What’s the Point of Comparing Human Government to Decentralized Blockchain Technologies?
Decentralization is about taking governance away from fallible entities.

What’s the Point of Comparing Human Government to Decentralized Blockchain Technologies?

By AlucardLife | cryptoinvesting | 28 Nov 2020


This article is in response to a comment on my previous article

Decentralization Is DEFINITELY The "End-All Be-All" of Crypto.

The commenter wanted to know how decentralization technology had anything to do with governance. The full quote was

So what blokchain would be something to create laws instead of goverment or what? Because that would be ridiculous idea (well generally democration is ridiculous idea - the very idea that what most people thinks should determine what is the law make no sense if we would really think of it) - but I still don’t see any other way to understand the statement: “These technologies are objectively better than any governance system humans have come up with on their own.” What make them better and better in what regard anyway?

First of all, [sic] on the entire quote. Lol.

But to the question — this is the essential advantage of crypto and why I write about it so prodigiously. I wouldn't waste so much digital ink on something that was just money. Crypto is, at its core, a better way to govern.

Is it perfect? No. The rich still get richer and hold overweighted influence in crypto governance systems. No project has come up with a way to avoid this. But it's closer than any fallible human-led system has ever been.

The first step in efficient government is to make it untenable and unprofitable to become a professional middleman. Should society integrate successfully with the smart contract, all superfluous bankers, legislators, lawyers, lobbyists, music managers, real estate agents, insurance salesmen, etc., etc., ad infinitum will suddenly have to find some true value in their existence or be immediately out of a life.

Decentralized governance through immutable value assignment and arbitration kills the need for the fallible arbiter. In this system, there is no premium in inserting yourself into a monied process and trying to extract more money from it by claiming to further negotiation or provide access. Every point in the process must add value, because the ledger and the contract serve as the sole and incorruptible source of governance.

At least in the republic of the United States, most of the money is made through representation. Lawyers represent you in court. Cashiers represent the owner of a business. The president represents the people. Supposed to. Why? Because the official documentation of corporate and legal America is written in a way that you need representation. Processes are set up that way on purpose. There is no essential need for bankers or cashiers or presidents.

Imagine a world with no need for representatives. This is what blockchain offers.

Blockchain technology, properly used, lets machines verify where stores of value reside and transact without a human saying, "I saw that transaction happen." We're already in that world — it's just that centralized entities want to be the human in the middle. Crypto's job is to put essentially a worldwide computer in the middle, controlled by no one, and completely unable to be corrupted.

That's why I compare blockchain to government. Because blockchain would be the best government humanity ever saw.

Questions?


AlucardLife
AlucardLife

The next level.

Send a $0.01 microtip in crypto to the author, and earn yourself as you read!

20% to author / 80% to me.
We pay the tips from our rewards pool.