Alas, the fraud of hyping supposed big breakthroughs in human governance is far from unpopular. Vastly more progress has been made learning (and improving) how computers work than in figuring out much less improving how humans work. https://twitter.com/La__Cuen/status/1001102779371393024 …
I feel like you're agreeing but also disagreeing. Blockchain is probably unlikely to solve societies problems, but it's true that with random exploration people sometimes accidentally come up with technologies which change society. It's just not something we can control...
-
-
You can evaluate it probabilistically - most probable outcome is blockchain having little to no systemic impact on society apart from dragging some grey/black markets up into white (eg. illicit drugs trade) and abetting heinous black markets (eg. human trafficking)
-
If people wanted libertarianism, Ron Paul would be a much more successful politician. Building an elegant technological expression of Austrian economics (like Bitcoin) does not solve that problem. The existing apparatus of society can, and will, suppress it.
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.
are you intentionally attacking Bitcoin here? This pretty much sums up exactly what is wrong with lauding the original paper as revolutionary.
New forms of technological governance don’t necessarily lead to corresponding change in socioeconomic governance.