How many nights have you laid in bed and thought about the importance of Bitcoin governance? Countless, right. It’s not the sexiest thing in the world but it is worthy of thought. Especially when you think about the implications of other more broadly used blockchains in the future. When we start dumping all our data on a blockchain, who owns it? Who manages it? Who cares for it? This is serious shit.

What happens as we standardize blockchains and many individuals, companies, even governments are writing to them? Who do we entrust to maintain them?

My gut instinct is to keep this as far away from government as possible, but you know this has got their name written all over it. Can you imagine how bad Uncle Sam would want to have control of the blockchain that tracks all self driving vehicle data, or a blockchain that has all financial transactions for the USD crypto when they roll it out?

It seems inevitable, but you can still be against it. Like so many things, this will be politicized.

So here’s the tweet that got me thinking about it…

It’s a good read, if your remotely into “governance”. I really like how Vlad outlined his views very clearly. For someone thinking about governance for the first time, it was refreshing to read about someones opinions and their personal beliefs. You spend enough time in Crypto Twitter and scroll pass enough buzzwords that you would think you these ideas just absorb into your brain. They don’t. It’s clear Vlad has thought about this long and hard, but also it sounds like he’s a bit jaded. In his tweets he is coming off like “no one made me do this…. I wrote this on my own free will.”

For those of you scared to click through, here’s his main points:

I intend to avoid autonomous blockchains
I intend to avoid capture of blockchain governance
I intend to avoid internet censorship as blockchain governance

Also this:

… I can tell you what is clear to me: I intend to have blockchains serve as global, public utilities with no owners, and I intend for them to be governed ethically and in a way that puts the interests of the public before the interests of other participants in blockchain governance.

As of today, I like this train of thought. I haven’t heard an alternative POV that makes more sense so I am here. It sounds a bit collectivist when you start saying things like putting the interest of the public above others, but in this case it might make sense.

My only counterargument to any of this has to do with the reward to those who are supplying service to serve up the blockchain. If you intend on governments to supply compute to power the blockchain, then they will want to seize control or at least have a say in governance. The same goes for private sector and even individuals. But then again, putting blockchain servers interest above the public is a strong statement. Surely there can be a middle ground where the servers are rewarded for their service.

That’s about it for tonight.

I expect zero clicks through because there are 149 links. That’s 2 weeks of articles saved. I didn’t even go through them to remove dupes.

Have a great weekend.



Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.