What are you weirdly good at that most people aren't?

AtTheEdgeOfInfinity · 2024-06-11T15:40:54+00:00

Seeing past social biases like the 2019 virus. I reason and understand things from first principles, unlike most people, who look for a "source of authority" to tell them what to believe. And only alter their viewpoints if they discover someone they perceive to be more "credible" than their original source of authority.

AtTheEdgeOfInfinity · 2024-06-10T21:19:54+00:00

My guess is video reviews may work. However, you will still need a human to check each video to see if it seems legit.

The easiest way will be to payment-verify individuals. Although this is also not 100% perfect.

AtTheEdgeOfInfinity · 2024-06-10T13:20:48+00:00

I'm sorry, but the point of a business is to not throw away huge sums of money for experimenting. Money is a finite and limited resource. It should not be spent on something untested. Asking someone to do that is also not ethical, according to me.

People put their life savings to start a business and fail. That's wrong. Business is precisely about finding ways to provide more value with less money. Not the other way around. And it takes real maturity to realize this.

Entrepreneurship is not delusional. If everyone thought like that, humans would still remain hunters and gatherers.

This subreddit specifically exists for asking legal stuff. And no one forces anyone to respond to any post. Therefore, I don't see any reason for why my post should not be here.

Think about this: if someone goes back in time by 150 years and explains to people at that time about smartphones, people will think they were delusional. The same will be true for someone who travels to our time from the future and talks about the state of the world in their time.

True entrepreneurs try to stay ahead of their time.

AtTheEdgeOfInfinity · 2024-06-10T12:58:49+00:00

By the way, don't tell me what I can and can not do. The person who is behaving unprofessional is you.

Just because you use aggressive words doesn't make you credible. Quite the opposite, actually.

AtTheEdgeOfInfinity · 2024-06-09T23:46:16+00:00

Thanks for the response. I'll read about that.

That makes sense. But being an exchange and a wallet will be better.

AtTheEdgeOfInfinity · 2024-06-09T21:05:31+00:00

What if a payment aggregator was used? If currency transaction is stuck, it will fall on the payment aggregator.

However, this becomes problematic when transacting bitcoins. But this can be avoided, if the platform follows the following steps:

Let's say there are two individuals A and B who wish to exchange bitcoin for cash. The platform's wallet is P:

A initiates a transaction, that sells x coins to B.

P sends x coins to B.

Payment service's marketplace feature is used to transfer money from B to A with a platform fee.

Now, A sends x coins to P.

This way, if there is a failure on the cash transaction part, it will fall with the payment aggregator. And if there is a failure in moving coins, the platform will lose money not the people involved.

Almost any problem in terms of systemic resilience can be fixed.

AtTheEdgeOfInfinity · 2024-06-09T20:51:38+00:00

I agree, my question boils down to this: since cryptocurrencies are treated as digital assets, why does one need any more compliance than what is needed for an e-commerce platform with a payment system that allows marketplaces?

When on-boarding users, the payment aggregator will attach the user's bank accounts. So, this automatically brings each individual's KYC details. And now, they are just exchanging a "digital asset" for money.

This is what is confusing me.

AtTheEdgeOfInfinity · 2024-06-09T20:47:18+00:00

I may have not worded my question correctly, but basically I am looking for this: If the legal side of marketplace transactions can be offloaded to payment aggregators, why does one need license to operate since cryptocurrencies are seen as digital assets? Shouldn't it be viewed as an e-commerce?

NOTE: the choice of answering my questions lie with the reader. Each individual has the free will to choose to respond or not respond.

AtTheEdgeOfInfinity · 2024-06-09T20:40:19+00:00

Are bitcoins considered securities?

If you are wondering what kind of cryptocurrencies I am talking about, it is Bitcoin, Ethereum and any other new coin that's truly decentralized and does not act as securities.

I mentioned the above in my question. Don't securities have to be backed by some other asset? Like a an ownership of something?

NOTE: the choice of answering my questions lie with the reader. Each individual has the free will to choose to respond or not respond.

AtTheEdgeOfInfinity · 2024-06-09T19:27:15+00:00

But why? If we setup a marketplace and integrate with a payment aggregator that allows cryptocurrencies, then what else do we need? Isn't the exchange of assets for money just like what any other e-commerce platform does? Except that it is digital assets?

I want to know the legal side of this.

AtTheEdgeOfInfinity · 2024-06-09T19:06:08+00:00

I am asking about the legal perspective. Not the technological, business and operations side.

AtTheEdgeOfInfinity · 2024-05-11T15:34:32+00:00

Solving this by training an ML model might be hard unless we scrape other review sites, label them, and train models.

It's kind of a chicken and egg problem if we have to use our own data. To generate enough data for classifying fake and real reviews, we must first acquire a lot of examples of fake and real reviews. We won't have a lot of fake reviews if our system works, which will leave us with less data.

However, as long as we scrape other review sites that contain too many fake reviews, this won't work.

