Copyright is indefensible. This is because one can only have rights in something which is scarce. Physical property is scarce. Cryptographically-ensured scarcity of the tokens on Dash and Bitcoin and Monero make them scarce. But an infinitely copy-able arrangement of sound waves (a “song”), copy-able arrangement of light patterns (“image” or “film”), or copy-able utterances of the human voice (“literature”) do not qualify as property, and hence are entirely outside the domain of rights assignment.
objetivity in news
There is no such thing as objectivity in news. My very selection of topics reveals my personal biases. But I do keep the show about facts within my bias of what is and isn’t important, simply because I don’t believe my personal opinion is that interesting.
I really just think constant competition is the most important thing. It is the spirit of maximalism that leads to war itself, I suspect.
Banck and criptocurrencies
I am kind of unsure why a bank would ever want to touch a cryptocurrency – I think this puts me in the minority of crypto commentators, too.
It makes no sense to me whatsoever why an organization whose only products are fiat and the transfer of fiat would profit from spending money to develop their own blockchains.
In my opinion, a blockchain is only sustainable if it has at least one token – its base token – that acts as a reward for those running its infrastructure. If that network does valuable things, the token gains in value, hence making it like a currency.
So if banks were to design a successful, valuable blockchain, it would give rise to a token of value on that blockchain. But that token wouldn’t be the bank’s product – it wouldn’t be dollar or euro or yen – it would be Bankcoin or something. This would further diminish the value of their fiat product, would it not?
But who would buy Bankcoin? Who would even be allowed to buy Bankcoin? Who would accept it for goods or services?
It all seems like an exercise in absurdity.
Bitshares probably has the best extra-currency function in its decentralized exchange. Have you seen that thing? It’s a monster. An obvious replacement to the issuance of stock over traditional stock “markets.”
Ross and bible
while a permissionless network enables one of the best things humanity is capable of – that is, free trade – a permissioned network would empower one of the worst things humanity is capable of: the censorship of trade.
In a hat tip to Bible thumpers everywhere, this is a scenario not unlike the “mark of the beast,” in which people without the “right” credentials on the “right” network are excluded from “above board” trade. I wrote an article about this once, actually.
But bear in mind that I don’t think humanity will change much in light of more advanced technology. I believe we’ll be pretty much like we are now, but with more advanced tech. So that means there will likely be permissioned networks run by assholes and used by assholes, and there will be permissionless networks where free trade lives. And the assholes will keep trying to hunt down the free traders, just like they do today. Look no further than what happened to Ross Ulbricht.
Free traders might look into arming themselves more and more as time goes on, to defend themselves from these attacks.
If you would trust a human-written policy to police the very human who wrote it, you are liable to be duped your entire life. If you cannot judge whether the content presented by The Daily Decrypt is factual or note, regardless of some policy, again – you are bound to be duped again and again your entire life. That is all I have to say about that.
time and resources
, it definitely makes sense to dedicate one’s limited time and resources to the venue where it looks like they’ll produce the greatest results.
dahs, bitshares, maidsafe
I see Dash & Bitshares as showing the most potential for facilitating commerce in the short and medium-term future. Who knows what will crop up next, though? Or which existing cryptos will hardfork to match Dash’s & Bitshares’ governance and funding models?
And if not to facilitate commerce, no network calling itself a cryptocurrency is going to last long. Currency is only useful for commerce and nothing else. P2P networks are certainly useful for non-monetary interactions – take Bittorrent for example – but you certainly don’t need or want a blockchain for that.
It will be very interesting to see if/when MaidSafe enters full deployment, and if/when Safecoin is deployed within the network.
I read that in matriarchies, men get more sex than in any other type of social organization.
Just a thought.
Only you can decide the ‘shoulds’ in your life
I’m not actually against centralization in currency. I’m against violent monopolies on currency, the way I’d be against a violent monopoly on any good or service.