DeseretCoin and altcoin decentralization +/- centralization

When I learned about DACs, it opened my mind to some of the possibilities for this technology applied to rewards and organization/management approaches.  Then a few weeks ago at the Utah Bitcoin Meetup someone introduced DeseretCoin where the coin would be for local Utah businesses, so they would be distributed by some trusted local person (non-governmental, thankfully).  This just brought to light in my mind how any aspect of an altcoin network can be centralized by their creator.

So many possibilities!

A romp through contrary ideas of government's role

Woke up around 2 and couldn't sleep, so I came down and broke out some Ted talks.  This morning, what appealed to me were the government ones that showed a view contrary to mine:

• Mariana Mazzucato: Government -- investor, risk-taker, innovator

I'll grant that government funding and support has pushed advances in many fields.  However, the market-shaping that government does is inappropriate, driven mainly by bureaucratic and political interests; there are only so many good examples of innovation because government has been involved in every aspect of our lives!  The negatives and unintended consequences of so much intervention far outweigh the positives.  I believe we would be much better off without some of our current technology (including space and medicine and computers and atomic energy), growing at a pace that is supported by voluntary investment.

I'll agree, too, with the proposition that government-funded innovations and research should yield a return.  There is no excuse for privatization of resources that have been forcibly taken from taxpayers.  Of course, I recommend a slightly different take: the results of these investments should be made available to all, without restriction, rather than being employed privately by anyone, neither in a company boardroom nor in a government office nor in a military base.

• Michael Sandel: Why we shouldn't trust markets with our civic life

He's totally focused on the market of dollars and cents.  That's the market I trust the least.  So I guess I agree with him there!  But there are other markets that make appropriate foundations for our "civic life."

I was going to add this comment, but Steve already did... and I couldn't resist the prompt to expand on it:

• Steve Gottschalk

  Oct 21 2013: There is a prevalent assumption in this talk that the only kind of market there can be is a monetized one, which is a bit like saying age is the only way to measure a child's progress.

  • Nick Vahlkamp

    Nov 8 2013: your comment is completely opaque. could you elaborate? Markets mean money in this here USA.
    Are you referring to indulgences from the 10th century?

    • Trent Larson

      I believe he is talking about a broader meaning of market, eg. "one of the many varieties of systems... whereby parties engage in exchange" (Wikipedia). Any social exchange becomes a market, so we can talk about the market for singles to find a good time and even a mate; for students to find a fitting educational environment; for workers to find an appropriate job; for social change-makers to find fertile ground for their ideas; and even for children to find the place where they will be loved and accepted. All these are exchanges, and I think we'd agree that there are many more dimensions than raw money that influence these trades and implicit contracts.
      
      This is my complaint with Sandel's talk as well: he only discusses the market of money/currency... meaning, in the USA, the system of the Federal Reserve and the Federal Treasury (and the supporting laws regarding tracking, lobbying, etc). I believe that particular market is rather unjust... so I guess I'd agree with him on that one. But there are so many other motivators that drive people to exchange their time and attention and effort, and it would be great if we paid more attention to those markets... markets which will always be voluntary... markets which give genuine, lasting rewards to the participants as opposed to artifacts generated by organizations.
      
      And I'll go further: I trust the aggregate choices driven by our common humanity much more than I trust the military-industrial-financial complex that currently serves as our civic governance in the US. I believe that we can build civil systems based on these other markets, contracting with one another rather than with a police-enforced government. (Unfortunately, I also believe it'll take a few generations.)

I'd love to have a local museum! But I'd rather it be voluntary.

A friend of mine just wrote encouraging me to participate in an event that will help raise money and awareness of a local museum. I asked if the museum would be built or supported with taxpare funds. They wrote back:

"For your information, it is mandated in the Bountiful City code that we, yes the people, we have a right and responsibility to record, archive, preserve, and disseminate the history of our community. It is not only proper that we use tax payer money for this purpose, but it is our duty and our heritage to let our children and grandchildren know where we came from and how we got here. All across America we have buildings and lands bought and paid for by tax dollars that tells of the sacrifices of each generation in making America what it is today. If you don't believe this, then don't take your children to a National Park, museum, National Cemetery, or monument, because all of these were and are funded by tax dollars."

My response:

"You are absolutely right: we have many, many buildings, museums, monuments, and lands that are funded with taxpayer money, and I agree that these add to our heritage.

"However, I think even you must admit that our government (especially at the federal level) has frequently spent our money on these things inappropriately. For the sake of one goal (eg. "building heritage"), they benefit the few at the cost of many, and they use government force to do beneficial things which weakens the efforts of those who do good work on a voluntary basis. We can build a much stronger, more resilient community through projects that accomplish these things without force.

