Quote from: disconnectme on Today at 05:36:26 AM

This is a good idea in theory but in practice there are several loopholes in this, firstly the Government can cease your assets if they feel you are becoming a threat to them, just look at what USA did to Russian assets and other countries they feel are unfriendly to them,

What assets do you see then US government seizing in this globally decentralized network? One sites hardware?
Will the government invade Africa too?

quote author=disconnectme link=topic=5454962.msg62356237#msg62356237 date=1685943386]

these governance voting can be gamed, by the developers, investors etc, developer can decide to go rogue and take away these assets. I just feel the risk is higher than the rewards.
[/quote]

The only attack vector against what I've built has "mirror properties of nakamoto consensus"
I'm willing to have the integrity battle tested.

Quote from: bettercrypto on Today at 06:17:29 AM

their motive is different and it is to control it like they control Fiat.

This isn't really something you have to get permission for unless they wanted to invoke violence after realizing what the physical setup of this system is capable of . But by the time they realize that, it's a global network and they wouldn't put a dent in the system.

I understand the skepticism about the fairness of the governance asset and that's why my first usecase is going to be using the protocol as a "dirty oracle" for a betting platform.
That way people can get a sense of the protocol's physicality first.