sms on Nostr: Putting the treasury on a blockchain? That sounds about as smart as putting balls in ...
Putting the treasury on a blockchain? That sounds about as smart as putting balls in a blender. Have people forgotten how inherently inefficient blockchains are? Government scale operations require speed and efficiency, yet here we are, watching people propose more friction and complexity. Isn’t that the opposite of what was promised?
Governments are built on trust. There is no government without it. A trustless system for a trusted entity is a contradiction. What’s being proposed here isn’t innovation; it’s a rebranded version of the failed DAOs of the past. Maybe that’s where the idea should stay.
And what about transparency? 100% visibility into government spending might sound good in theory, but in practice, it means giving away every strategic advantage to competitors who aren’t playing by the same rules. Nations operate like living organisms: radical, untested changes can be fatal.
Then there’s the issue of control. If the government is the only entity with the ability to alter the system, who exactly is ensuring they don’t exploit it? The government? Yeah right. Read a book. Governments already have a money printer…why would they design a blockchain system that doesn’t serve their interests?
And let’s talk about smart contracts. Do we really trust the government to build secure, unexploitable code when they can’t even run basic programs efficiently? If their blockchain innovation is anything like the rest of their work, it’ll be a glitch-ridden, easily manipulated disaster.
Some people believe putting transactions on a blockchain will solve government corruption. But corruption isn’t a software bug; it’s human nature. And until we accept the reality of human nature, Bitcoin won’t fully make sense. Notice I didn’t say blockchain.
The reason governments push for blockchain, not Bitcoin, is simple: they’ve already planned their corruption. Bitcoin removes their ability to manipulate money, and deep down, they know it. They don’t fear blockchain…they fear the accountability that Bitcoin imposes. And they know their reckoning is coming.
Governments are built on trust. There is no government without it. A trustless system for a trusted entity is a contradiction. What’s being proposed here isn’t innovation; it’s a rebranded version of the failed DAOs of the past. Maybe that’s where the idea should stay.
And what about transparency? 100% visibility into government spending might sound good in theory, but in practice, it means giving away every strategic advantage to competitors who aren’t playing by the same rules. Nations operate like living organisms: radical, untested changes can be fatal.
Then there’s the issue of control. If the government is the only entity with the ability to alter the system, who exactly is ensuring they don’t exploit it? The government? Yeah right. Read a book. Governments already have a money printer…why would they design a blockchain system that doesn’t serve their interests?
And let’s talk about smart contracts. Do we really trust the government to build secure, unexploitable code when they can’t even run basic programs efficiently? If their blockchain innovation is anything like the rest of their work, it’ll be a glitch-ridden, easily manipulated disaster.
Some people believe putting transactions on a blockchain will solve government corruption. But corruption isn’t a software bug; it’s human nature. And until we accept the reality of human nature, Bitcoin won’t fully make sense. Notice I didn’t say blockchain.
The reason governments push for blockchain, not Bitcoin, is simple: they’ve already planned their corruption. Bitcoin removes their ability to manipulate money, and deep down, they know it. They don’t fear blockchain…they fear the accountability that Bitcoin imposes. And they know their reckoning is coming.