a decentralized community
why we need a community led by a single or group of leaders?
why we are required to share our personal information to them?
why we even want centralization?
from where it all started, to where it is now, people created different communities or joined a community. when a majority of humans follows or inherits a proposed set of rules to be adhered to a particular sector, it becomes a trend. if it benefits the community, it is adopted quickly, but if it is a failure, it becomes retarded and thrown away. every technology ever created, works on this principle. each adoption is divided into two categories - fast and slow. computers were quickly adopted while the internet was slow.
rate of technology adoption is inversely proportion to its criticism - in simpler terms, the more it is criticized over a period of time, the more time it takes to capture. as it gets approved by a series of community, to build a bigger community.
similarly, is the case of cryptocurrencies. blockchain is adopting in a buggati speed, but cryptocurrencies are being criticized and rejected by multiple communities (mostly government, coming to it), but it is not a failure. it has paved the way to more decentralized and distributed nature of financial systems. with this "asset", it is easy for the people to use and trade in a more transparency with secure mode of channel. i've used the term asset, to define it's "need value" in current context, not the actual price of a cryptocurrency, but its actual worth of using it in this digital world. fiat money should not be a deprecated asset, it has to be there in parallel, as a local vendor shop in this amazon era. a revolution is not ended by a new revolution, instead, it mixes with the latter.
why a decentralized community?
the open source or open model service of a technology has a great past record, with GNU project and Launch of Linux Kernel, that laid the foundation of the OSS, any developer were able to contribute to the development of software along with the open source community. and since then, many OSS has been playing pivot role in this digital world, Android, Apache, FireFox, Chrome, GIT, NodeJs.
open source is a subset of decentralization. with decentralized community, the roles are distributed, no trusted central authority and more importantly data ownership to individuals.
the power?
the power is the community itself. in this digital era, data is the new gold, with each individual's privacy on their hands, it will be easy for anyone to specify which part of data to be utilized by whom. the power is also distributed, this could take down any centralized actors, the amount of acceptance / rejection on a particular feature and rules will be curated according to the betterment of the community.
according to IMF — Today, 60 percent do. Governments are also decentralizing—shifting responsibilities and resources to subnational units of government.
in the same article, they had mentioned, an entity with set of rules and protocols works better than one which is not. seriously? I think in a decentralized state, it will be more quickly implemented and perfectly executed. as we, as an individual, will only try to see what's good for us, not in a greedy way.
blockchain is the future, and it is the only way to achieve the decentralized state.
the power is the community itself, the power is the data, the power is the rules and protocols, the power is the decentralized state.
the real value?
the real value is immeasurable. just think yourself, each individual contributing for a bigger impact. the network state, by @balajis, is a great book towards aligned community. this book contrasts startups, which create centralized networks, with blockchain-based systems that foster decentralized networks. It highlights the value of decentralized social networks as the basis for an open metaverse, where digital land isn't controlled by any single entity, offering more freedom and choice.
in a remote society, official existence is tied to being on-chain in the blockchain system of record. This approach decentralizes the capital of a network state, making it less vulnerable to physical invasion and more adaptable to hosting subsets of the metaverse
the adoption?
many aproaches are currently implemented, but none of has secured a trust level to the community. why? because knowledge is not shared, and the community is no longer a community, it is a group of people who are trying to make money. the adoption will be slow, but it will be steady. the adoption will be from the community itself, not from the centralized actors. the adoption will be from the people who are willing to share their knowledge, not from the people who are trying to make money.
you are what you share, not what you have, in a decentralized state.
coming to the cryptocurrencies topic, government is against it due to its decentralized nature, but they are not against the blockchain technology. they are trying to implement their own centralized blockchain, which is not possible. if they want to have control over it, its impossible, but if they want it to be safe and secure, there are many ways to achieve it. we need to find it (in coming articles) and just implement it! for a centralized entity to accept a decentralized state, we, as a community have to provide the solution they are afraid of, like laundering of money and terror funding.
the future has both, centralized and decentralized entities, but the decentralized entities will be more powerful than the centralized ones, infact, the centralized will be inside the decentralized ones.
the backlash?
there are and will be some bad actors in a decentralized state, I accept that. with a perfectly aligned consensus, we can eliminate this issue too. with a track record of someone's actions, also respecting individual's privacy, we can easily identify the bad actors and ban them from the community. this record will be maintained on the blockchain, so it will be immutable and transparent, with a twist of computable hash proofs for privacy.
the endgame?
the endgame is the decentralized state.