2 ms·
The issue is who decides the obvious good and obvious harm? As soon as you’ve made such a powerful authority it becomes a target for regulatory capture since th
by kjkjadksj 3y ago
The issue is who decides the obvious good and obvious harm? As soon as you’ve made such a powerful authority it becomes a target for regulatory capture since the incentives if you pull this off are sky high.
- __MatrixMan__ 3y agoNo need for an authority, it can be a DIY/opt-in sort of thing. If somebody came up to you and presented you with some money that had metadata re: how it was earned, you'd have to decide whether to accept it, so it would be up to you to decide if that endeavor was one you wanted to align yourself with. If you make that call in a way that disagrees with your wider community, you may end up in a situation where you can't find anyone else who will accept that money, so I expect some degree of consensus will emerge. Making that judgement call on every transaction would be tedious, so I imagine organizations would form which are trusted to make that call, and then you'd sort of "subscribe" your wallet to their decisions so that you don't have to think about it all the time. As for regulatory capture, if such an organization stopped aligning with your interests, you could just unsubscribe from their judgements and either do it yourself or form a competing one.
- timschmidt 3y agoSee, I think this is a great reason to colonize Mars or the Moon. Because I'd like to see the result of this social experiment without watching the world crash and burn at the whim of popularity economics.
- hgomersall 3y agoWe have the sky high regulatory capture as it is, just that what has been captured is opaque. There are loads of things that corporations should be getting fined for but are not.