Berg, Davidson and Potts, the trio of libertarian/IPA economists have been busy writing boring articles to give them something to talk about at the international blockchain conferences they've been attending, and all the time it would appear that Xi Jinping has decided that yeah, blockchain is a great idea for government control. From Axios:
China had a short, whirlwind relationship with Bitcoin before unceremoniously dumping it last September. Now, President Xi Jinping calls the underlying blockchain technology a "breakthrough."
I've read stuff before about warnings that cryptocurrencies and blockchain may end up being quite attractive to authoritarian regimes: see this article in The Atlantic, which I may have posted about before:What's going on: Xi is differentiating between cryptocurrencies and blockchain. In his view, Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies could fuel financial risk and even jeopardize Communist Party authority. But in blockchain, he sees something he cherishes — even greater government control.How it works:
- Blockchain technology uses a network of computers to create a record of any string of events, from financial transactions to the origin of an oyster. Every time the thing being tracked changes hands, it's publicly recorded, so its legitimacy can be verified while eliminating human intermediaries.
- Cryptocurrencies — Bitcoin being the most prominent — are digital monies that live on the blockchain.
- Those distrustful of governments are drawn to blockchain for its anonymity. But if only a few can enter transactions, blockchain could increase government power.
In certain circles, the technology has been hailed for its potential to usher in a new era of services that are less reliant on intermediaries like businesses and nation-states. But its boosters often overlook that the opposite is equally possible: Blockchain could further consolidate the centralized power of corporations and governments instead.Even without Xi taking away anonymity as a feature of blockchain, some were warning that Bitcoin wasn't exactly the anonymity dream of libertarians after all.
Or am I being unfair - are Berg and all writing stuff about how to defeat authoritarian applications of blockchain? I don't really see how it is possible anyway - can't governments just legislate their control of entries onto key blockchain uses? If so, what is the whole point of Berg, Potts and Davidson's excitement?
4 comments:
Yes they were raving about it but not anymore because the markets are collapsing at an astonishing rate, so much that there it is now estimated there are 1 million surplus GPUs being held by Nvidia(GPUs being the main mining tool). A big driver of the early year growth appears to have been criminal money!
There is nothing anonymous about blockchain, the very point was that everyone could see the ledgers.
So much for Davidson et al being reliable economists. They got it completely wrong.
I thought you might find this amusing steve https://www.connorcourtpublishing.com.au/Economics-for-Infants_p_65.html
Yes, I was aware of Kate's effort in infant brainwashing, Jason. He has mentioned it himself at Catallaxy (which he uses to promote all of his books when they are published or updated.)
The subtext is wrong. It should read: Written FOR Steven Kates
Post a Comment