Hazards of thoughts: the blockchain paradoxes and their impacts?

The first thing that one notices when accessing the Steemit website is the word "Blockchain". This should be the eighth world wonder as this is the product that one is trying to sell you. Moreover, our voice is worth something as one can get 3.50 USD for registering.

I registered, and I regularly participate to the platform activity since then. But I have some troubles with it. One said that the blockchain is the solution to solve all problems on Earth.

The same thing has been already said with the omega.

@grandpere likes trying to understand things following a historical standpoint. Science and technology developments have led to the industrial revolution, and this revolution has changes several ways of thinking. Will it be the case with the numerical revolution?

I will not try to describe what a blockchain is in its deepest details, but I will instead  focus on its main elements that seem to influence a novel way of thinking. In many articles that can be found on the topic, several people like to think that all future societies, the governments and the institutions must follow a blockchain model. 

So, what is a blockchain?

Definition and explanations:

The blockchain is a technology allowing one to store and transmit information in a transparent and secured manner, and that does not need any central control device.
https://blockchainfrance.net/decouvrir-la-blockchain/c-est-quoi-la-blockchain/

Now, some details for the beginners. A database is a big table with line and columns. Each line consists of a transaction. And each field in this line consists of a data.

When you have registered to the Steemit platform, you performed a transaction containing the following data: your name, username, password, etc. All transactions are saved one after the other on a storage area that does not belong to anyone.

Transmitting information consists in sending any transaction to the storage area, from a point A to a point B. That is a crucial step since during the transmission, the transaction can be altered, intercepted or modified. For instance, an e-mail is transiting through several servers and can thus be intercepted, altered or redirected to another person. On a blockchain, transmissions rely on the mining technique. Each transaction contains a key (token) so that the message is encrypted, and it is split into blocks submitted to miners who used complex algorithms and the power of several computers (or nodes) to validate it.

This operation requires a lot of energy (so that it is not recommended to use wind energy or solar panels located on the poles to power the corresponding computers), and the miners are paid as a function of the number of blocks they have treated. The system is thus autonomous and decentralised. 

Within the process, there is no human intervention and no control at all, knowing that humans have designed the used algorithms. These human beings are thus perfect men!

To illustrate the process, lets imagine that a package sent by Amazon is verified by dozens of robots in many places from the sending point to the delivery point. No matter what is inside the package. The important point is that it is still as it was when it was sent. 

Once a block is accepted, it becomes transparent, which means anyone can access it through the blockchain. Try it yourself (https://blockchain.info), it is worthy.

Why is it so great? 

First, the process is entirely encrypted, secured, and anonymous, it does not require any human intervention and it is visible by (almost) anyone. To access the information, one needs a key and one is the only one who has it. 

To send a message, your key is then added to it, with the purpose of interacting with the recipients key. No one knows who is behind the key, so that the blockchain inventor would actually not yet be identified. And this message is direct, without any intermediate between the two keys. In other words: secured, anonymous, confidential and autonomous. 

That is the best finding of the century! But who needs such a system? 

In the everyday life, don't we like our internet communication be secured, anonymous, confidential and not controlled by anyone. States, banks and many organisations look for these criteria, but only a few uses the blockchain.

Among the ensemble of interested people, one finds the cryptocurrency (or virtual money) promoters. And there was bitcoin.

The cryptocurrency unit is the bitcoin. It is limited to 21 millions of units and can be divded up to the eighth decimal. Every single transaction is verified by the nodes of the network and are saved in a public database that cannot be falsified called a blockchain. The system does not need any central authority or unique administrator, but relies instead on a decentralised way of working thanks to a consensus obtained from all the nodes of the network.  

Legal?

A cryptocurrency is an electronic currency based on a peer-to-peer network or decentralised network based on the cryptography principles to validate all the transactions and emit the money itself   [1] [2]

All cryptocurrencies are today alternative currencies as they have no legal tender in any country. From their intrinsic design, they escape in this way any regulation. Nevertheless, their monitoring is actively discussed by the monetary authorities following two axes  [24] :

•  Controling the legal aspects attached to any good or service bought with cryptocurrencies and avoid in this way illegal activities such as connected to drugs.
• Monitoring the conversion of cryptomoney into legit money and detect in this way the laundering of illegitimate funds.

To sum up, cryptocurrencies do not have any legal tender and are highly monitored. Most countries have nominated dedicated committees in charge of the problem. [See here for more information]  

US tax services have moreover decided that bitcoins should be considered as incorporeal goods, which contrasts with the US dollar. As a result, bitcoins belong to the category of taxable capital gains. A group of researchers from Oxford and Warwick have shown that bitcoins have actually features similar to those of the precious metals. [25]

From cryptocurrencies to the crypto-anarchy philosophy

 The term anarchy comes from the Greek anarkhia [13]. The word is made of the privative prefix "an"(meaning "without") and of the root "arkhe" (meaning "origin", "principle", "power" or "order") [14] and [15 ]. The etymology of the term point hence to whatever is free of any ruling principle and origin, which can be translated as an absence of principles or rules [16 ], of leader [17] of authority [2] or of government [15].

