1. 2
  1. 6

    One important omission on tlon.io is Curtis. As of today, he’s no longer working on Urbit. His own words are the best way to understand his thinking. It’s an achievement for the team, I think, that he can depart with confidence.

    Interestingly, buried in horridly-written egotistical wank is the founder, jumping ship now he’s made his money.

    1. 3

      Or maybe he’s just burned out after working on it for over a decade. He talks about it over in his post on the matter, but it really is hard to read through due to his writing style.

      1. 2

        I don’t think he’s actually made his money yet, in that Urbit is still too new and unproven of a system for the ownership of address space in it to be reliably profitable. I think Yarvin’s sincere when he says that he’s leaving because he’s successfully gotten Urbit to the point where a company/foundation/open-source community can take over work on it and see it towards more widespread use.

      2. 3

        The little pictures for visualizing the different address allocations are kind of neat. It’s a shame the project still doesn’t have a compelling introduction video–a similarly long-running project called TempleOS with at least as colorful a founder was quite approachable by comparison.

        1. 9

          Wooooo, neo-nazis on the blockchain

          1. 2

            If you really want it to be that you can pretend. But I don’t know why you would feel better doing so.

            1. 11

              I mean, his entire schtick is “Neo-Reaction”, he’s defended owning slaves, and the list absolutely goes on from there. I’m not sure why thats controversial. If you want to sift through his oeuvre for more tidbits on what he believes by all means, but denying that he believes in all different kinds of hierarchy and especially racial hierarchy is going to be a problem when you’re done.

              1. 3

                If you can give a pithy explanation of what urbit is really about, you’ll be the first in my experience.

                There are some cool concepts but it seems like they are melded together to create a solution to some problem which is never clearly stated, unless the problem is “there should be a digital asset akin to land in that it is impossible to create more of it,” which isn’t a problem most people, even most people posting on various programming-oriented messageboards, would find compelling.

                1. 1

                  “a digital asset akin to land in that it is impossible to create more of it” is actually a really interesting solution to the problem of making digital identities expensive enough to discourage spam, and also to the problem of funding the development of a social network before the social network has gotten large enough to be obviously valuable. Certainly not the only such solution, but a solution. I’d actually like to see other projects that have nothing to do with Urbit try out their own spins on the idea of cryptographically-verified digital land ownership.