Accounting for Everything - How much money is in Existence? Is it in fact a limited Supply or is it an Ever Expanding Number and Valuation?
This type of thinking comes to mind from a starting point of practical living of Efficiency and Effectiveness as Communication and Participation Here.
Would it be Best to have a World Wide Effective System of Accountability?
In a way - all decentralized block-chains are World Wide systems of Accounting.
If we consider the Effectiveness of a System has to do with it's Network Effect - It raises the issue...and Question:
Wouldn't it be most Practical to Have a System of Accounting that Everyone subscribes too? Wouldn't this be of Best Benefit to Everyone in the World?
Wouldn't this be the most tangible approach to facilitating the most effective and efficient organization of Utmost Support and Potential for all of Existence?
Is this the Heart of the Matter Here - The real political discussion of Law and Order for Humanity?
I love challenges! It's like the art of Playing. "self expression is the practical living of challenges on a day to day basis, If we don't challenge ourselves - we stop growing/learning.
Man, you got me thinking about the Art of "Challenge" - got me going way into the word.
Thanks for that - it is most appreciated.
In a way - the structure of centralized governments and banks is "challenging" it takes a real process to even make sense of all the non-sense - to actually do the math add up all the disorganization structured as various organizations and authorities of law and order.
Though, your comment got me thinking about the recent eos updates and the structuring of it's decentralized network - and from what i gather by community working together in kind of a centralized way - stronger decentralization...network security is possible.
kind of like a hybrid of sorts - kind of a weird concept that i am still racking my brain around.
in reflecting on my line of questioning/post i see the point coming up of "more or less centralized or decentralized". This reminds me of a recent discussion vitalik buterin and dan larimer were having...well fairly recently.
the point was: what does that even mean when you say something is "more decentralized". raising the question: Is it or isn't it.
if you are an apple - can you be more an apple than another apple?
My initial thinking with regards to monetary accountability in the world is that: I see there being a real lack of integrity and clarity within our world today with regards to money and accounting.
in a way our centralized governments and banks are very very decentralized in the financial reporting/accounting.
it's like there's so many different agencies and layers of banks and sections of government - that it's very difficult to understand the rouse here. (obviously that's the current structure and design. Maybe it's not obvious. I studied law - and to me it's obvious because the law is designed with a lot of layers of deception/confusion/contexts).
a judge - his name and exact placement escapes me at the moment - but the point he made was rather profound with regards to the study and practice of law - that basically no law professional actually understand or for the most part has the time to comprehend all aspects/areas of the legal system - which is a serious issue - because that means the regular populace...general public are like mostly dead in the water in terms of being able to function to each individual's best benefit - because the legal advantages are mostly a series of clever tricks and advanced plays based on having 'special knowledge' that is basically hidden in plain sight...but at the same time a needle in a hay stack because things are mostly deliberately less than optimized in practicality, efficiency and effectiveness to the betterment of all Life Here.
pardon me if my response is a little sloppy - your questions opened up a lot of reflection for me - i find i learn best by talking as i kind of walk it out.
When you put it that way, it is true that though we see the whole banking system as centralised, in terms of working principles and reporting, they are decentralised, which makes it difficult for individuals to understand all the laws governing these systems.
Decentralised systems are obviously more secure but my concern is the centralised part of the system. Like Bittrex, which is a centralised exchange for cryptos. If someone is able to prevent access to the system, all people using their services are down as well.
100% security is surely not possible and if governments start adding laws which can make that security even weaker then in some way we will be doomed for the future...
Bitshares comes to mind as an example and solution of a decentralized exchange relative and in comparison to Bittrex being centralized.
it is indeed a point of security in preventing the opportunity for abuse at the expense of others. That being said - i think we can have hybrid sort of models. In my opinion DPoS - delegated proof of stake is a hybrid model.
The beauty of DPoS is cooperation is incentivized in a way which promotes effective system functioning and network security.
steem and bitshares blockchains are practical examples
arguably - the issue with bitshares exchange thus far is it's volume - liquidity - coin availability - individual I think at this point - it's not well enough understood and is kind of a 'what comes first question - the chicken or the egg?"it is so ingrained into our thinking based on the nature of all our predominate systems of exchange to have a centralized model of government - it's like we humans almost don't know how to function as a decentralized trading platform exchange yet effectively.
shapeshift and blocktrades are interesting models - perhaps a decentralized exchange could function best like that but with the users collecting the fees...actually as i talk this out - this is the point in functionality for bitshares is that each person has a membership account and that you collect a piece of the fees....maybe not quite 100% aligned...i don't yet got full knowing of all function-ability of bitshares - i'm still fine tuning - but i really do think it's the kind of examples needed for the best benefit of all users of crypto exchanges.
I second the point where people don't know how to function as a decentralized trading platform.
They expect someone, like a government, to put out the laws and rules for them and then they will start something.
Fully decentralized systems are probably difficult to achieve but a hybrid model has all the bright future in front of it. People just need to understand and assess their risks properly.
ARK - is a coin that could play an interesting role in the future as it bridges blockchains together - making for ways of decentralize exchange. i think we are going to see a lot more ways of decentralize exchanging popping up - which is great!
