What if Bitcoin is not just a value transfer program but; Direct Democracy?

[tmbp]

Bitcoin is a tool, how you use it is up to you, the Kalashnikov doesn't care whether you're shooting rebels, democrats, demagogues, communists or just totalitarian scum, this is the beauty of it.

[1714186867]

1714186867

[1714186867]

1714186867

[1714186867]

1714186867

[1714186867]

1714186867

[Realpra]

"Magnum opus" is greek and means "great work" often used to refer to someones life work.

I was not referring to a project or thread name, if you found one that is entirely incidental (and a little funny).

My "thing" had a name during my bachelors project, but the final program will be vastly different and does not exist yet. It may get a new name. You can search OrgOs if you want.


A constitution is possible and the idea, but there are limits: You can specify that the program should make a random citizen "the president" every 4 years, but if you specified that "everyone should be equal" or that that "guns should be free" the program would have no way to know if these things were being respected.


My program will not be an AI, but rather a very carefully thought out incentive structure from which order will grow - similar to Bitcoin; nothing in Bitcoin actually specifies that it is money, it just behaves in a way that makes humans behave in a certain way - I will do the same, but with government.


I fundamentally disagree with the anarchists on this forum. I believe in organization and leadership, but it has to be a good organization and a good leader. So far democracy has been the best shitty system of other shitty systems.

[BTCLuke]

I fundamentally disagree with the anarchists on this forum. I believe in organization and leadership...

Why can't leaders organize in an anarchy? Or are you confusing anarchy with a lack of leadership or structure?

it has to be a good organization and a good leader.

Perhaps you're not familliar with the self-evident truth that power corrupts?

[Realpra]

I fundamentally disagree with the anarchists on this forum. I believe in organization and leadership...

Why can't leaders organize in an anarchy? Or are you confusing anarchy with a lack of leadership or structure?

Name ONE system or organization in the world where the leader cannot threaten the subordinates one way or the other.

You could respond with GreenPeace here, but do you really think an entire country could be organized like that? No money just volunteer work?

Bosses threaten to fire you and politicians and generals can throw their subordinates in jail.

it has to be a good organization and a good leader.

Perhaps you're not familliar with the self-evident truth that power corrupts?

So does crack, yet some few manage to get off crack.

History is rife with examples of rare, but amazing leaders: Gandhi, Mandela, Lincoln...

You just have to find a method to select for that kind of leader.

[BTCLuke]

Name ONE system or organization in the world where the leader cannot threaten the subordinates one way or the other.

Even if there never was one, there's no proof that one can't exist in the future.

Luckily for me though, there were some:

Historical examples of anarchy without Chaos

You could respond with GreenPeace here, but do you really think an entire country could be organized like that? No money just volunteer work?

Your education about anarchy must be EXTREMELY stunted in order to think the words "volunteer work" belongs in your reply.

Anarchy is not about volunteering your time and efforts for some collective... It's about there being no collective, and you just doing stuff for you. (And your family of course.)

The golden rule applies, however.

I highly advise you to read up about anarchy since you're helping to bring it into the world with bitcoin.

Start here:

http://daviddfriedman.com/The_Machinery_of_Freedom_.pdf
and here:
http://www.freedomainradio.com/free/books/FDR_5_PDF_Practical_Anarchy_Audiobook.pdf

So does crack, yet some few manage to get off crack.

If being ruled by something like Crack is acceptable to you then I don't know what else there is to talk about here...

History is rife with examples of rare, but amazing leaders: Gandhi, Mandela, Lincoln...

Gandhi wasn't a politician, but a leader, and probably an anarchist.

Mandela was a politician, and was no angel.

And do I really need to say anything about the politician that committed more Democide than any other in the history of the USA?

Lincoln is EXACTLY why we should all embrace anarchy... Even when he's "freeing" some of his followers, they still aren't free to vote, they still have to be taxed, they still have to be suffering a thousand other hardships... And even that sad little effort took the lives of over a HALF A MILLION of his followers!

Someone here has some pretty low standards when it comes to picking lists of leaders...

[Lgetty17]

Bitcoin is anarchy. Beautiful sweet anarchy.

Wrong.

BITCOIN IS CAPITALISM.

Just like in the real world, those with power can change past events ( blocks)

[cho]

Gandhi wasn't a politician, but a leader, and probably an anarchist.

He was.
"The State represents violence in a concentrated and organized form. The individual has a soul, but as the State is a soulless machine, it can never be weaned from violence to which it owes its very existence."
"While apparently doing good by minimizing exploitation, [the State] does the greatest harm to mankind."

[Eich]

Bitcoin is anarchy. Beautiful sweet anarchy.

Wrong.

BITCOIN IS CAPITALISM.

Just like in the real world, those with power can change past events ( blocks)

Wouldn't you have to change the blockchain info simultaneously for every user ever? Go ahead and alter the record. my copy will serve as a backup for the entire blockchain.

edit:
And how is bitcoin capitalism? can you explain that?

[gollum]

The recent news about big brother spying on our communication shows how important peer-2-peer technology and encryption is for democracy, so we can communicate in different ways without being spied on.

The worst problem of a big brother society is not the spying itself, but the self-censoring of each individual.  
"I am watched, therefore:
I must censor my words when I talk in phone, chat at facebook, mail at gmail or talk on the street with my friends.
I must support the main stream political party so they dont consider me as the enemy of the big brother state.
I must think about who I communicate with, otherwise I will also be considered as part of a terrorist network."
Does this sound like an individual living in a liberal country, or someone living in the Soviet during the cold war?

We cannot have a democracy if we feel that we must censor our thougths, our communication and our actions!

It is not to late, we can restore internet freedom if many developers and entrepreneurs put ego away and decide to create services that focus on the user privacy rather than profitability.

[CompNsci]

I have to agree that self-censorship is the biggest problem with the surveillance state. And hopefully bitcoin and bit message, via the mechanisms discussed in this thread, will help in overcoming it.

[Zangelbert Bingledack]

Some big confusions in this thread:

• Governance needn't imply a government. Society can operate peacefully being governed by a structure of laws and norms without any central power structure creating or enforcing those laws.
• Democracy in the mainstream sense is not only literally "rule by the people" but a centralized form of that rule. Bitcoin and its potential uses allow for a true democracy ("rule" by the people, but not by any specific people; law that is the product of human action but not of human design) that is decentralized - basically anarcho-capitalism, though without any Rothbardian or Friedmanite ethical flavorings.

[jdbtracker]

I agree, governance is the voluntary acceptance by the people laws that they believe in and can agree to follow because they understand it. it is funny to me thinking that most contracts and laws are made in such a sloppy fashion or maybe on purpose? difficult to read and understand... this is not the way to go. how do you get people to follow something that is sneakily introducing a downright draconian law? no wonder people are disillusioned with democrazy when they are actively being tricked into passing laws that need to be enforced by force.

real laws are understood by the people and voluntarily accepted by them.