You may have misunderstood the part where I said I am between a minanarchist and a free market anarchist. What I mean is that we have to prove to what degree technology can mute or render impotent the power of the State. Pontification is not the same as implementation. Even though it sounds nice, the reality is that the State exists because humans disagree and fight. This is why for example Proof-of-Work was such a major technological breakthrough, because it enabled centralized trust of decentralized untrusted parties. Ditto the end-to-end principle pushes the trust out to the ends of the network, so the untrusted intermediaries are just dumb relays. Please see my prior post where I mentioned that some decentralized (insufficiently damped) systems don't converge and instead oscillate. It is not enough to just say "magic wand decentralized!". We have to actually build decentralized technologies that solve real problems. Also decentralized systems may have tradeoffs. For example, an entirely anonymous, decentralized economy means human trafficking may become less traceable. OTOH, government is the most egregious human trafficker, bribing our women (with
inequality employment laws, welfare,
subsidizing hypergamy, and divorce battering ram) to ignore men
forsaking child rearing (birth rates have collapsed in Western nations where government is > 50% of the economy) and conscripting our men to kill each other in silly wars.
http://blog.jim.com/economics/the-future-belongs-to-those-that-show-up/http://blog.jim.com/images/JapanFert4.pngTangible assets are very illiquid without a market maker, because they are not fungible like money is (e.g. not every person who has a fish wants to trade for a gold nugget). The centralized intermediary ruins the end-to-end principle. I have suffered greatly dealing with gold dealers. Tangible assets will not scale to a knowledge economy. Sorry.
The government can never entirely take down the internet. We hackers are too resourceful. Heck we can even 3D print guns out of plastic and build contraptions out of junk we find in a gar(b)age (can).
For one thing, we can retrofit WiFi routers to form mesh networks across communities, then connect those with HAM radio or what ever.
Let them try to shut it down, it will be just like when they shut down Napster, which will incentivize us to produce decentralized solutions.
We do need to re-design crypto-currency to adapt to multiple chains, if regions are temporary unable to communicate with each other.
There is a lot of work that needs to be done in crypto-currency that is not being done on Bitcoin.
We are starting to win. Even
Sergei and Larry of Google were hackers before they became famous.
Oh. Wait. We did invent them. Where do you suppose Sergei and Larry came from? Why do you suppose theyve been running Summer of Code and hiring a noticeable fraction of the most capable open-source developers on the planet? Well, heres a flare-lit clue: before those two guys were famous, they sent me fan mail once.
http://armstrongeconomics.com/2014/12/18/apparently-our-blog-is-now-suggested-by-google/http://i0.wp.com/armstrongeconomics.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/Google-Screen-Shot.jpg?resize=584%2C973P.S. I don't agree with blog.jim.com on every point. Note he is the first person who ever communicated with Satoshi in a public forum.
