Though I do not know if I come down on the same side as you on this issue, I greatly appreciate that you're beginning the conversation thoughtfully. This is where we need to be having one of the few deep conversations in order to know how to move forward.
I have been writing less myself because I constantly bump up against the question of "Who/what are we facing off against?", "How is the war taking place, fundamentally?", and "Do we make improvements by playing their game, or improving our game in defending status quo systems?"
Not easy questions to answer, but crucially important.
Our systems are fully corrupted. We need to build new systems. And a decentralized transparent network state built the right way by and for the people could really be a helpful tool.
Mathew did a great job pointing out the dangers of centralized systems. Network states or real states or any system. Centralized will become corrupted.
But a decentralized leaderless network state has an entirely different awesome and hopeful possibility that is not being addressed in this discussion.
The easiest way might be to Imagine a network state charity run using decentralized collective intelligence systems:
"digitized anarcho-feudalism" brilliant phrase, brilliant article, Gabriel. I don't know anyone else seeing this as clearly and explaining it as succinctly as you do.
The temptation is for easy, or as Jello Biafra so famously titled the Dead Kennedys double live album, "Give me convenience or give me death".
It is hard to say "Fuck, no"! ... the 1st few times 🤔 but it becomes reflexive 😘 I just went into Taree (NSW, Australia) Centrelink/Gov Services to formally fill in a form to WITHDRAW, DENY, REFUSE an Australian Federal Government Digital I.D. They can insert it where their colostomy bag goes. I read the fine print; if say the Australian Taxation Office (ATO) sends one an email, via Digital Enslavement Convenience, and you do not answer it? You'll have a FINE old time 🤑🤑🤑. The CNTS can write me a letter.... I ain't giving my traitor Gov't permission to use an IOTA of MY DATA.
Your concerns above are not wrong. The tech Barons want network states like China has. Social credit score states. That is coming. If we sit here and do nothing we will be like the American Indians when the settlers came here. Behind on technology.
Balaji isn’t advocating for that. He is pointing out that Network States are coming, and that the people should make our own with our own rules. Right now. Before the digital prisons they The Corruptors want to build stop us.
I went to Network State camp in Texas this year. It reminded of the founders of this country were meeting 200 years ago. Not tech barons, but rather tech anarchists libertarians, and individualism free market thinkers.
Network states are coming. We can make them decentralized, transparent, and for good (like America was), or we can let the bad guys make them to control us.
We will not be able to stop them from coming.
Your fear is over CENTRALIZED network states. Which also should be your fear over centralized states in general.
Decentralized States (both network and nation) are good. We can make decentralized network states right now with our own rules. And no one can stop us.
If we don’t, the settlers will take out the Indians because of technology.
Network states are powerful tools. Just like collective intelligence is, electricity, nuclear, flight, gunpowder, language, and the internet are.
Our fight cannot stop technology, but we can decentralize it and use it for good.
Have you read the book The Starfish and the Spider?
You only understand half of the possibilities here. There are good possibilities too. We must decentralize and organize before it is too late.
We write about the difference between centralized and decentralized systems often and if you do not understand the last hand on the bat theory of systems, please try to so we can further this conversation in a more meaningful manner. Here is a link to an article where we flesh it out:
Elon is centralized and not transparent. Balaji advocates for decentralized and transparent.
We don’t have a choice. Network States are coming. We only have a choice over what kinds we make: centralized and corrupted or decentralized and working for the people.
I'm dangerously close to "transistors shouldn't be involved with elections".
But if they are done digitally, I don't think there's anything wrong with recording election RESULTS, so long as identities can't be traced back to votes (which is crucial imo).
To be fair, I haven't given too much thought to elections specifically.
"so long as identities can't be traced back to votes"
This is fairly easy to achieve from a technical standpoint using techniques such as hashing or single use public key/wallet address.
I have been toying with this idea together with a few other people whereby a vote is issued in the form of an NFT and there are two smart contracts:
1. VOTING smart contract which distributes the vote (NFT) as per the voter's wishes; and
2. COUNTING smart contract which does exactly what it says on the tin with the last step being recording the results as an immutable record on-chain and making it read only for all eternity.
We were thinking of using Solana for that given how cheap it is to issue NFTs at scale and the very low transaction cost but I am not married to any particular DLT.
The voting itself will be facilitated through a simple voting device (essentially a raspberry pi with a touchscreen) which will also act as the hardware wallet to store the vote (NFT).
Though I do not know if I come down on the same side as you on this issue, I greatly appreciate that you're beginning the conversation thoughtfully. This is where we need to be having one of the few deep conversations in order to know how to move forward.
I have been writing less myself because I constantly bump up against the question of "Who/what are we facing off against?", "How is the war taking place, fundamentally?", and "Do we make improvements by playing their game, or improving our game in defending status quo systems?"
Not easy questions to answer, but crucially important.
