It is embarrassing that rich tech bro drivel like the Network State is what counts as intellectual discourse in modern society.
Do you have any specific criticism of the idea?
What I think about network states
131–140 of 144 posts
Re: What I think about network states
#132Yay even more groupism. Like nationalism, bigotry and racism weren't enough. I think we should move towards a more integrated Earth, not more partitioning.
People encourage free trade and travel among states while still believing in and committing too states for their living and identity.
Re: What I think about network states
#133Here's something some software engineers need to understand: Most things in society and the world are not technical problems. Just because you can invert a binary tree doesn't mean you understand how society works. It seems like some people, just because they are smart in one area, think they know everything. We see this with many VCs, Elon Musk, Vitalik etc. Reading this post, I don't even know where to begin. This…
That is the kind of criticism that the idea of a constitutional republic got back when all we had were kingdoms.
Re: What I think about network states
#134Re: What I think about network states
#135Earlier quoted context omitted.
You are painting all libertarians with a broad brush. Just as not all Democrats are communists and not all Republicans are Nazis, not all libertarians are anarcho-capitalists that want the state to be destroyed. It is a way to dismiss libertarians but it isn’t true. I’m a libertarian and I still want our constitutional republic in the US. I just advocate for market-based solutions vs. top-down paternalistic solutions…
No, I'm painting historical secessionist libertarian movements as secessionist libertarian movements. The abolition and replacement of the state. Reformist libertarians are categorically excluded from the context of my criticism.
Ok, but the point here is that "reformist libertarians" are the much larger group.
The vast majority of people who call themselves libertarians are merely moderately economically right wing and moderately socially left wing.
Re: What I think about network states
#136Earlier quoted context omitted.
You are painting all libertarians with a broad brush. Just as not all Democrats are communists and not all Republicans are Nazis, not all libertarians are anarcho-capitalists that want the state to be destroyed. It is a way to dismiss libertarians but it isn’t true. I’m a libertarian and I still want our constitutional republic in the US. I just advocate for market-based solutions vs. top-down paternalistic solutions…
Money is a source of power, maybe the biggest source, often strong enough to overpower democratic governments. Reducing the state just makes society more vulnerable to those who abuse the power that money has granted them. When you think about it, the answer isn't to make the state smaller, the answer should be to make big states unnecessary then they will shrink on their own. Almost every ideology has fallen into th…
> Reducing the state just makes society more vulnerable to those who abuse the power that money has granted them.
I don't understand... how other people don't understand this point.
When the powerful gather enough power to change the rules in their favour the system breaks.
Re: What I think about network states
#137Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Paper" people need to understand one thing: the real world does not give a shit what your paper stack says. For your paper-based project to have any effect on the real world, you need some physical, trusted party to reconcile the state of the paper with the state of the real world... at which point you may just let the trusted party rely on a good old stone tablet.
> "Paper" people need to understand one thing: the real world does not give a shit what your paper stack says. For your paper-based project to have any effect on the real world, you need some physical, trusted party to reconcile the state of the paper with the state of the real world... This but unironically.
[deleted]
Re: What I think about network states
#138Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Paper" people need to understand one thing: the real world does not give a shit what your paper stack says. For your paper-based project to have any effect on the real world, you need some physical, trusted party to reconcile the state of the paper with the state of the real world... at which point you may just let the trusted party rely on a good old stone tablet.
> "Paper" people need to understand one thing: the real world does not give a shit what your paper stack says. For your paper-based project to have any effect on the real world, you need some physical, trusted party to reconcile the state of the paper with the state of the real world... This but unironically.
The sooner we reach a steady state of pro-crypto and anti-crypto people the sooner we can move on with our lives.
Re: What I think about network states
#139Earlier quoted context omitted.
You are painting all libertarians with a broad brush. Just as not all Democrats are communists and not all Republicans are Nazis, not all libertarians are anarcho-capitalists that want the state to be destroyed. It is a way to dismiss libertarians but it isn’t true. I’m a libertarian and I still want our constitutional republic in the US. I just advocate for market-based solutions vs. top-down paternalistic solutions…
Money is a source of power, maybe the biggest source, often strong enough to overpower democratic governments. Reducing the state just makes society more vulnerable to those who abuse the power that money has granted them. When you think about it, the answer isn't to make the state smaller, the answer should be to make big states unnecessary then they will shrink on their own. Almost every ideology has fallen into th…
Philosophically I believe the state is the much bigger threat than the wealthy.
The wealthy made their money on their own. The state is lead by power-crazed mad men who earn their money by taking it from others.
I prefer the wealthy to the crazed.
Re: What I think about network states
#140Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, I'm painting historical secessionist libertarian movements as secessionist libertarian movements. The abolition and replacement of the state. Reformist libertarians are categorically excluded from the context of my criticism.
Ok, but the point here is that "reformist libertarians" are the much larger group. The vast majority of people who call themselves libertarians are merely moderately economically right wing and moderately socially left wing.
That has no bearing on the original proposal vitalik is responding to being tinged with the nation-building folly of seccessionists.