When I wrote the title of a sub-section below, it means I wrote a little about it. So as you can see, I did not write anything about the structure itself.
These are just thoughts I have gathered over time and I am not an expert, I am engineer / experimental physicist by profession, and I find the following fascinating.
A Decentralized Global Government (DGGov)
The ultimate use case of a cryptocurrency network
1. Introduction
2. Preliminary concepts
The decentralization spectrum
Energetic basics, bitcoin, and money
POW and the handicap principle
…
3. More advanced concepts
Fractional and delegated governance
Decision making by conditional prediction markets
Proof of humanity will fail, what's the solution?
The currency
…
2. DGGov structure
...
A Decentralized Global Government (DGGov)
The ultimate use case of a cryptocurrency network
The ultimate use case of a cryptocurrency network
Introduction
Crypto currencies (CCs) can be decentralized, trustless, permissionless, autonomous, etc... but none of these terms actually represent the fundamental objective of true CCs. This objective is more fairness. Bitcoin allows people to own their money. Bitcoin is obviously not the fairest system imaginable, especially due to the way it has been distributed, but it is much fairer than the current system where the creators of money have the custody of it and take a cut of it, on the back of the end user, through inflation notably. Similarly, DeFI allows people to cut the middle man in their finances and rely on open source code and rules, and community driven governance. In both these examples, the transparency of the network rules, that apply to strictly everyone, means fairness, and is the ultimate goal of cryptos. Decentralization, permissionless or trutlessness are key concepts, but (to a large extent) they are simply a means to fairness.
More fairness is only made possible by higher efficiency. The Hammurabi code was rough and arguably unfair compared to current standards, but given the information available on the actors and the technology of the time, it was a step up in fairness, partly thanks to the new tech of the time, wrtiting. And today technologies’ demonstrated by CCs also would allow a significant step up in fairness. Higher efficiency of a system does not by itself lead to more fairness and it is our job to make it so. 20th century societies are relatively fair compared to most of humanity's post-agrigultural societies, however, they are becoming obsolete as far as fairness and efficiency are concerned, in the light of the current tech that are available.
Since their inception in 2009, CCs have been siloed from the real world economy, despite being a revolution. I argue that Ccs will never really change the world in their current state. Not because we are waiting for the next technical blockchain scalability solution or because the current regulatory environment is not ideal, or because people do not understand the technology, but for the more profound reason that CCs are antithetic to traditional governments, which currently are in control of the vast majority of power and resources. Govts have no interest in giving credit or power to entities that are outside of their control, and CCs “should” have no intentions, given their core values, in getting controlled by govts. Now, how come the situation seems to be mitigated? Many might argue, especially given the recent political developments, that CCs are getting mainstream and bitcoin is going to be the world's store of value. This is an illusion. The only reason why govts let CCs live is because they cannot discard an efficient new tech and are struggling to figure what to do with it, but ultimately, they ought to appropriate it. As for CCs, the reason why some actors (although these are not the “true” CCs in that case) accept to be somewhat regulated by govts, is because they need to survive, or are just trying to make businesses. However, fundamentally, CCs and 20th Govts are antithetic, and one only can be there at once. Additionally, CCs are, so far, a parallel digital economy, running on the back of people who produce real world goods, like food, clothes and houses, because lucky crypto millionaires are resourceful enough not to pay much taxes to the real society. To solve this all, CCs must take over the core of society, that is: Politics, Welfare and Ethics (POWETHICs), and everything CCs have shown about currencies, finance and more, it can do to public services and political governance on a unified global scale, to make the world much fairer and more efficient.
This Decentralized Global Government (DGGov), would be permissionless (anyone can join and participate), transparent (open source code and public wallets for official entities), and by the nature of being unique and global, it would be seamless and highly efficient. This would be the real achievement of CCs. POWETHICs have attracted much less interest than the applications we have today, because its is a very ambitious endeavor that holds deep responsibilities, and also it is less sexy to work on POWETHICs (that one should not make any money from) compared to enabling new assets and businesses that potentially make lots of money.
CCs’ future is not uncertain. It is certainly a failure, if it does not take the reins, structurally, of our global civilization. There is no way that the current governments and poloticians, however smart, hardworking and good-willed they are, can handle the future world governancance in a fair and efficient manner. However, this does not require a conflict. Bitcoin did not come into the world with a war declaration but with a sensible whitepaper and deep ideals that appeal to humanity. In this essay, I will try to find what should be the fundamental properties and structure of a DGGov.
--- The incenption of such a network would ideally be similar to that of bitcoin, unknown, unmarketed, but as advantages appear, the network would be used and grow ---