"Scaling computational resources requires cheap additional resources. Scaling human institutions in a reliable & secure manner requires increasing accountants, lawyers, regulators, & police, along with the increases in bureaucracy, risk, & stress such institutions entail."https://twitter.com/richard1storey/status/1069720965750407174 …
-
Am I correct then that attempting to add governance other than Nakamoto Consensus would essentially be an attack vector?
Nakamoto consensus is a protocol, not governance, but yes in general substituting human governance for secure protocol is an idea of astronomical bad proportions.
![[./Tim.Bouma$]](https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/1082084674745159680/abN7iTzL_normal.jpg)
-
-
Isn't the acceptance of the protocol the means of governance by consensus. By accepting the rule set of the protocol one is part of the consensus. This is what I was trying to say, maybe this version is better.
-
It’s consensus then that governs it would seem, or lead or act as the pillar of trust or lawmaker.
- End of conversation
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.