I read the paper, Marco. I have two major issues to launch a discussion, as well as a lot of minor points. It would be great to have the developer on board so we could discuss it with him directly.
- I had the same issue with this paper I did with the last one - a certain « idealism » that could lean towards « naivety » about people’s capacity to use technology for unintended ends. On paper it all looks great, but any such system has to have weaknesses that could be exploited.
- My second point is one I mentionned before in a different context. The authors use the term « ecosystem » in a kind of metaphorical sense. They imply they are doing something more « organic », but their actual use of the ecosystem idea neglects the real dynamics that actual ecosystems incorporate, and it weakens their argument overall, in my opinion.
I do understand that this is a kind of « metagovernance » proposal rather than governance per se, but my concerns remain valid I believe.
I am happy to take part in any discussions on this issue.
A note to @DurwinFoster, I think all these experimental efforts deserve support. That said, blockchain has built-in limitations (it is an extreme energy hog over the long term) and is probably unsustainable, whereas holochain appears to avoid these problems, albeit at the price of giving ground on the issue of absolute integrity. But holochain is still under development, while blockchain is a stable environment. So things developed with blockchain might be eventually adapted for holochain and its successors. The unsustainability of blockchain is ethically problematic, however, for me, especially given the vast resources being devoted to it.