i guess the idea i was getting at with "government and traditional systems making steps forward" was that they will continue to exist with a large share of power for the foreseeable future, and their efforts in "the new economics" will have its impact.

there will be feedback between a DAO-ish mindset and traditional governance, but they will have different end goals.

but @taskmaster4450 rightly points out the current rate of progress, the disruption of various parts of the economy by new technology, and the general trend in satisfying human needs, which in some areas now include rights to Internet access. a fair number of these projects were undertaken by state governments.

South Korea comes to mind here, as an example of a techno-progressive Democratic, soft-Authoritarian state. the state invested heavily in Internet infrastructure in the '90s, recognizing the potential it could offer, and their citizens have certainly benefited....but they also have mandatory military service....

i'm rambling a bit, but i suppose i wanted to assure everyone that i'm not saying that centralized government will solve our problems. a socialist government's lag in comparative progress comes from an essentially parasitic bureaucracy extracting value. a capitalist government gains from progress made within its borders, but often lacks resources to do anything else with that improvement.