It is indeed strange that there are so many diffrent kinds of system. But it is like that since ancient times. You could even say it would be better if we all speak the same language and people tryed it but it never launched.
a System of Accounting that Everyone subscribes too
How do you envision a universal accounting system? Everyone is a lot of people, how would this ever be accomplished without corruption and tyranny? Just a few thoughts. @ironshield
how cool that would be to have a unique system for all the accounting but it may lead to some challenges too :)
For Sure!
On all Accounts!
I love challenges! It's like the art of Playing. "self expression is the practical living of challenges on a day to day basis, If we don't challenge ourselves - we stop growing/learning.
Man, you got me thinking about the Art of "Challenge" - got me going way into the word.
Thanks for that - it is most appreciated.
In a way - the structure of centralized governments and banks is "challenging" it takes a real process to even make sense of all the non-sense - to actually do the math add up all the disorganization structured as various organizations and authorities of law and order.
I guess in this way we will be back to a more centralised form of banking.
Even if hackers are not able to steal the money on blockchain, they can still execute DDOS attacks and bring the whole system down..
Why do you think the centralised accounting system will work better
I wasn't thinking centralized per se.
Though, your comment got me thinking about the recent eos updates and the structuring of it's decentralized network - and from what i gather by community working together in kind of a centralized way - stronger decentralization...network security is possible.
kind of like a hybrid of sorts - kind of a weird concept that i am still racking my brain around.
in reflecting on my line of questioning/post i see the point coming up of "more or less centralized or decentralized". This reminds me of a recent discussion vitalik buterin and dan larimer were having...well fairly recently.
the point was: what does that even mean when you say something is "more decentralized". raising the question: Is it or isn't it.
if you are an apple - can you be more an apple than another apple?
My initial thinking with regards to monetary accountability in the world is that: I see there being a real lack of integrity and clarity within our world today with regards to money and accounting.
in a way our centralized governments and banks are very very decentralized in the financial reporting/accounting.
it's like there's so many different agencies and layers of banks and sections of government - that it's very difficult to understand the rouse here. (obviously that's the current structure and design. Maybe it's not obvious. I studied law - and to me it's obvious because the law is designed with a lot of layers of deception/confusion/contexts).
a judge - his name and exact placement escapes me at the moment - but the point he made was rather profound with regards to the study and practice of law - that basically no law professional actually understand or for the most part has the time to comprehend all aspects/areas of the legal system - which is a serious issue - because that means the regular populace...general public are like mostly dead in the water in terms of being able to function to each individual's best benefit - because the legal advantages are mostly a series of clever tricks and advanced plays based on having 'special knowledge' that is basically hidden in plain sight...but at the same time a needle in a hay stack because things are mostly deliberately less than optimized in practicality, efficiency and effectiveness to the betterment of all Life Here.
pardon me if my response is a little sloppy - your questions opened up a lot of reflection for me - i find i learn best by talking as i kind of walk it out.
When you put it that way, it is true that though we see the whole banking system as centralised, in terms of working principles and reporting, they are decentralised, which makes it difficult for individuals to understand all the laws governing these systems.
Decentralised systems are obviously more secure but my concern is the centralised part of the system. Like Bittrex, which is a centralised exchange for cryptos. If someone is able to prevent access to the system, all people using their services are down as well.
100% security is surely not possible and if governments start adding laws which can make that security even weaker then in some way we will be doomed for the future...
100% agree with you.
Bitshares comes to mind as an example and solution of a decentralized exchange relative and in comparison to Bittrex being centralized.
it is indeed a point of security in preventing the opportunity for abuse at the expense of others. That being said - i think we can have hybrid sort of models. In my opinion DPoS - delegated proof of stake is a hybrid model.
The beauty of DPoS is cooperation is incentivized in a way which promotes effective system functioning and network security.
steem and bitshares blockchains are practical examples
arguably - the issue with bitshares exchange thus far is it's volume - liquidity - coin availability - individual I think at this point - it's not well enough understood and is kind of a 'what comes first question - the chicken or the egg?"it is so ingrained into our thinking based on the nature of all our predominate systems of exchange to have a centralized model of government - it's like we humans almost don't know how to function as a decentralized trading platform exchange yet effectively.
shapeshift and blocktrades are interesting models - perhaps a decentralized exchange could function best like that but with the users collecting the fees...actually as i talk this out - this is the point in functionality for bitshares is that each person has a membership account and that you collect a piece of the fees....maybe not quite 100% aligned...i don't yet got full knowing of all function-ability of bitshares - i'm still fine tuning - but i really do think it's the kind of examples needed for the best benefit of all users of crypto exchanges.
I second the point where people don't know how to function as a decentralized trading platform.
They expect someone, like a government, to put out the laws and rules for them and then they will start something.
Fully decentralized systems are probably difficult to achieve but a hybrid model has all the bright future in front of it. People just need to understand and assess their risks properly.
ARK - is a coin that could play an interesting role in the future as it bridges blockchains together - making for ways of decentralize exchange. i think we are going to see a lot more ways of decentralize exchanging popping up - which is great!
It is indeed strange that there are so many diffrent kinds of system. But it is like that since ancient times. You could even say it would be better if we all speak the same language and people tryed it but it never launched.
Why? Because people don't like drastic changes.
How do you envision a universal accounting system? Everyone is a lot of people, how would this ever be accomplished without corruption and tyranny? Just a few thoughts. @ironshield