You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

RE: Perfect Knowledge and the Evolution of Our Species

in #community • 4 years ago

I had a rather interesting discussion about a blockchain-governed community in the real world the other day and some intriguing issues came up.

  1. The transition to a DAO governed neighborhood/city/country requires active participation from the majority of the network. Our society is being robed for 2000 years without a viable solution. It will take immense effort to convince them into participating unless we find reasonable incentives.

  2. The idea of perfect knowledge resides in the fact that we hope everyone will comply with it. Many religious groups will have a thing or two to say about quantum mechanics today and something new that will be discovered 10 or 20 years from now. If you can't explain why one atom can be in two places at once, they have no reason to listen to you. To have a ledger of "normal things to do" we all need to agree on it. Hard to see that happening any time soon.

  3. Individuality would cease to exist with perfect knowledge. Once I grasped the concept of Bitcoin and blockchain in general it became crystal clear how some critical issues can be solved, but other problems emerge with these solutions. When we reach a point where we know everything we either all become exactly the same or we discover another unknown aspect of our existence and split our personalities based on these new discoveries.

I know that what we are striving for as a community is morally correct but the end result may not be what we are expecting. Would love to stand corrected on this one though. Also, great work on this piece. Loved it.

4 years ago in #community by
$0.21
  • Past Payouts $0.21
  • - Author $0.11
  • - Curators $0.11
1 vote
Reply 3
Sort:  
  • Trending
    • [-]
     4 years ago  

    Thanks for commenting.

    1. Yes, it will take quite an effort, but when the alternatives get bad enough (and they are getting bad with how much fiat is being printed now), they will put in the work.
    2. Not everyone, but some reasonable form of consensus such as 51% or 2/3rds+1. I don't think everyone needs to agree, just a level of agreement that creates benefits. We agree to drive in the right side of the road not just because we'll get a ticket if we don't, but because that level of cooperation benefits us all.
    3. I don't think so, and that is the magic trick. Our DNA is universally unique. Why is that? Could it be that we are designed (or evolved) to bring new information to the system so the absolute unbounded oneness can learn about itself? It a computer system, duplicate data is compressed and the duplicates are removed. We are refined, unique information. Human ambition and how we choose to use our time is not only scarce, but unique. Yes, new challenges and problems will arise, and that's the point! That's how we continue to evolve and grow!

    The end result will be something that keeps us evolving forward. :)

    [-]
     4 years ago  

    I have to agree with almost everything and I really enjoyed this discussion and read. One thing though.

    Not everyone, but some reasonable form of consensus such as 51% or 2/3rds+1

    This type of governance makes sense for problem-solving but when it comes to moral values and obligations, I'm very sure we will need at least 90%+ consensus on for that one to ever pass. It's that last hurdle that worries me.

    $0.00
      Reply
      [-]
       4 years ago  

      Attempts to enforce moral values often cause very severe immoral consequences. If we could get enough people to agree on some basics like the non-aggression principle, other things can be left as live and let live.