TMPHBITEU
Member
That was an interesting read. While I don’t disagree with anything in it I think it’s weird we claim “decentralized thinking” when instead of looking to a government or standards body we look to another source of information like a book about keto or a person who claims to be an expert in literally anything. As long as it’s not the government and the source is considered fringe or underdog we claim to be sitting outside realm of “normal” and are decentralized.
Member
Wow, not what I was expecting. Well written. Does she do the program? Did she reach out to you? My guess is that she did.
I also see a lot of the Stoic strains within he program.
Member
I am a bit sceptical of the initial premise. A blockchain application that requires massive network and energy resources to run doesn't seem a very example of decentralisation, especially given that at present (and for the foreseeable future) those massive resources can only be delivered by infrastructures built and managed by nation States.
I understand the superficial allure of the concept of a currency which is not issued by a State, but even this doesn't seem to stand up to scrutiny. Issuing currency is ontologically a State prerogative; transferring this prerogative doesn't privatise it, it simply confers Statedom to the recipients. In Bitcoin's case, these are the handful of miners who have enough computing power to validate the chain of transactions and mint new coins. Effectively, Bitcoin adopters swap one 'public' State for a private one; to add to the bargain, they also forfeit any possibility of legal recourse in case of controversy or fraud.
IPB
Member
Private monies have been used before and can be used again.Originally Posted by IlPrincipeBrutto
No reason to think the government will inevitably do it better than the market.
Posting Permissions
