3 ms·
1. I wonder how much of this still holds in a potential future world where machines are making decisions in most aspects of life already. 2. It doesn't follow
by pishpash 5y ago
1. I wonder how much of this still holds in a potential future world where machines are making decisions in most aspects of life already.
2. It doesn't follow that you can't have some recognized authorities within decentralized finance to negotiate fallback cases. For instance, the role of banks could become merely to supply information related to human authentication, not most of market operation.
- smackeyacky 5y agoI guess you could set it up that way, but then you create the problem of competing authorities - it's the same problem that the internet has with DNS. At some point, it has to have a single source of truth. The blockchain itself isn't enough when what is recorded on the blockchain is potentially not what the actors intended (or is what a criminal intended in a fraud scheme).
- programmarchy 5y agoCompeting authorities seem like a feature not a bug. It allows for experimentation and evolution of governance models. International law works this way and is what allows people to “vote with their feet”. There is no actual requirement for a single source of truth.
- smackeyacky 5y agoThat seems kind of different in a way, the different authorities cover different countries where laws are different. It almost seems like to make it work you would need...regulation.