"For example, the South Davis Recreational Center and the Rogers Memorial Theater are good examples of burdens that our local Davis county government(s) have imposed or might impose on taxpayers and local businesses, affecting either the free use of their income or the freedom to compete fairly for people's attention.

"Feel free to keep me in the loop. I would love to be part of any voluntary initiative that improves our community like this!"

FYI: I promised to contribute to the next local, voluntary project my friend brings to my attention. Hold me to that. :-) I can't promise that to everyone, but I'll appreciate knowing any of these you send my way!

I don't buy the "Buy American" motto.

I just got a note from a relative with a long article about buying American-made products first, and finishing with: "buy as many articles as possible that are made right here in the USA!"

I disagree.

I do agree with buying things locally first... and not just because of the money. When your community works together and trades together, not only do you support your local resources, you increase the bonds of trust and cooperation, both of which can help you in the future.

However, once you get outside your "community" (maybe 5-20 miles?), you might as well be dealing with another country. Unless they're someone you plan to do business with again, you're just dealing with another anonymous supplier, so you're not building any meaningful relationship. Any why not support workers in other countries? I love how Americans have helped build up communities and infrastructures in other countries just because they need the help... and the very best way to get aid to our brothers and sisters worldwide is to buy their goods, rewarding their work. (Now, many of these products actually help corrupt governments instead of communities, so you've got to be smart about buying internationally as well. Dunno how. It's all hard.)

So, no, I don't buy the "Buy American" motto.

PS: Note that when you're a business you do create long-term relationships with people located further away, so a business "community" may be much broader. But it's still about the relationships.

This ad doesn't convince me that planned communities work.

This article includes a CDC video ad trying to make the case for planned communities. There's just one funny thing that's missing: the people. In any video snippet, there were never more than 4 people enjoying the benefits of these planned areas, and usually there were fewer. This is the whole problem with planned communities: what good are they if people don't use them because they prefer the benefits of purchasing houses in non-planned areas? (There's another article on the topic the next day, but it is made of analysis and references to analysis without any real examples of approaches that actually work.)

I believe there are ways to achieve what you're discussing, and I'd like to hear more, but you'll have to have a different approach than the typical urban planner mandates to get us there. There are bountiful studies and reasons why the traditional government approach doesn't work, so please overcome those obstacles in future attempts to convince me.

Let's act honorably!

Another editorial for you. Actually, this is for us all, including my children someday.

There are troubled times ahead. We're starting a period of economic hardship for almost everyone, and I'm convinced that there will also be massive amounts of political force brought to bear on every aspect of our lives.

What are we going to do as this happens? Since many will lose their livelihoods and some of our physical infrastructure will be affected, people are bound to go hungry; as a result, many will lose their tempers and abandon all sense of morality. We've seen this happen in certain neighborhoods at times of destruction, where lawlessness reigns for a time. Hopefully everyone I know would not stoop to that level.

But even if it doesn't get that bad, I hope we will all act honorably even when things get difficult. If the majority of us act selfishly (in the short-sighted sense of the word), then we will reap anarchy and/or vicious totalitarianism, with repercussions for decades. There is more hope if we don't push others unreasonably, trying to get everything we can; if we give as much as we can to help others around us; and if we demonstrate generosity and kindness in the face of indulgence and anger. This is how a good people would act, and this is the way we maximize our peace and liberty, both for ourselves and for our children.

And this is especially true if you, like me, want to radically change the way our government works; I believe our best happiness and prosperity depend on massively reducing the national government's encroachment into every aspect of our lives. If we were to succeed in any part of what we're attempting, it will cause hardship as society has to adapt to the realities of free, voluntary association and non-interference. We will have to demonstrate patience, generosity, and strength of character in order to keep on track and show others the way to an effective society.

I love the example of my Grandpa Gould in this regard; whether finances were good or bad, he understood the needs of the people in his business, and he would do what he could to work with them while still caring for his own needs (see end of paragraph).

Can we put aside our need for security and dependability, and truly care for each other? Can we value relationships enough that our acts of kindness will overwhelm the insecurity that others around us are feeling? I guess everyone's actions will speak for themselves. Whatever happens in the world around us, this is all that truly matters.

Love is all we need.

Cheers!

lost opportunities to build bridges

The Olympics started this week with a spectacular opening ceremony, and it's been cool to watch how those events bring humanity together. Right now I'm watching Music & The Spoken Word, and they have a choir and an instrumental ensemble of Chinese children; it's fantastic, because their voices, sounds, and faces are so remarkably pure. They're so good that my oldest daughter is cheering after their music.

This past week has been the Bountiful Summerfest, and I blogged about our experience. But we found while there that the Chinese delegation couldn't make it because of visa problems.

Thanks a lot, Feds!