4 ms·

> All in all: when your source of truth is the legal system, there is absolutely no point for a blockchain and you might as well record ownership in a database.

by jerry1979 5y ago

> All in all: when your source of truth is the legal system, there is absolutely no point for a blockchain and you might as well record ownership in a database. Crypto works well as a source of truth for things that start out in our imaginations but still have a large presence in the real world. For example, ownership of things like money accounts or even shares in group projects both come from and exist within our imagination, and crypto allows us to create rules and boundaries for those things easily and in a relatively trustless manner. I think the article focuses on objects that start out in the real world. If we want to manage the rules and boundaries for those kinds of things, then talking, writing, and violence probably work better than crypto.

knorker 5y ago
But it doesn't. Not at all. Society cannot be boostrapped on top of cryptodelusions, exactly because people will not accept it. If your bank account gets drained through something "unfair" (hack, robbed, bug, etc...) society delegates power to courts to order your money back. Society will drop "the blockchain" like day old garbage every time, because people Do. Not. Care, about it. They care that they live in a society of relative fairness, judged by their peers. Not by a bug in a program. There is no link between the blockchain and reality in the shared delusion of society. There is a link between the courts, and the government, and the treasury, and the shared delusion of society. There have been armed uprisings against governments that don't live up to the promise. And to the extent people DON'T rise up against the government it's because the government has guns. The blockchain has no guns. Society will just stop believing in it, when it's wrong. You can't just "stop believing in the government" (i.e. look at the success of "sovereign citizens"). The government of all levels doesn't go away when you're not looking at it. Nor the dollar (because of the government). The blockchain does.
- jerry1979 5y ago
  Not sure what you mean by bootstrapping society. But I do think that most people won't keep all their money in crypto accounts. Instead, some people will probably just use crypto to move a bit of money around on the internet, maybe use it as a rainy day account, maybe do a group project. It could work pretty well for that.
  - knorker 5y ago
    But why? I have multiple accounts because FDIC (and other reasons), and different investment platforms. Using blockchain for a slush fund like this is just LARPing. And I get the thrill of "being your own banking", I really do. But that's all it is. And it doesn't make it in any way a good idea, for anybody and everybody.
    - jerry1979 5y ago
      Let's say I wanted to start a small podcasting collective with people from many different countries. We would all know each other in so far as any member of a small online group knows other members. We might want to have people tip our podcasts and streams, and we might want to use a system to split up that income to the people in the collective. Bitcoin can allow that kind of revenue splitting without having to mess with hiccups in the legacy financial system. Whatever people's reasons, I don't think crypto is just one thing because there is a whole world of things people might use it for, and I can't trust myself to know of or approve or appreciate the value of all of them. In that way, crypto kinda reminds me of learning to play Go.
      - knorker 5y ago
        Yes, the world needs a system for microtransactions. The thing is that your use case can be likened to you and your friends coming together to play poker, so we need a system for allowing anyone to create a casino of any size. As for what I meant by "bootstrapping": Why do we have money, society, or any other social construct? It's because we as humans believe in some form of "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness". Different cultures have different tradeoffs between these. And they may not recognize these things in people who don't look like them, or don't have the same gender, but the point is that this is the foundation of why we build social constructs such as government, police, and money. The issues are complex, and sometimes contradictory, but this is what we bootstrap on. Math is not that. > for example, ownership of things like money accounts or even shares in group projects both come from and exist within our imagination, and crypto allows us to create rules and boundaries for those things It does allow us to create those rules. But they are useless rules. Unless you think you can math-codify not only morality itself, but also exceptions and overrides. And we don't know the exceptions until we encounter them. Before we had DNA evidence we did not need to know what is "right" thing to do is, for someone who's just been proven innocent after 40 years. Not that we know now, either, but we have the mechanisms for trying, at least. Blockchain enthusiasts want to make this impossible. And that's why nobody will accept it. You think people are upset about the 1% now, imagine if it were literally impossible to change rules (laws, taxes, or anything else) that are clearly being exploited through a loophole. It's the difference between mass surveillance and a proper legal court-approved search warrant. This should not surprise you: People actually want search warrants to be a thing. > I can't trust myself to know of or approve or appreciate the value of all of them. Similarly you can't know the existence or value of all the things that a blockchain-based economy would make impossible. Whereas the alternative (fiat currency) makes nothing impossible, as long as we can want it.

