3 ms·

@kordless I like your work on BTC and openstack but I disagree with the premise some Blockchain technologists evangelism about using a technology driven by a ma

@kordless I like your work on BTC and openstack but I disagree with the premise some Blockchain technologists evangelism about using a technology driven by a majority consensus theory to create or enforce laws. A form of government that doesn't protect the rights of the minority from the tyranny of the majority concensus is a dangerous thing.

smokeyj 12y ago
> A form of government that doesn't protect the rights of the minority from the tyranny of the majority concensus is a dangerous thing. Are you implying this is possible without blockchain technology, but impossible with? I can't imagine what attribute of an unforgeable ledger would do that. People who believe in the mythic notion of "social contracts" should embrace blockchains with open arms. Minorities now have a concrete method to create enforceable agreements among each other. Isn't that what government should be -- an agreement amongst the people?
- schoen 12y ago
  You probably already know about "Secure Property Titles With Owner Authority", but other people might not: http://szabo.best.vwh.net/securetitle.html http://szabo.best.vwh.net/securetitle.html I think Satoshi must have read all of Szabo's work! Long before the Bitcoin paper, Szabo argues that technology can supplant existing bureaucratic means of recording claims to property rights (but he notes that it doesn't directly supplant existing institutions for enforcing those rights, or beliefs about how the rights are acquired or transferred). I thought of this piece when reading this week's xkcd what-if: https://what-if.xkcd.com/111/ https://what-if.xkcd.com/111/ ("[...] you could edit all the property records on Earth to say that you own all the land and edit all the banking records to say you own all the money. But everyone else would disagree with those records, and they would edit them back or ignore them [...]")
  - kordless 12y ago
    Also, you're a duck.
- kordless 12y ago
  An agreement amongst the people: "Blockchain of the people, by the people, for the people shall not perish from the earth."
kordless 12y ago
I agree with you regarding the dangers of consensus. Trust can be evaluated many different ways: through direct votes, aggregation, statistical analysis, and more. We should be cautious about implementing government control with the blockchain and I'm sure the current government will have a say about it when we do. Whether they chose to arm themselves with a keyboard and coded editor is another matter entirely. Thanks for the kind words about Utter.io!

smokeyj 12y ago

> A form of government that doesn't protect the rights of the minority from the tyranny of the majority concensus is a dangerous thing. Are you implying this is possible without blockchain technology, but impossible with? I can't imagine what attribute of an unforgeable ledger would do that. People who believe in the mythic notion of "social contracts" should embrace blockchains with open arms. Minorities now have a concrete method to create enforceable agreements among each other. Isn't that what government should be -- an agreement amongst the people?

schoen 12y ago
You probably already know about "Secure Property Titles With Owner Authority", but other people might not: http://szabo.best.vwh.net/securetitle.html http://szabo.best.vwh.net/securetitle.html I think Satoshi must have read all of Szabo's work! Long before the Bitcoin paper, Szabo argues that technology can supplant existing bureaucratic means of recording claims to property rights (but he notes that it doesn't directly supplant existing institutions for enforcing those rights, or beliefs about how the rights are acquired or transferred). I thought of this piece when reading this week's xkcd what-if: https://what-if.xkcd.com/111/ https://what-if.xkcd.com/111/ ("[...] you could edit all the property records on Earth to say that you own all the land and edit all the banking records to say you own all the money. But everyone else would disagree with those records, and they would edit them back or ignore them [...]")
- kordless 12y ago
  Also, you're a duck.
kordless 12y ago
An agreement amongst the people: "Blockchain of the people, by the people, for the people shall not perish from the earth."

kordless 12y ago

I agree with you regarding the dangers of consensus. Trust can be evaluated many different ways: through direct votes, aggregation, statistical analysis, and more. We should be cautious about implementing government control with the blockchain and I'm sure the current government will have a say about it when we do. Whether they chose to arm themselves with a keyboard and coded editor is another matter entirely. Thanks for the kind words about Utter.io!