4 ms·
It’s probably not a good idea to lean into definitions for your mental model of what a network state is/will be. At various stages of growth it will have simila
by gfodor 5y ago
It’s probably not a good idea to lean into definitions for your mental model of what a network state is/will be. At various stages of growth it will have similarities to clubs, organizations, societies, communities, nation states, and other things that exist today. But ultimately they will be distinct societal constructs that have technological pre-requisites that render them incoherent without them.
The analog to a typical nation state is not fully knowable today imo, but ultimately it will probably boil down to having no impedance mismatch in participating in global affairs (eg treaties, UN membership, etc) vs small independent nation states.
- ravel-bar-foo 5y agoWhy call it a state if it is indistinguishable from a community or club? What sets states apart is their claim of sovereignty: their own currency, their own diplomacy, their own military, their own legal mechanisms, and their own land: - A state without its own currency is a protectorate of some larger, currency-minting state. The network state passes this test, but it is left as a protectorate of whoever has enough compute to apply a 50% attack. - A state without diplomacy is a rogue state. Crucially, it requires enough diplomatic leverage to establish itself as a legally distinct entity. - A state without military is a protectorate of neighboring powers, and thus not sovereign. - A state without legal mechanisms will not even survive as a community. - A state without land is a government in exile. Historically these don't last very long, and only survive as protectorates of a larger patron state.
- gfodor 5y agoMy point is that it will be distinguishable from a community or club, but will also be distinguishable from a typical nation state.