Yes, I acknowledge the particular characteristics are different, but the principles are the same.
It is in the same way any tool is.
If we never discovered the use of a hammer, it is true that the particular implications would be broad and societal.
The internet changed how we relate to each other, not “that we relate”
bitcoin is no different.
If human nature is immutable, anarchy seeks the impossible.
Where does bitcoin exist?
It’s information in a database, on a network.
It exists in objective reality.
It’s just as “physical” as gold.
It doesn’t exist in our mind.
Bitcoin impossibly exists as a framework for money without rulers.
maybe that’s the conflation causing all the trouble.
money is an objective tool brought into existence intersubjectively by people
and rulers of people are people
ruling money is different than ruling people
money without rulers is different than people without rulers, even though both domains touch at “people”
yes i agree bitcoin does remove the rulers from money the way we are talking about it here.
but it does not follow that bitcoin would remove rulers of people.
and yes, it changes the dynamics, and i would bet my life rulers will be >100x the quality of rulers we have today.
I think that is the place we go on different pages.
Do u agree ruling money and people are distinct?
thx for the back and forth, its been enjoyable and good mental exercise 🙏
Those rule frameworks seems different but Bitcoin and the underlying cryptography enable a form of law that is inviolable, we just now have the money to go along with it. That expands the scope of discussion a bit. So by proxy of bitcoin and cryptography we have a new paradigm for ruling people as well as money. So what are the theological implications?
Likewise, I enjoy all the feedback!
