I realise that this post might get heavily flagged but I am writing it anyways.
Over the last few weeks, two things happened that made me contemplate further on the idea of Decentralisation. Whether these are good or bad, is irrelevant. While you read this, try to reflect towards your own ethics. Not mine.
The first instance, was the Black Hack attack towards Ethereum. The hacker managed to aquire millions due to a flaw in the Ethereum Blockchain. In Ethereum, code is law. As far as I am concerned, the hacker did nothing wrong.
The second, was the pimping up of celebrities like the DollarVigilante here in Steemit. This obviously happens for the sake of exposure and publicity of Steemit to the general public. The guy realised this opportunity and abused his fame in the anarchic scene. It was obvious he could exploit this advantage. After his initial post, he started posting the same things such as bogus advice in regards to how to make money with posts. He might as well posted selfies.
The content was nonesense clickbait. A regular folk could have written like Mark Twain and layout content like a pro and still earn pennies on the dollar. It didn't matter either way what he was posting. He was also playing by the rules.
The Dao Hacker, as he came to be known, took advantage of the parametres of the free market as much as the DollarVigilante did. Almost everybody inside and outside the Blockchain community recognise the anarchic values both worked upon. Both individuals adhere to the concept of decentralisation and cryptocurrencies. Nobody doubts this.
Lets examine things a bit more closely though. The value of the DAO project surely did not reflect the basic security measures that had to be taken in order to avoid such a sham to begin with. Imagine setting up a crowdfunded luxurious house in the middle of a town. You then fill it up with gold, leave a couple of windows open and say to the community: "Look, you can do whatever you want in the house as long as you follow its rules". How can anybody complain when most gold goes missing? Same thing happened with the Ethereum contract exploit.
Ethereum emerged through code. Code was both ethics and law. As far as I am concerned, the DAO Hacker earned his money with dignity and respect by following the rules.
The value of Steemit is based on the people who join it. The parametres are pretty clear. The more popular a post, the more rewards one gets. The more power one has, the more impact one makes. Famous people like the DollarVigilante obviously provide more value to the community. What happened in the specific case though, was very dishonest to the very idea of anarchy and decentralisation. Not the Steemit system itself. He went against his own anarcho-capitalistic principles tha made him famous, in order to make money. Personally, I never judge people based on my ethics, but based on their very own.
The guy became famous because he openly critisized the idea of centralised entities such as the State. On a daily basis, he is bashing politicians about their dishonest ways and how they manipulate the public in order to gain money and fame. In order to accomplish his goals, he relies on quote mining and cheap ridicule, recycling childish memes over and over again. Through this process, he gains both money and fame. You see, the sheep, can be both anarchic and statist. It makes no difference and he knows this very well. I know this first hand because I founded and maintain a freethinking organisation in my country that focuses on ideas of atheism and anarcho-capitalism.
How is the DollarVigilante better than any politician when he posts nonsense posts on Steemit in order to gain money and fame? How is Hilary Clinton, Bernie Sanders or Donald Trump any different from him when they all openly say lies and admitely make money on the backs of sheeple that follow them? How can one make the same bogus posts about money making, fame and attitude when ome clearly has a whale push that is giving the reward? (plus thousands of tinfoiled followers that cannot tell the difference between you and any other politician?). How can one accuse the "establishment" and the "status-quo" of society when themselves act very much like the establishment, preserving openly the state of idiocy that claim to be trying to salvage the masses from?
I have no respect for people who go against their own ethical standards in order to become who they accuse. This is the lowest level a human can crawl. The idea of decentralisation is new to most people. It is still "blacklisted" in most people's minds because it goes hand in hand with revolutionary ideas such as anarchy and free association. We might be benefiting shorterm from celebrities like the DollarVigilante. No doubt about this. In the long term though it hits back like a boomerang because we give birth to the same degenerancy we are trying to get away from.
When it comes to greater acceptance of decentralised projects, these attitudes damage everyone. Values of honesty and liberty that we all uphold go kaput. One cannot defend anything new when themselves act very much like the establishment. It Is up to us to define who we want to be associated with. Otherwise, we are all wasting our time in here.
__
@kyriacos