On the one hand blockchain tech, in its many manifestations, is simply reinscribing existing power formations in new technical shapes that act as a foil for what's actually going on

But on the other hand, what could be more important than the social and technical protocols we use for coming to consensus about the things we do in the world?

Maybe I'm just falling under the spell of some of the discourse around this tech, but is anyone else finding themselves similarly conflicted?

@edsu One thing that’s always baffled me about this is that the underlying tech *is* neat — it’s a novel solution to the “Byzantine generals” problem, which is a longstanding “hard thing” in CompSci. It’s all just *terribly* suited to anything like a currency.

All the stuff around DAOs has a “maybe there’s something there?” Feel to it because it is actually about decisions and consensus. But everyone involved is so tied up in the rest of the crypto trash I’m happy to just ignore for now.


@a yes, exactly that -- I was listening to a podcast about some Internet of blockchain tech where the interviewee was talking about the BFT research, which is what lured me in arxiv.org/abs/1807.04938

@a like you said it is easier, and healthier, to just ignore it, and not expend the energy sifting through it all to find what is worthwhile. It's not clear to me that what is actually worthwhile will survive, but I guess it will?

Sign in to participate in the conversation

A Fediverse instance for people interested in cooperative and collective projects.