> He posited that the financial system's algorithm's purpose is to answer, "what should we do?". Yes, That is just re-stating what the author wrote, without pr

> He posited that the financial system's algorithm's purpose is to answer, "what should we do?". Yes, That is just re-stating what the author wrote, without providing any clarifying information. > You seem to have interpreted that as saying that the financial system should answer that problem for society as a whole. Maybe yes that is a maximalist interpretation; what is the alternative interpretation (it doesn't seem to be present in the author's text)? > move away from min-sum towards sum-product (which often works an order of magnitude better) by perhaps implementing basic income. Etc. Etc. Referencing 'basic income' here seems like a whole society problem to me, which has nothing to do with the technical implementation financial payment gateways, no?