More information can be found [here](https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchisme).

Starting from a solution to an information treatment problem in informatics, we hence would like to design a society following the same model. This sounds unrealistic and is trying worthy? 

Originating from the US, crypto-anarchism fights for massive and limitless usage of cryptography on the web: everyone could hide his/her identity and whatever he/she is doing thanks to highly involved cryptography techniques. For Thimothy May, the founder of this current and the author of the crypto-anarchist manifest from 1988, the goal is non ambiguous: dismantling states by forbidding them, thanks to the option of being completely anonymous, to control any of their citizens.

 This is also the aim of Ian Clarke, the IT person who founded FreeNet, a system forbidding to control anything on a network (check the *Liberation* newspaper from May 23). Similarly, the Sealand pseudo-state, a former British military base close to London, has been converted into a crypto-anarchist paradise by a group of Americans who have promised to all their clients that any information that they would store will be hidden from the government eyes (see [this article](http://www.liberation.fr/ecrans/2000/06/26/la-crypto-anarchie-societe-anonyme_328739) by Florent Latrive http://www.liberation.fr/auteur/6372-florent-latrive.

The same speech has appeared on Steemit where cryptography applications to different domains of the society have been proposed. This is nonetheless an interesting avenue concerning the treatment of the information, but this is still, in my opinion, questionable concerning the decision power of a state or of any other entity. 

•    How I Made $15,000 in 12 Hours on the New Blockchain Based Social Media Site Steemit :

Now, I should point out here, that the site is both blockchain based and has attracted many freedom minded/libertarian/anarcho-capitalists. And, of course, I am one of the biggest names following cryptocurrencies and blockchain and am one of the most famous anarcho-capitalists in the world... so, clearly, the main reason I made so much from one post was because many people on the site are already big fans of mine. https://steemit.com/steemit/@dollarvigilante/how-i-made-usd15-000-in-12-hours-on-the-new-blockchain-based-social-media-site-steemit 

•   Can Blockchains Replace Governments? (https://steemit.com/blockchain/@blocho/can-blockchains-replace-governments)
•  Blockchain and education (https://steemit.com/technology/@jacor/blockchain-and-education).
•  Blockchain in Transport Industry (Shipping containers) (https://steemit.com/technology/@jacor/blockchain-in-transport-industry-shipping-containers).
•  Blockchain and the Internet of Things (IOT) (https://steemit.com/technology/@jacor/blockchain-and-the-internet-of-things-iot)
•  Steemit's Evil Plan for Cryptocurrency World Domination (https://steemit.com/steem/@dan/steemit-s-evil-plan-for-cryptocurrency-world-domination).

People are afraid to take a bet on Russian bonds and stocks because theres a potential that tomorrow they could break into civil war and all of the money invested would be lost.  https://steemit.com/life/@calaber24p/how-corruption-and-the-lack-of-political-stability-in-developing-economies-is-slowing-growth

But what can we bring back home from all of this? 

• The blockchain is a database, a long journal with many transactions that have the following features:
•  It is decentralised: it exists on several computer that no one controls. It is also centralised as it consists of a single database.
• It cannot be modified, destroyed, and is there forever except if all computers stop working all together. 
• It is transparent and open access.

Several questions and several paradoxes

Is it necessary to store everything forever? Is it acceptable to store forever smoothie recipes, latte designs, sport or loto results, spams? Is is socially acceptable to reproduce information that already exists somewhere else in a better structured and organised way? Is it acceptable to spend so much energy in a context of green energy and environment protection?

Is a blockchain transparent and open access? Well, transparent for who exactly? This does not mean that anyone can understand all details. Only experts can interpret data. Is it a form of technocratic government?

On the one hand, we are complaining about Google and others to access our information. But on the other hand, we are invited to identify ourselves and share our opinions on a blockchain that is transparent, open access, and there forever. Isn't this a gift for the governments, the police and the crime organisations?

It is also strange that we pretend being anonymous. We are all a bit voyeur: we want to see everything without being seen.

Under the pressure of lobbies that claim the right to privacy, governments made laws on the right to be forgotten and forgiven in the internet search engines, Facebook and others. The blockchain is however transparent, non destructible and cannot be modified forever. This looks strange to me. Am I missing anything?

Freedom of speech? Really? Yes, but we have to face the consequences. Then we can probably understand why Asian and Eastern Europe countries are not super motivated. Since cryptoanarchists have been largely present in the recent demonstrations that occurred in several countries, will the states not have the tendency to associate Steemit to any potential trouble? Moreover, any potential trouble is now linked to a security threat, to terrorism, etc, especially after September 11th. Won't states therefore take actions to defend themselves against any potential threat? Alas, we do not all have the same freedom of speech definition. 

It can therefore be understandable to a given individual or investors do not want to be associated with a company that can damage their reputation. 

But Steemit wants to be a social media that rewards its authors! 

Maybe a little bit too naive?

To conclude, maybe will it be necessary to think again about the marketing, mission and philosophy behind Steemit, because there is definitely a demand for this kind of product.

Translated by @lemouth