class trans man with 75,000 followers to accept responsibility for counter-responding to a literal war when there are actual celebrities and billionaires with both the actual reach and money to make a difference who simply refuse to because they won't personally benefit from it.

I used to run a really popular fandom blog here on Tumblr. For an actual fandom, not just what I do here and now. It started off small, but I eventually grew it to the point where my follow count was creeping toward 10,000. Which for Tumblr and for a fandom-specific blog was not at all insignificant.

And the moment my notes count started going up, the demands started flooding in. People expecting me to reblog their donation links, demanding I share their friend's aid post, asking why I wasn't reblogging awareness posts or donation drives, ect.

Its largely because its easier to harass accessible people over it than it is to harass someone like Kim Kardashian, but its also because again: we have such a skewed understanding of what is actually effective in terms of activism and circulation of information.

Most of it comes down to shaming people and trying to assert that they're a bad person for having the privilege and benefits of a large following but not doing anything for other people or to 'deserve' that following. They're 'a bad person' for having 75,000 people's attention and not using it to force them to be aware of X.

A good example of proper audience targeting and activism is the page We Rate Dogs.

We Rate Dogs will share awareness posts and donation drives.

About dogs.

Because their followers are there for the dogs. Their followers like dogs. They want to enjoy dog content and help dogs.

If they started sharing posts about war and death and rape, the people who are following them to see cute dog videos will simply unfollow them.

They're using their targeted platform properly.