That's a big ideal. Easier to make maths, protocols and code idea, than humans. Especially given such widely different stances on what is justice. I think ideal money is a more unifiable concept than ideal people/judgement.
Debatable. Are you going to step in and stop/force/change me? With what enforcement? What about a million me? What if we become a minority with veto rights in the model? Do you fork us off the social chain like the DAO hack?
-
-
I think of the possibility of setting the veto threshold requirements in relation to the amount of stolen property such that the thieves can't hope to gain from paying for veto power etc.
-
Interesting. Doesnt combat too big to fail institutional theives, and geopolitical cabals from undue influence. Especially entering a hyper consumeristic attention economy.
-
You think the governments will get together to collude against the system?
-
People within governments with self interest and powers to protect. You think they won't?
-
To be meaningful it would have to be US cooperating with China and each in turn with Russia and so on. North Korea, South Korea etc...is this what you suggest could happen? That this is a danger in regard to mutability movements?
-
I'm still not sure this whole model is ideal for society and advancement. It may be morally ideal, and truly just within its own self defined goals, but I think we departed a few steps back. I'm still always interested in fleshing out your ideas.
-
It is morality defined by 'that which we all agree on' it is hardly a definition one could reasonably disagree with.
-
I may not disagree with your definition, but still be doubtful of its optimization/value as an instrument of changing bitcoin immutability, or concerned with tradeoffs. Whats wrong with currently immutable model?
- 4 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.