Autonomous decentralized system becomes useful when it works as an auto-scaled atom
It is clear that “decentralization” is not necessarily absolute justice. A useful case is when auto-scaling is possible by enabling decentralized coordination at the atom level. A useless case is one that is used as an excuse to release resources.
In other words, it is positive if it is possible to extend the entire cooperation without labor even if parts are added later. It is negative if it is just to break up and reduce the blocks.
Like the Autonomous System of Internet, the UNIX philosophy, and even the virtual server, if the autonomous decentralization system at the atom level can be built, a system can expand the entire scale even if parts are added later. Costs and lead times are lower than human manual control, and transformations from labor-intensive to capital-intensive can make a ceiling-free growth curve theoretically possible. In addition, the reduction of dependence on specific actors makes it easier for third parties to participate, promoting collective intelligence and evolving into new ecosystems.
I think that there is not much controversy against this case is good, and the issue is mainly how to realize autonomous decentralization. The main issue is the useless case.
As seen in the free community, when “decentralization” is used to avoid conflicts and pass on individuals’ ego, it is like going against prehistoric history before forming society. The distopia side of a divided society that blockchains and VRs show seems to strengthen the individual at first glance, but it is a figure that takes the ego of an individual and discards the group’s cooperation. It is to repel “intersubjective reality” which human is definitely different from animals described on A Brief History of Humankind / Homo Deus. It is also the proposition of economic proof that it is a dystopia because GDP would be negative if the whole is added.
However, the premise that measuring human happiness with economic GDP is broken, and it is premised that AI will support GDP. The premise of promoting a divided society is that gathering the humans of the same values and hobbies together will maximize the happiness index. That is, there is a hypothesis that as the size of each atom expands, it will become larger if the whole is added.
Which one is correct? It is true that neither of them is autonomous decentralized system. Cipher punks and colonies are focused below only.
This is not decentralization but decomposition. Since autonomic decentralization system becomes useful when moving as an auto-scale atom, cooperation between atoms becomes important as the next step.
It is negative immediately after blocks are crushed. The autonomous decentralization system become positive when a coordinated method is established.
Bitcoin, when viewed only in the “internal” of bitcoin, created an autonomous decentralization system. But it is only broken if it is in the range to “outside” of bitcoin. I think cryptoLaw’s argument is an argument for coordination. And interoperability and DEX are important, because they are the ones that reconcile what was once diverged.