Can you define “sovereign” for us, in terms of how you personally are using the word?
Bitcoin discussion and news
- Thread starter camouflage
- Start date
But if the government takes a sensible approach to crypto regulation, tokenising the pound and issuing CBDCs then a large part of the population won't bank and that of course will cause liquidity problems for the banks, causing one bank after the other to collapse.
Re Visa and contactless payments. While that's not crypto, Visa is pro crypto and has trialled using the Ethereum network as a settlement layer.
However the Biden administration is hostile to cryptos for no good reason.
The crypto community is very honest about any shortcomings in the crypto. We have to be. You can't improve something if you aren't critical of it.
But the Biden administration is unreasonably hostile to crypto and it's got a lot to do with how much the banks have been donating to them.
FTX doesn't count in the poltiical donation stakes - they donated stolen money that the Democrats probably knew was dirty.
Still, it's good to see you're not hostile to regulations and laws that don't stifle crypto innovation here in the UK.
moochedit
I'm not feeding seagulls
Something about maritine law and that they can't give you a parking ticket unless you consent to it
The People
The Crown
The Government
The people are top. The people are sovereign as a collective. not as individuals.
The people as a collectvie are the ultimate authority.
It's a concept that is familiar in the cryptoverse, because the people are refereed to as "layer 0".
I have no time for "Sovereign Citizens".Something about maritine law and that they can't give you a parking ticket unless you consent to it
NoXion
Craicy the Squirrel
Based on the actual proposals made so far by the Bank of England, I don't think many people will be interested in digital pounds. Why would they be? You can already stash physical cash, and it's my understanding most people already don't do that. Besides, banks offer various services other than a safe place to keep your money, and introducing digital pounds would do nothing to stop the banks continuing to offer their services they currently do. Indeed, they would most likely be able to offer new services thanks to the introduction of the digital pound. So I doubt your prediction that people would abandon banks in favour doing the digital equivalent of stuffing their mattresses with notes. That's the kind of shit done by people who hoard old newspapers or jars of their bodily secretions. The reasons offered by the BoE in the paper are all very vague and wishy-washy, and as I was reading the paper one of the things I kept asking myself throughout was "yes, but why?". The only thing that really stood out to me as being novel was the notion of a digital currency directly issued by the central bank, but the paper is remarkably light on details concerning how this functionality would be applied on a practical basis.
I've certainly not been offered any good reasons to be either scared or excited by such a development. Neither crypto nor CBDCs are going to address any problems that I actually give a shit about, like inflation eating away at my disposable income.
I'll stick with normal Visa payments, I'm not interested in getting my personal finances mixed up in crypto bullshit.
As for my hostility towards regulations, the devil as always is in the details.
That hasn’t defined it. You’ve just used it in a sentence, is all. What does being “top” mean, and in what way is this “top” status meaningfully enacted?
You tell me when you're involved in "crypto bullshit".
Scenario : You walk into a store and spend £20 using your VISA card. Visa sends the merchant processor £20.00 in tokenised GBP on Ethereum (or Visa's L2 that sits on top of Ethereum). The merchant processor then sends the merchant £20.00 using Visas L2 (Which sits on top of Ethereum).
In that scenario, as far as your concerned, it's a normal bank account. But behind the scenes, that's what happening, because it's much more reliable and cheaper. And yes, it's private. Your transaction isn't viewable by the public, only the end of day settlements between the companies are.
If GBP is used more, then it's value goes up around the world. One way to get it used more is to tokenise it and issue it on blockchains. You may not see a use for that, but there are loads of people out there who do.
It's not all about self custody with crypto. The major blockchain networks such as bitcoin and ethereum are always up, even in times of market volatility.
Banks would collapse if people and companies have the option of alternative custody and yields. I don't mean that in a nasty way, because many ex-bankers will thrive in a post banking world.
It doesn't have to be meaningfully enacted in the legal sense.
If you believe that the people should have things imposed upon them against their will because the King and his government "knows better", without any kind of mandate, whereby the King and his government knows full true well that it's something the people dont' want, then you believe the people aren't sovereign.
The people are sovereign because you authoratarians don't have enough guns, bullets and people willing the slaughter them all when they march into London with pitchforks and piano wire.
NoXion
Craicy the Squirrel
If it's functionally indistinguishable from how things work now, then it's no revolution, is it? Some background processes would change, but capitalism would continue to chug along and operate much as it always has, and nobody but a tiny clique of nerds would give a shit. Yawn.
mojo pixy
...שלא נמצא בשמאל
How can people be 'top' and 'layer zero'? And how dehumanising is the term 'layer zero' anyway! 'the people as a collective' is utterly meaningless and in fact counter-productive, unless it's framed within some kind of political structure. Without that, it's a short road from 'everyone gets a say' to dog eat dog. Who gets how much of a say, how and on what matters? Who frames key decisions, by whom and how are those decisions implemented? How can agreed outcomes be guaranteed IRL? How is it all funded, and by the way can i see a doctor even if I don't have the fee to pay with? The human questions that blockchain tech doesn't even touch, are endless. You go on about human sovereignty, blockchain seems aimed at sidelining human agency entirely from as many social processes as possible, which is fucking absurd tbh.
In my understanding, “sovereign” means “possessing supreme power”. As such, saying “The people are sovereign” is not just some wishy-washy ideology, it’s a specific statement about power relations. It’s saying that the ability to act on the actions of others vests supremely in the polis. But firstly, that isn’t actually true as things stand. There is little mechanism in truth by which the polis can currently effect meaningful change. And secondly, there is nothing about a crypto money system that would change this. Things would still be owned by their current owners, the ability to affect the lives of others would be unchanged.
