Souveränisten gegen Globalisten: Warum Blockchains dauerhaftes Versprechen Souveränität ist
Sovereignists vs. Globalists: Why blockchain’s lasting promise is sovereignty
Souveränisten gegen Globalisten: Warum Blockchains dauerhaftes Versprechen Souveränität ist
Sovereignists vs. Globalists: Why blockchain’s lasting promise is sovereignty
2 Kommentare
tldr; The article argues that the true promise of blockchain lies in achieving sovereignty, not just decentralization. Sovereignty enables individuals and communities to control their infrastructure, assets, and data without relying on global networks that can be compromised. It critiques the over-reliance on singular global networks like Ethereum and Bitcoin, advocating for resilient, locally operable systems. The author emphasizes privacy, heterogeneous trust models, and the need for blockchain to empower communities to define their own rules and governance.
*This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR.
>Why should a DAO in Buenos Aires or a co-op in Berlin have to trust the same validator set as everyone else? Sovereignty means picking your own trust model. Maybe you want to use local validators you know and trust. Maybe you want to federate with other communities. Maybe you want to run solo.
That’s called a bank, a credit union and stuffing money in your mattress respectively. These are not profound ideas. Even in the blockchain world, people have been using federated blockchains for over a decade.
>the Bitcoin network will not survive a WWIII scenario […] This is not some doomer fantasy
Yes it is.