RE: Crypto-Anarchism: Dreamer's Utopia or New Order of the Future (English/Turkish)
Fascinating stuff. Upvoted and resteemed. I absolutely agree with you about the potential for blockchain based technologies, including initiatives like Blockstack and so forth, to tackle the inequities we have in both the distribution of wealth and equal, open access to information. I also totally agree that ideologies which offer great promise, such as communism, are prone to corruption. Perhaps that is indicative of our broader human nature, but it is most certainly indicative of the nature of the Kleptocrats ruling us currently.
For this reason, I think we are in a time of great danger. While blockchain technology provides the potential for truly decentralised networks; and libertarianism, voluntarism and communitarianism (in its various forms) offer the potential for a better, decentralised, stateless society, both the technology, and the these hopeful ideologies can be and, I believe, will be corrupted.
We have already seen China’s impact upon various cryptocurrencies, with their value seemingly inextricably linked to the fate of the Chinese exchanges. Currently china appears to be more favourable to the exchanges but that, I suggest, is because they are racing towards the roll out of a CryptoYuan. They are already talking about regulated blockchain technology. Which, of course, is the antithesis of blockchain technology.
Similarly we have heard talk of the FedCoin, a regulated, allegedly blockchain based cryptocurrency as the U.S faces up to the reality that the petrodollars days are numbered. Again we see the use of the term blockchain as an oxymoron.
This is where I fear the technology will take us in the next few years. Far from providing a gateway to decentralised crypto-anarchism it will be used to rid the planet of cash and ensure the total control of everything. This won’t represent truly decentralised blockchain based networks but the banks and the corporations don’t want them to exist and care little about the widespread misuse of the term. If they can’t destroy them with investor power, corralling the exchanges, they will do it with legislation and regulation.
Many here may hope, as I do, that it won’t matter because blockchain technology offers the potential for us to sidestep the regulated, central bank controlled, quasi cryptocurrencies that will be offered to and then forced upon the global population. Why should we care? We don’t need to use their crypto’s.
Sadly you only need a minimal grasp of history to understand that the widespread adoption of decentralised, genuine blockchain based technologies, will not be allowed to flourish. The corporate oligarchy that rules this planet will criminalise their use. It is inevitable I feel.
Yes, this technology can offer us all great hope for the future but, just as they corrupted Soviet communism, the banking cabal that owns everything (all money is a debt owed to them) will not allow that to happen.
We cannot expect blockchain decentralision to be the panacea for the creation of the stateless world many of us would like to see. We have no choice other than to tackle the issue of global, corporate tyranny first. Unless we do, the legal introduction of corrupted cryptocurrencies will give the Kleptocracy total dominion.
took time to read this bulky comment...you made a whole lot of points. Always good to view from another angle. Cryptocurrency has great potentials and faces big challenges too. With the inception of new cryptocurrencies we will get to a time where Nations and big firms will seize the opportunity and create their own cryptocurrencies, so like FIAT currencies, we will have crypto versions for a particular place and transactions made within there will be done only with their cryptos...and that will take us back to exchange, value differencies etc obtainable with FIAT cash.
And is it true that certain people affect the price of cryptos apart from the normal demand and supply principles? I hope its not true.
Sorry about the length of the comment. I'm relatively new to Steemit. Is it bad etiquette? Yes it is true. If you have a limited supply (as Bitcoin does) then investment power can only effect value (demand) as supply is fixed. Let's say George Soros decides to buy 100,000 BTC (he could afford it) then the value (price) will skyrocket. Therefore the opposite must also be true. If he sells en masse the only thing that can give is the value (price.) Supply and demand still applies but supply is fixed. What do you reckon?
No, no, no. I don't think its bad etiquette provided you contribute and share helpful information.
source
Supply of BTC is constant (fixed) as you said, this is because the remaining amounts to be mined and released into circulation is small compared to the time it will take for them to be mined and released.
( so supply has liitle effect on the price) rather the demand which is a function of increased usage and wider adoption controls it's price.
The question in my first comment meant "can someone, say 'Satoshi', wake up one day and decide that the price should go up irrespective of demand?"
Is the blockchain truly and completely encrypted for everyone including the originators and key investors?
This question is a concern for most people still reluctant to join the cryptocurrency train.
yup , state currencies aren't just going to roll over and dies , we can already see many countries stifling it's citizen's participation in crypto revolution.
When automation finally conquers most of the work force, mostly concerning production, what do you think people will do then? Will there be enough for people to do for money that a population, such as ours, could be sustained until more evolved ideas are implemented toward social concern? Or are people going to just start dropping like diseased cattle from poverty? Think in terms of like, a "third world country" or less. I am open to your thoughts and nice article! It made me aware that I need to be more aware of crypto-currencies and their trends.
Automation will conquer most of the workforce, especially in the production line. However, i dont think man will lack what to do to raise money. We adapt everyday to the evolving nature of work as a whole. Just like in the now, in the 'then' those who fail to adapt to the new work trends will drop like diseased cattle from poverty.
But, the future will definitely be brighter in terms of poverty reduction. Resources will be shared "almost" equally and the gap between rich and poor will be reduced too.
crypto-currency tech may be very helpful then.
I want to take a focus on this phrase you used, "will drop like diseased cattle from poverty". it is almost if you speak as if that is your wish? Is this true? Do you realize it doesn't have to be that way at all? That poverty itself ONLY exists because we use money, or other similar forms of exchange? On a much more positive note, I do like how you mention that the gap between rich and poor would eventually be lessened, but, why do that when we can eliminate the problem as a whole? I can explain how that can be if you wish. There is no real need to use money (or similar things) if we make our goal to create abundance. Money only exists because resource "scarcity" exists, right? Thanks for commenting. <3
@abbernard Thanks for earlier reply and putting me straight on the value function of a fixed supply currency. I fully accept what you mean about the value soaring if uptake rises rapidly (for example if Amazon starts accepting Bitcoin.) I also agree that the potential exists that we will adapt to the new reality when the estimated 47% of jobs in the workplace disappear over the next decade. I think blockchain, decentralised ledgers could play a part in this. However most of these will be white rather than blue collar. However, sadly, I don't share your optimism about reduced inequality or reduced poverty. I believe we will be led towards a Universal Income Guarantee in the absence of anything approaching full employment. I believe unemployment will be running at about 40%. Here in the UK we have seen its pilot in the form of Universal Credit. This has exacerbated poverty and inequality with an increasing use in food banks, more evictions, rising homelessness worse health outcomes and, for the first time in modern history, rising death rates. What we will get is more of the same I'm afraid.