Storm Fox
Trying the find the next noun to verb
I'm going to assume that Layer 0 is a corruption and misunderstanding of the OSI 7 Layer model and with even a basic glance people should be Layer 8 or higher as going down each layer is one further abstraction from human understanding.
What is OSI Model | 7 Layers Explained | Imperva
I just googled it. I was wrong above; it's not a misunderstanding of the 7 Layer model, just a complete bastardisation.
What Is Layer 0 in Blockchain? | Binance Academy
and also somewhat at odds with StakerOne's definition.
You assumed wrong. Sorry you've wasted your time.
I can't guarantee that crypto would change it, but it certainly has a good chance of doing so and a better chance of doing so than anything else.
A local community could achieve a lot with DAOs.
Storm Fox
Trying the find the next noun to verb
Well if you had bothered to provide a correct and full definition of layer 0, I wouldn't have to make an assumption. But I'd expect nothing less and thankfully I actually bothered to find out for myself find and that your vague definition is incorrect anyway at least according to Binance.
The political (Governance) structure is setup within the DAOs, including the rules, from grass roots level upwards.
A good place to start would be to run a housing association by way of DAO for a local ward. Every resident would be a member of it. Votes would be taken, including for who would be picked to stand as councillor in a local government election.
If the various DAOs that run each ward have picked up enough confidence, their elected representives would get the local authority to recognize the DAOs and for the local authority to create it's own DAOs that interact with the original ones, with people having more of a say in the day to day running of the local authority ... one day for the local authority itself to be a DAO.
This would have to be done in a way that doesn't contravene current electoral law, but I believe it can be.
This is what I mean by the people being sovereign. If the people elect councillors that want DAOs, then local authority officials should respect that and help advance the technology and participate in the experiement in good faith.
mojo pixy
...שלא נמצא בשמאל
I take it you think this is a serious response to my post that you quoted?
Saying what “should” happen is not sovereign power. Sovereign power doesn’t have to worry about what “should” happen. That’s the very definition of sovereign. It makes things happen because nobody else has a choice in the matter.
This is just some kind of teenage dream, not hard political analysis. It’s just “The ones with power should let the rest of us do what we want”. The point is that there are real material structures that already exist, and this creates power relations that already act on the world. Those who own those material structures aren’t just going to hand over that power on the grounds that you want to use a different money system. Even if your new money system takes off, they have the structural power to take control of it, because that’s what money is.
I cannot always predict how because every industry and service is different, along with the dynamics of AI to contend with.
The ownership of the means of production is varied and in some cases complex.
A private company is different than a publically listed one.
Let's also not forgot that the issue of climate change is being hijacked to create regulations that protects those who are rich.
CBDCs will help track carbon credits with all sorts of goofy rules to lock in those who want to support the status quo and exclude those who don't, to their detriment. Crypto fights all of that.
DAOs can be used to create workers cooperatives, with whatever rules the workers see fit.
Heck there can even be hybrid DAOs that keeps the majority of ownership with the workers, but still allows the public to buy a stake of that interest.
Smart contracts and DAPPs will eventually disrupt the likes of Uber and AirB&B - any of those services that doesn't really own the product it's selling.
But if that sovereign power is being eroded, it's going to eventually be no longer sovereign by your definiation.
CBDCs will make more people do more stuff for the government.
Crypto will make less people do less stuff for the government.
If the people of Pimlico impliment DAOs, there's not a damn thing your all powerful "sovereign" can do about it.
Storm Fox
Trying the find the next noun to verb
Why does this need to be a DAO? We have elections and voting from home on various matters now. What advantage does doing on a blockchain give?
In this case, the DAO would only be an indicative vote. It will still need people to act on the result of the vote. Just like regular voting, so it's just another layer of complication that can go wrong and is not needed.
Storm Fox
Trying the find the next noun to verb
Not according to Binance
Easy.
You can't practically replace layer 0.
Layer -1 doesn't make any sense.
The people will always be layer 0.
Nothing is "needed" if you're happy with the status quo.
With DAOs:
Far greater transparency and it's impossible for anyone to nick any sizeable amount of money.
All of the local authority's assets can be audited in a split second in real time.
It's far easier for people to be able to prove entitlement to services, while protecting their privacy is protected - there's nothing to hack.
Even if it were to go wrong, it's easy to where it went wrong, where anyone went wrong - without any coverups.
Storm Fox
Trying the find the next noun to verb
Or
What is a Layer 0 Blockchain? | Horizen Academy
Layer 0 networks solve three critical problems for web3 development and adoption - scalability, flexibility and interoperability. Learn more in this article
www.horizen.io
or
Layer 0 Definition | CoinMarketCap
Layer 0 is a network framework running beneath the blockchain. It is made up of protocols, connections, hardware, miners, and more that forms the foundation of the blockchain ecosystem.
FOUND IT!!!!
It 's some marketing BS website
Layer 0
www.layer0.ventures
Whose sovereign power? Nobody has sovereign power in neoliberal societies. You’re the one claiming it for “The people” but without actually defining what that means. I’m not claiming it for anyone or anything. I’m with Foucault on this one — power is distributed across the functions of society in a pastoral form.
You know that you’re just saying stuff, right? This isn’t analysis. It’s just an assertion.
How are the people of Pimlico actually managing this implementation against the interests and agreement of those who own the material structures by which things are actually enacted? What is the process by which the transfer of power is enforced?
What you’re staying is basically, “if somebody gives me a million pounds then I’ll be a millionaire”. Well yes, but so what?
It is a serious response.
It's like asking me to explain how smartphones are a benefit before they're invented.
My reply would have been "I don't know, because I know what apps developers are going to write!"
Similar threads
