adding page because i keep finding myself (lovingly) screaming at influential/smart/kind people who keep touting/perpetuating currency/money as os (unfortunately.. or maybe i’m wrong.. i hope i’m wrong.. i think even rushkoff is perpetuating the money as os) .. which to me means.. short changing our human energy.. because if we spend all our time measuring/protocoling/validating/inspecting.. transactions.. we have little left to be us..
this via share by Jordan on fb:
A nice clean description of an important trend. I think John Robb was the first person I heard this concept from.
This is a great way to incentivize creators: if the protocol is successful, the App Coins will go up in value.
really..? a great way to incentivize creators..? seems like ..perhaps a kinder .. but still an energy suck for humans
what about we try.. luxury.. as motivation… (assuming we want this to be remarkable creations/art.. and assuming we want this to be sustainable..)
and then this ted shared by Joi
Great explanation of cryptocurrencies by out very own @neha twitter.com/neha/status/77…
computers collectively confirming who owns what bitcoin – Neha
is that what we want?
let’s do better
crypto.. short for cryptography: the art of writing or solving codes.
so.. we’re spending our days writing/solving codes to make money/measuring .. more efficient.. all the while not realizing.. that’s our poison.. aka: we’re making our poison more efficient.. like automating ineq et al
fb share michel:
when we look at the emerging crypto economy, it is very important to disentangle the two co-mingled aspirations that it can represent.
We said this at the very beginning from bitcoin: it represents the first socially sovereign currency at scale, and moreover it is strongly based on open source / commons dynamics through its open code. But that social sovereignty is immediately and very strongly embedded in anoher principle: that of the sovereignity and independence of the corporate class from any form of social and political regulation. It’s a declaration of independence from the market sector, which sees itself as society, since for the propertarians, the market IS civil society, and society is simply the sum of atomistic relations of individuals. If we want to make crypto innovation work for society as a whole, which is the whole that actually co-produces individuals and needs its own care, then the powerful but suppressed principles of social sovereignty must be literated from market totalitarian thinking and practice.
Here is a good example of the propertarian mentality behind bitcoin and crypto-currencies:
this article makes it very clear that for the ‘average’ bitcoin/blockchain enthusiast, governance equalis economic incentives, and I would add, implicitely, competitive game theory
so my question, who has educated these people to make these reductionist assumptions about human life, organizations and society. For economists I understand where it is coming from , but developers ?https://medium.com/…/blockchain-governance-programming...
Yeah this seems about right to be, Michel Bauwens. Many of the people involved are *bastards*. It’s one of the reasons these systems are doing do well in the real world: generally they can out-evil the existing systems, i.e. beat them at their own game.
It’ll take a strong hand to turn that around to some more social purpose.
Chris Burniske (@cburniske) tweeted at 7:50 AM – 28 Jul 2018 :
“Prediction: Crypto-powered governance markets will solve the tragedy of the commons and drive future abundance at the same level of scale as the stock market and the corporation.” -@m2jr https://t.co/4X5NcGxuh2 (http://twitter.com/cburniske/status/1023204076107059200?s=17)
How will blockchains drive our standard of living forward exponentially? How will we see the creation of tens of trillions in new value like we did with the stock market in the last 150 years?
The answer lies in how crypto can transform the tragedy of the commons into the wealth of the commons..t
the answer to what..? crypto ness is what’s making the commons into tragedy
Why hasn’t the commons succeeded in producing abundance at scale?.t
that’s not a common ing purpose.. it’s more about affluence w/o abundance
Although her (elinor) ideas were trailblazing, it was hard to see how they could scale beyond niches where people knew each other face to face.
Crypto creates a scalable governance model for the Commons
commons doesn’t need that.. commons needs and undisturbed ecosystem
Keep in mind that what makes the commons fail is a lack of scalable governance because there is no centralized control by a corporation or a government. Instead, you are limited to informal relationships among people who know each other.
One of the biggest value propositions of crypto is scalable governance without informal localized trust.
Vinay Gupta (@leashless) tweeted at 4:39 AM – 29 Jul 2018 :
The great @doctorow reminds us of why he’s one of the best thinkers in the game. He’s raising the bar here. https://t.co/TerwSSNWv2(http://twitter.com/leashless/status/1023518262297018368?s=17)
we need rat park ness.. not more efficient/secure measuring
WIRED (@WIRED) tweeted at 5:19 AM – 30 Aug 2018 :
The safest way to store virtual currency is offline, in computers unconnected to the internet. https://t.co/JKLbZspb08(http://twitter.com/WIRED/status/1035124902859300865?s=17)One is an unsightly environmental footprint. The computers known as “miners” that thrash through tricky math to verify bitcoin transactions consume as much energy as a small country.
jordan on web3 et al