The blockchain paradox: Why DLTs may do little to transform the economy
1–10 of 355 posts
Re: The blockchain paradox: Why DLTs may do little to transform the economy
#2I agree with this in as much as I don't think cryptocurrencies are ever going to replace 'fiat' currency. That doesn't mean that they don't provide economic value or are worthless, however.
Re: The blockchain paradox: Why DLTs may do little to transform the economy
#3A while back I wondered if networks like facebook, electrical grids should have more direct user decision making.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14293114
I think eventually networks need to figure out distributed decision making.
Re: The blockchain paradox: Why DLTs may do little to transform the economy
#4I agree with this in as much as I don't think cryptocurrencies are ever going to replace 'fiat' currency. That doesn't mean that they don't provide economic value or are worthless, however.
Especially in places or by individuals where fiat currencies are seen as corrupt.
Re: The blockchain paradox: Why DLTs may do little to transform the economy
#5I agree with this in as much as I don't think cryptocurrencies are ever going to replace 'fiat' currency. That doesn't mean that they don't provide economic value or are worthless, however.
The article didn't discuss that issue.
Re: The blockchain paradox: Why DLTs may do little to transform the economy
#6Blockchain already transformed economy; it brought fast international payments with small fees.
Re: The blockchain paradox: Why DLTs may do little to transform the economy
#7I agree with Vili Lehdonvirta's analysis about governance and wrote a similar conclusion previously.[1]
Yes, the concept of "money" existed before governments and therefore doesn't require government. That said, today's modern money is very much an instrument of government power. This is why alt-coins will not overthrow fiat currencies like some enthusiasts believe because Bitcoin does not come with its own Bitcoin-police-force and Bitcoin-law-courts.
The distributed block chain may eventually prove useful for other recordkeeping such as real estate property transactions (e.g. no need to pay $300 fee for title searches in the future), or maybe buy/sell internet domain names (e.g. don't need Verisign as middleman to buy dot com domains). Those scenarios are more realistic than Bitcoin/Ethereum replacing government approved fiat currencies. DLTs may still transform the economy -- but not in the ways people expect.
There's definitely some interesting applications of distributed consensus ledger but the idea of bypassing government money is overhyping its potential.
Re: The blockchain paradox: Why DLTs may do little to transform the economy
#8I agree with this in as much as I don't think cryptocurrencies are ever going to replace 'fiat' currency. That doesn't mean that they don't provide economic value or are worthless, however.
The article didn't discuss that issue.
It does if you take USA's "governance of Fed Reserve Notes" and EU "governance of Euro" as examples of the author's "governance of technology" or "governance paradox".
Re: The blockchain paradox: Why DLTs may do little to transform the economy
#9I agree with Vili Lehdonvirta's analysis about governance and wrote a similar conclusion previously.[1] Yes, the concept of "money" existed before governments and therefore doesn't require government. That said, today's modern money is very much an instrument of government power. This is why alt-coins will not overthrow fiat currencies like some enthusiasts believe because Bitcoin does not come with its own Bitcoin-p…
> Bitcoin does not come with its own Bitcoin-police-force and Bitcoin-law-courts
My government will enforce a contract even if it is denominated in some foreign currency, will it not? Currency used is independent of jurisdiction.
They may award damages in legal tender, rather than in Bitcoin, but I have to pay taxes in legal tender anyway, so there will always be a market to convert back.
Right now they might be confused by Bitcoin enough that they won't effectively be able to assess damages, but that's not necessarily a permanent state of affairs.
Re: The blockchain paradox: Why DLTs may do little to transform the economy
#10I agree with Vili Lehdonvirta's analysis about governance and wrote a similar conclusion previously.[1] Yes, the concept of "money" existed before governments and therefore doesn't require government. That said, today's modern money is very much an instrument of government power. This is why alt-coins will not overthrow fiat currencies like some enthusiasts believe because Bitcoin does not come with its own Bitcoin-p…
> Bitcoin does not come with its own Bitcoin-police-force and Bitcoin-law-courts My government will enforce a contract even if it is denominated in some foreign currency, will it not? Currency used is independent of jurisdiction. They may award damages in legal tender, rather than in Bitcoin, but I have to pay taxes in legal tender anyway, so there will always be a market to convert back. Right now they might be conf…
>My government will enforce a contract even if it is denominated in some foreign currency, will it not?
Sure, if usage of that other currency is trivial enough volume that it doesn't threaten the government's currency. That's the sticking point. Bitcoin is allowed to exist at the whim of the government.