knorker 5y ago

But it doesn't. Not at all. Society cannot be boostrapped on top of cryptodelusions, exactly because people will not accept it. If your bank account gets drained through something "unfair" (hack, robbed, bug, etc...) society delegates power to courts to order your money back. Society will drop "the blockchain" like day old garbage every time, because people Do. Not. Care, about it. They care that they live in a society of relative fairness, judged by their peers. Not by a bug in a program. There is no link between the blockchain and reality in the shared delusion of society. There is a link between the courts, and the government, and the treasury, and the shared delusion of society. There have been armed uprisings against governments that don't live up to the promise. And to the extent people DON'T rise up against the government it's because the government has guns. The blockchain has no guns. Society will just stop believing in it, when it's wrong. You can't just "stop believing in the government" (i.e. look at the success of "sovereign citizens"). The government of all levels doesn't go away when you're not looking at it. Nor the dollar (because of the government). The blockchain does.

jerry1979 5y ago
Not sure what you mean by bootstrapping society. But I do think that most people won't keep all their money in crypto accounts. Instead, some people will probably just use crypto to move a bit of money around on the internet, maybe use it as a rainy day account, maybe do a group project. It could work pretty well for that.
- knorker 5y ago
  But why? I have multiple accounts because FDIC (and other reasons), and different investment platforms. Using blockchain for a slush fund like this is just LARPing. And I get the thrill of "being your own banking", I really do. But that's all it is. And it doesn't make it in any way a good idea, for anybody and everybody.
  - jerry1979 5y ago
    Let's say I wanted to start a small podcasting collective with people from many different countries. We would all know each other in so far as any member of a small online group knows other members. We might want to have people tip our podcasts and streams, and we might want to use a system to split up that income to the people in the collective. Bitcoin can allow that kind of revenue splitting without having to mess with hiccups in the legacy financial system. Whatever people's reasons, I don't think crypto is just one thing because there is a whole world of things people might use it for, and I can't trust myself to know of or approve or appreciate the value of all of them. In that way, crypto kinda reminds me of learning to play Go.
    - knorker 5y ago
      Yes, the world needs a system for microtransactions. The thing is that your use case can be likened to you and your friends coming together to play poker, so we need a system for allowing anyone to create a casino of any size. As for what I meant by "bootstrapping": Why do we have money, society, or any other social construct? It's because we as humans believe in some form of "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness". Different cultures have different tradeoffs between these. And they may not recognize these things in people who don't look like them, or don't have the same gender, but the point is that this is the foundation of why we build social constructs such as government, police, and money. The issues are complex, and sometimes contradictory, but this is what we bootstrap on. Math is not that. > for example, ownership of things like money accounts or even shares in group projects both come from and exist within our imagination, and crypto allows us to create rules and boundaries for those things It does allow us to create those rules. But they are useless rules. Unless you think you can math-codify not only morality itself, but also exceptions and overrides. And we don't know the exceptions until we encounter them. Before we had DNA evidence we did not need to know what is "right" thing to do is, for someone who's just been proven innocent after 40 years. Not that we know now, either, but we have the mechanisms for trying, at least. Blockchain enthusiasts want to make this impossible. And that's why nobody will accept it. You think people are upset about the 1% now, imagine if it were literally impossible to change rules (laws, taxes, or anything else) that are clearly being exploited through a loophole. It's the difference between mass surveillance and a proper legal court-approved search warrant. This should not surprise you: People actually want search warrants to be a thing. > I can't trust myself to know of or approve or appreciate the value of all of them. Similarly you can't know the existence or value of all the things that a blockchain-based economy would make impossible. Whereas the alternative (fiat currency) makes nothing impossible, as long as we can want it.