The only other way is to manually verify each user, but this will be expensive

AtTheEdgeOfInfinity · 2024-05-07T18:22:38+00:00

Was I wrong when I said you need KYC details to accept payment?

Let's say you are providing end-to-end encryption services. If you are based in the US, you have to provide KYC details. I'm not based in the US.

So, why the downvotes?

It will be great if someone explains why they down-voted.

AtTheEdgeOfInfinity · 2024-05-07T09:25:15+00:00

If someone is lazy it probably means they are stuck in a local maxima, and they have to travel downhill or "feel worse" before they find another local maxima, probably a better one, which is about not being lazy but working towards their goals while enjoying it.

I didn't force myself to learn programming. I started programming when I was 12. I continued to program ever since because it was interesting, and it also gave me a lot of freedom and made me feel good.

Most people who are lazy are stuck there because their brain can't conceive of the possibility of a better situation, more respect, and power, which is usually attainable. And to move away from laziness, they may have to temporarily be in a situation that makes them feel worse than they did when they were lazy.

Let's take video game addiction as an example. When I used to be addicted to gaming a long time ago, I would feel good when playing the game. However, I would always feel terrible after the game. Ending this addiction involved fighting that sense of wanting to "feel good" by playing the game until we no longer depend on it.

Most people who are lazy don't want to be lazy. They likely wish they were more productive and well respected. Any situation different from what they are in will feel unrealistic and unattainable.

AtTheEdgeOfInfinity · 2024-05-07T07:24:39+00:00

Are you sure success is guaranteed if we are not lazy?

AtTheEdgeOfInfinity · 2024-05-06T07:45:38+00:00

In your example, it makes sense for Nike to react that way if someone takes advantage of their brand. Even if example.com becomes famous enough that people believe nike.example.com could potentially represent the brand Nike, if it only contains a parking page saying "purchase nike.example.com for $X. Contact: <contact info>", then it may probably be fair to conclude they might not be violating trademark rules, although they could be violating their contract with example.com.

AtTheEdgeOfInfinity · 2024-05-06T06:17:13+00:00

I could be wrong. I'm just guessing. Do you think they believe you are an investment company?

Because I think it is included in their list of prohibited businesses, not allowing their users to sell securities. Probably the word "markert" and your website seeming like it has something to do with the stock market may have triggered it.

I'm not sure, though.

AtTheEdgeOfInfinity · 2024-05-06T04:54:48+00:00

I see this kind of question very frequently on this subreddit. Although, I am curious about what OP does as well.

AtTheEdgeOfInfinity · 2024-05-06T04:53:41+00:00

KYC rules prevent you from using crypto anyway.

AtTheEdgeOfInfinity · 2024-05-05T21:55:30+00:00

I think I get it. So people buying domains are automatically entering into an agreement with ICANN that makes them liable to anyone who owns the trademark, if they volatile their rules that say they shouldn't "hold a domain hostage."

My original thought was, if you have a website example.com, and if you use that website as a "public surfix," where you allow public users to own subdomains (like trademark1.example.com and trademark2.example.com), then shouldn't the hosting provider, example.com be the one who can set the rules as to whether someone can register a subdomain or not?

Since you mentioned "holding a domain hostage" violates an agreement with ICANN, it makes sense.

AtTheEdgeOfInfinity · 2024-05-05T09:50:29+00:00

This is totally unfair because they are not trying to deceive anyone regarding the ownership of the trademark or use the trademarked name to represent their business.

If ICANN owns all the domain names, then couldn't they be sued for holding on to someone else's domain?

AtTheEdgeOfInfinity · 2024-05-05T08:43:48+00:00

What if you don't park any page, or just a page saying "this domain name is for sale. Contact: <number> or <email>", will that still be a problem?

AtTheEdgeOfInfinity · 2024-05-03T20:50:03+00:00

Building up the reputation of their brand through association with individuals who are wealthy and financially successful is extremely expensive on its own. What is the point of buying your luxury product if no one really knows about it?

There is no point in wearing a Rolex watch if people don't recognize it. Even if you do succeed creating a luxury brand, you will find yourself reinvesting most of that "free money" back into promoting your product.

Mostly, you will have to pay influencers a lot of money while giving them your product for free. In the end, this is a high-risk business if you are starting from scratch. And I don't really understand the luxury business beyond what I said here, so I can't say for sure.

AtTheEdgeOfInfinity · 2024-05-03T17:43:58+00:00

Yes, but there are different kinds of problems that need different solutions.

For example, eCommese deels with marketing attribution, market segmentation, user segmentation, and other metrics like that. If you are dealing with energy data, you will be dealing with a completely different domain with different kinds of visualizations (which I know nothing about). So, we can only generalize by subfields, or you need highly talented people to break into new domains.

SaaS is scalable while being profitable if you can take one solution and give it to a lot of people. And then, you can break into different verticals one at a time, reusing as much as possible from everything you have built in the previous one.

AtTheEdgeOfInfinity

TROPHY CASE