But we should not then pretend that [digital fluff] created by anyone will bring us a better world in a naive techno-libertarian utopia tinged with neo-Rousseauism.
Harsh!
I admit that I felt flattered to be called a "neo-Rousseauist"
😁
Interesting how your post develops as I was already thinking from Mr Noel's response ... "Well, are not the stakeholders of a decentralised blockchain like Hive a Sovereignty? ..."
Fun to read on a Friday afternoon! (And I interpreted some French, a bonus).
Thanks for reading and commenting. Blockchain communities do not fit the definition of a Sovereign because there is no coercion, no violence. A sovereign creates order with authority and coercion (force, violence).
I understand. I meant it in the senses "self-governed" "true to itself" and ideas like that. We have governance, we have ways of organising, we offer services (and I guess sometimes goods), at any rate, we exchange various things. We have our own culture and ways of doing things, not all of which are written into the code.
I was more challenging Mr Noel's definition of authority, state, those kinds of ideas and concepts.
I have to investigate Rousseauism now hehe.