12 ms·

You don't understand how decentralized systems that provide cryptographically-assured accountability improves on existing institutions in the first world? I fi

You don't understand how decentralized systems that provide cryptographically-assured accountability improves on existing institutions in the first world? I find that curious. Usually people get lost on the tech side.

chaosite 5y ago
Yeah, I don't. Decentralized systems don't provide cryptographically-assured accountability, they require cryptographically-assured accountability in order to function correctly. If you give up the decentralization requirement, and instead federate authority across well-regulated entities, then you don't need the crypto, not as a base requirement anyway. And you still need the regulation, because all this fancy cryptographical assurance does is prevent man-in-the-middle attacks that arise from the decentralization requirement, and you still need to regulate the input and output--which is where all fraud occurs anyway.
- rjtavares 5y ago
  Exactly. The hard problem is to build and maintain the democratic institutions required by a developed country. I find some people seem to be willing to gamble that for a tech solution.
  - Ygg2 5y ago
    I think crypto has some use as distributed logs. But that's it. You can't solve a social problem with a computer/tech solution. It just doesn't work.
lottin 5y ago
I don't understand it either. In fact, I don't think it's true at all. I think if you think technology is a substitute for well-functioning democratic institutions you're an ignorant fool.
- syzygyhack 5y ago
  The technology does not replace democratic institutions, but it makes them enforceable and accountable. The real ignorant fools are those kidding themselves into thinking their "democratic institutions" are well-functioning.
  - rjtavares 5y ago
    Can you give an example?
    - koonsolo 5y ago
      Not OP but here is my answer: You could say that Turkey was a well functioning democracy. But look now with Erdogan, and Turkeys inflation is at 49%. Having access to some stablecoin like UST could saved a lot of people troubles. Without really having the burden to go buy dollars or euro's in some form or another.
      - syzygyhack 5y ago
        That's a good example. My current favorite example would be the UK, and the so-called democratic British government. The democratic façade has fallen away spectacularly over the last few years. There is no way to hold anyone to account when there is corruption at the top. They don't even need to hide it anymore. The borders are gerrymandered, fair voting is hamstrung by FPTP, funding is withheld from constituencies where the MP doesn't tow the party line, and both public money and foreign bribes go into the pockets of the elite few. Clearly a well functioning democracy, a pillar of the West, where government officials may place themselves above the law. Lying in Parliament? Free pass. Calling out lying in Parliament? Ejected from the discourse. But at least Sir Boris led an inquiry into Sir Boris and found Sir Boris free of guilt. I really don't think it's so crazy to think that the adequate application of crypto can lead to well-functioning democracies for precisely this reason; we can have real accountability.
        lottin 5y ago
strangeattractr 5y ago
I usually find it's the opposite to be honest. Most people that I know that have a good understanding of how the technology works are far more sanguine about what it can and cannot do. Whereas those friends and acquaintances who understand the technology the least tend to be far more zealous in its potential.

chaosite 5y ago

Yeah, I don't. Decentralized systems don't provide cryptographically-assured accountability, they require cryptographically-assured accountability in order to function correctly. If you give up the decentralization requirement, and instead federate authority across well-regulated entities, then you don't need the crypto, not as a base requirement anyway. And you still need the regulation, because all this fancy cryptographical assurance does is prevent man-in-the-middle attacks that arise from the decentralization requirement, and you still need to regulate the input and output--which is where all fraud occurs anyway.

rjtavares 5y ago
Exactly. The hard problem is to build and maintain the democratic institutions required by a developed country. I find some people seem to be willing to gamble that for a tech solution.
- Ygg2 5y ago
  I think crypto has some use as distributed logs. But that's it. You can't solve a social problem with a computer/tech solution. It just doesn't work.

lottin 5y ago

I don't understand it either. In fact, I don't think it's true at all. I think if you think technology is a substitute for well-functioning democratic institutions you're an ignorant fool.

syzygyhack 5y ago
The technology does not replace democratic institutions, but it makes them enforceable and accountable. The real ignorant fools are those kidding themselves into thinking their "democratic institutions" are well-functioning.
- rjtavares 5y ago
  Can you give an example?
  - koonsolo 5y ago
    Not OP but here is my answer: You could say that Turkey was a well functioning democracy. But look now with Erdogan, and Turkeys inflation is at 49%. Having access to some stablecoin like UST could saved a lot of people troubles. Without really having the burden to go buy dollars or euro's in some form or another.
    - syzygyhack 5y ago
      That's a good example. My current favorite example would be the UK, and the so-called democratic British government. The democratic façade has fallen away spectacularly over the last few years. There is no way to hold anyone to account when there is corruption at the top. They don't even need to hide it anymore. The borders are gerrymandered, fair voting is hamstrung by FPTP, funding is withheld from constituencies where the MP doesn't tow the party line, and both public money and foreign bribes go into the pockets of the elite few. Clearly a well functioning democracy, a pillar of the West, where government officials may place themselves above the law. Lying in Parliament? Free pass. Calling out lying in Parliament? Ejected from the discourse. But at least Sir Boris led an inquiry into Sir Boris and found Sir Boris free of guilt. I really don't think it's so crazy to think that the adequate application of crypto can lead to well-functioning democracies for precisely this reason; we can have real accountability.
      - lottin 5y ago

strangeattractr 5y ago

I usually find it's the opposite to be honest. Most people that I know that have a good understanding of how the technology works are far more sanguine about what it can and cannot do. Whereas those friends and acquaintances who understand the technology the least tend to be far more zealous in its potential.