Our systems are fully corrupted. We need to build new systems. And a decentralized transparent network state built the right way by and for the people could really be a helpful tool.
Mathew did a great job pointing out the dangers of centralized systems. Network states or real states or any system. Centralized will become corrupted.
But a decentralized leaderless network state has an entirely different awesome and hopeful possibility that is not being addressed in this discussion.
The easiest way might be to Imagine a network state charity run using decentralized collective intelligence systems:
https://youtu.be/pwNId_vuwPM?si=3-vCZQphvGjituAr
"digitized anarcho-feudalism" brilliant phrase, brilliant article, Gabriel. I don't know anyone else seeing this as clearly and explaining it as succinctly as you do.
Thanks a ton! I hope you've been doing well!
So Punk Rock! Love it. Life was so much better back in the analogue days of my youth! Fight the power! Fight the powers that be!
The temptation is for easy, or as Jello Biafra so famously titled the Dead Kennedys double live album, "Give me convenience or give me death".
It is hard to say "Fuck, no"! ... the 1st few times 🤔 but it becomes reflexive 😘 I just went into Taree (NSW, Australia) Centrelink/Gov Services to formally fill in a form to WITHDRAW, DENY, REFUSE an Australian Federal Government Digital I.D. They can insert it where their colostomy bag goes. I read the fine print; if say the Australian Taxation Office (ATO) sends one an email, via Digital Enslavement Convenience, and you do not answer it? You'll have a FINE old time 🤑🤑🤑. The CNTS can write me a letter.... I ain't giving my traitor Gov't permission to use an IOTA of MY DATA.
I am not your data bitch.
I am not your data, bitch.
I am. Not yours. My data. Bitch.
Your concerns above are not wrong. The tech Barons want network states like China has. Social credit score states. That is coming. If we sit here and do nothing we will be like the American Indians when the settlers came here. Behind on technology.
Balaji isn’t advocating for that. He is pointing out that Network States are coming, and that the people should make our own with our own rules. Right now. Before the digital prisons they The Corruptors want to build stop us.
I went to Network State camp in Texas this year. It reminded of the founders of this country were meeting 200 years ago. Not tech barons, but rather tech anarchists libertarians, and individualism free market thinkers.
Network states are coming. We can make them decentralized, transparent, and for good (like America was), or we can let the bad guys make them to control us.
We will not be able to stop them from coming.
Your fear is over CENTRALIZED network states. Which also should be your fear over centralized states in general.
Decentralized States (both network and nation) are good. We can make decentralized network states right now with our own rules. And no one can stop us.
If we don’t, the settlers will take out the Indians because of technology.
Network states are powerful tools. Just like collective intelligence is, electricity, nuclear, flight, gunpowder, language, and the internet are.
Our fight cannot stop technology, but we can decentralize it and use it for good.
Have you read the book The Starfish and the Spider?
You only understand half of the possibilities here. There are good possibilities too. We must decentralize and organize before it is too late.
We write about the difference between centralized and decentralized systems often and if you do not understand the last hand on the bat theory of systems, please try to so we can further this conversation in a more meaningful manner. Here is a link to an article where we flesh it out:
https://open.substack.com/pub/joshketry/p/decentralize-everything-in-1776-america?r=7oa9d&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web&showWelcomeOnShare=false
Elon is centralized and not transparent. Balaji advocates for decentralized and transparent.
We don’t have a choice. Network States are coming. We only have a choice over what kinds we make: centralized and corrupted or decentralized and working for the people.
Best
Josh Ketry
What are your thoughts Gabriel about using Smart Contracts specifically and exclusively for ELECTIONS?
Wouldn't that be a better set up than the current one?
If not, can you think of another set up that is superior in protecting both the INTEGRITY and TRANSPARENCY of the electoral process?
I'm dangerously close to "transistors shouldn't be involved with elections".
But if they are done digitally, I don't think there's anything wrong with recording election RESULTS, so long as identities can't be traced back to votes (which is crucial imo).
To be fair, I haven't given too much thought to elections specifically.
Edit: inb4 voting is bad/evil anyways
"so long as identities can't be traced back to votes"
This is fairly easy to achieve from a technical standpoint using techniques such as hashing or single use public key/wallet address.
I have been toying with this idea together with a few other people whereby a vote is issued in the form of an NFT and there are two smart contracts:
1. VOTING smart contract which distributes the vote (NFT) as per the voter's wishes; and
2. COUNTING smart contract which does exactly what it says on the tin with the last step being recording the results as an immutable record on-chain and making it read only for all eternity.
We were thinking of using Solana for that given how cheap it is to issue NFTs at scale and the very low transaction cost but I am not married to any particular DLT.
The voting itself will be facilitated through a simple voting device (essentially a raspberry pi with a touchscreen) which will also act as the hardware wallet to store the vote (NFT).
Ethical Web Principles, as revised by Yet Another Tommy
should supersede the W3C version...
https://tomg2021.substack.com/p/ethical-web-principles-as-revised