It is interesting and crucial to me that you think blockchain technology can be used away from the clutches of the current central banking cabal. I guess the question is then, how do we know that we won't replace them with another lot who end up as technocratic despots too! If you use crypto currencies you are still using money and money can be a steering mechanism as well as a medium of exchange.
Who ever had control of the blockchain could steer behaviour and accumulate wealth, just like the current lot.
Why do we need so much technology and do we need money? Have you addressed these questions?
First, I would respond that no currency is effective if monopolized by a cartel. All conversations about the utility of currency must assume a free currency market. We are already seeing moves by the corporate cartel to centralize cryptocurrency markets. They will likely use regulation of the crypto exchanges to create barriers to entry for new currencies and make other moves to promote cryptocurrencies the cartel prefers.
It is my understanding that there is a big difference between "centralized" and "decentralized" cryptocurrencies. Centralized crypto gives access to all data collected on the chain to the producer of the currency, while decentralized crypto places the data across a "peer to peer" network that can only be accessed by the person who owns the coin. Clearly, the cartel prefers the former (such as Central Bank Digital Currencies), while the latter can be used to protect private information (Bitcoin, Monero). As things progress, libertarian crypto enthusiasts will probably have to leave the exchanges and engage in person-to-person transactions using their own digital wallet. This may have some utility in the parallel economy but yes, the cartel will use the same old tactics to ensure the success of the centralized blockchain assets that they will use for the type of data collection necessary to implement the Internet of things/bodies. In a free society, I do believe decentralized blockchain technology could help liberate currency markets, but the current cartel is actively preventing their implementation on a practical level.
I could write essays concerning both your other questions but to be brief, I don't think technological advancement is necessary for a happy and fulfilled life. Such advances, however, are out of our control as their development is more of a cultural evolution. Some people will love to tinker with tech, and others will use the tech. My main concern would be to ensure that all technological advancements are limited to prevent mechanisms of control and manipulation. Some types of liability mechanisms need to be in place to protect people from forms of personal trespass that infringe on their boundaries. Of course, this is an issue right now, where lack of liability controls allows the corporate/government complex to trespass essentially at a whim. Technological advancements are currently controlled by the cartel through patents and Intellectual Property, so unfortunately, most current tech is implemented to benefit the cartel, not liberate the people.
The money issue is similar. Currency is a very convenient tool and, while one could conceivably live without it, it is likely that many would take advantage of this tool in a free society. While I would not judge anyone who chose to form or participate in a voluntary collective that manufactured and distributed goods and services according to perceived needs, I have yet to discover a more efficient method to sustainably distribute goods and services than a free market currency system utilizing the law of supply and demand. The information contained within price action allows goods and services to flow where they are needed while accounting for the availability of necessary resources.
Thank you for your answer. Particularly as your article was written long ago and I have just read it!
I know little about technology and didn't even know what bitcoin was until recently. Not being involved in that world may help however as I ask the basic questions and in my mind the crucial one is who controls the internet and blockchain technology? If it is the military industrial complex, surely they will be controlling any community currencies that emerge, if they are on the blockchain?
CBDCs will be several layers back, behind the scenes, giving people the impression they are freely trading with each other, peer to peer. In reality, they will be playing the game where the rules are set by the elite, who are watching on the sidelines. And betting on the outcomes.
Even now, I understand that crypto assets can be traced using wallet addresses, transaction history and, of course, the blockchain. Most cryptocurrency is not anonymous. Bitcoin transactions are not anonymous, but pseudonymous, meaning you’re using a fake name (your wallet address).
Whether we need money or not is a big question. My little brain though can see that the push to a digital, technocratic world is including digital money. It doesn't keep you warm or fed unless the government and their bosses say it will. And they will.
It is interesting and crucial to me that you think blockchain technology can be used away from the clutches of the current central banking cabal. I guess the question is then, how do we know that we won't replace them with another lot who end up as technocratic despots too! If you use crypto currencies you are still using money and money can be a steering mechanism as well as a medium of exchange.
Who ever had control of the blockchain could steer behaviour and accumulate wealth, just like the current lot.
Why do we need so much technology and do we need money? Have you addressed these questions?
First, I would respond that no currency is effective if monopolized by a cartel. All conversations about the utility of currency must assume a free currency market. We are already seeing moves by the corporate cartel to centralize cryptocurrency markets. They will likely use regulation of the crypto exchanges to create barriers to entry for new currencies and make other moves to promote cryptocurrencies the cartel prefers.
It is my understanding that there is a big difference between "centralized" and "decentralized" cryptocurrencies. Centralized crypto gives access to all data collected on the chain to the producer of the currency, while decentralized crypto places the data across a "peer to peer" network that can only be accessed by the person who owns the coin. Clearly, the cartel prefers the former (such as Central Bank Digital Currencies), while the latter can be used to protect private information (Bitcoin, Monero). As things progress, libertarian crypto enthusiasts will probably have to leave the exchanges and engage in person-to-person transactions using their own digital wallet. This may have some utility in the parallel economy but yes, the cartel will use the same old tactics to ensure the success of the centralized blockchain assets that they will use for the type of data collection necessary to implement the Internet of things/bodies. In a free society, I do believe decentralized blockchain technology could help liberate currency markets, but the current cartel is actively preventing their implementation on a practical level.
I could write essays concerning both your other questions but to be brief, I don't think technological advancement is necessary for a happy and fulfilled life. Such advances, however, are out of our control as their development is more of a cultural evolution. Some people will love to tinker with tech, and others will use the tech. My main concern would be to ensure that all technological advancements are limited to prevent mechanisms of control and manipulation. Some types of liability mechanisms need to be in place to protect people from forms of personal trespass that infringe on their boundaries. Of course, this is an issue right now, where lack of liability controls allows the corporate/government complex to trespass essentially at a whim. Technological advancements are currently controlled by the cartel through patents and Intellectual Property, so unfortunately, most current tech is implemented to benefit the cartel, not liberate the people.
The money issue is similar. Currency is a very convenient tool and, while one could conceivably live without it, it is likely that many would take advantage of this tool in a free society. While I would not judge anyone who chose to form or participate in a voluntary collective that manufactured and distributed goods and services according to perceived needs, I have yet to discover a more efficient method to sustainably distribute goods and services than a free market currency system utilizing the law of supply and demand. The information contained within price action allows goods and services to flow where they are needed while accounting for the availability of necessary resources.
Thank you for your answer. Particularly as your article was written long ago and I have just read it!
I know little about technology and didn't even know what bitcoin was until recently. Not being involved in that world may help however as I ask the basic questions and in my mind the crucial one is who controls the internet and blockchain technology? If it is the military industrial complex, surely they will be controlling any community currencies that emerge, if they are on the blockchain?
CBDCs will be several layers back, behind the scenes, giving people the impression they are freely trading with each other, peer to peer. In reality, they will be playing the game where the rules are set by the elite, who are watching on the sidelines. And betting on the outcomes.
Even now, I understand that crypto assets can be traced using wallet addresses, transaction history and, of course, the blockchain. Most cryptocurrency is not anonymous. Bitcoin transactions are not anonymous, but pseudonymous, meaning you’re using a fake name (your wallet address).
Whether we need money or not is a big question. My little brain though can see that the push to a digital, technocratic world is including digital money. It doesn't keep you warm or fed unless the government and their bosses say it will. And they will.