Again, another interesting conversation was raised in a client session this morning, and it was one that is close to my heart - Decentralization. Which I prefer to write as decentralisation with an "S", but I suspect Americans might not be able to understand. ;)
It is actually a bit weird at times because I use US English for Hive and at work, but I use Br English for my personal stuff and I assume I am sometimes slipping up and using the wrong forms, especially these days. But you see, this is what happens through globalization, as nuances are slowly weeded out and homogenization (homogenisation) increases. This reduces the variation and diversity and will impact on many aspects of our culture and process.
For another day perhaps?
So, what we were talking about was actually the building crisis in China, where there are all sorts of debt issues with massive building companies owing hundreds of billions of dollars. And, because they are unable to finish the buildings, owners are refusing to pay their mortgage, so the debts keep piling up, the buildings still aren't getting completed. Not only this, the incentive in the past was to buy real estate to become wealthy, so the middle class did - and there are now between 50 and 70 million empty apartments, enough to house about 20% of all the people in China.
And this is where the discussion turned to decentralization. Well, actually, it went into centralization instead, but it is one of those "via negativa" conversations, where you describe what is not, to leave what is. Kind of like chipping away at a slab of marble to reveal the statue beneath, that was always there.
The problem with centralized decision making is that it is impossible for it to suit everyone simultaneously, so there are always people who are going to be somewhat left out. And, because of the complexity and dynamics of the system, there are no perfect rules anyway, so they are all off by some degree. However, because they are being applied at such a grand scale, it takes time to get the ship going, but once going, there is a massive amount of momentum, making it very difficult and time consuming to change course. It is like taking a very long flight and going in the wrong direction by half a degree - the desired destination might be quite far away. Off by a degree on a 1000 kilometer journey, and you are almost 20 kilometers away.
And then of course, we have to think about what incentives are being driven by the centralized authority, where human nature being what it is, it is generally going to favor the ones making the decisions. This is why a major city can be thriving, while satellite locations are starving. There is no way for the central authority to know everything every node needs, let alone find a rule that creates optimal outcomes for all, so it falls back onto what it can see and what benefits it.
There aren't many starving dictators.
And then of course, because a single source can't se or make all of these decisions, the powers are delegated out to those who are "trusted" by the authority, which inevitably ends up as you'd expect - where they are incentivized to maximize themselves over their purview, cutting corners in order to increase their resources of wealth and power.
And, over time, no matter how good the intentions were to begin with, any rules created will get increasingly unsuitable, because changes affect all the original variables that were considered and dynamics shift. This means that everything gets out of balance with increasing speed, so a stable society that is seemingly working well, will eventually fail, unless it continuously course corrects.
For instance, after the war in Finland, there was a strong push to industrialize away from primary industry and in order to do this, a very good education system was built from scratch that brought the nation very quickly into the knowledge work areas we are today. However, as always, economic incentive is going to be a driver of decision making, and no matter how even the education system, people are going to excel at different areas of life. And since we highly value money, those who are able to generate wealth are of course going to have more power over those who aren't as good at generating it and as that power grows, more maximization decisions are made, creating growing wealth gaps.
And inevitably, there comes a time where the gaps are so large and the peak so narrow and high, that there is barely even a semblance of reality in the decision-making process, which is where we are now. The books just don't balance. And ultimately, it is going to cause conflicts that will tear that society apart from the inside out, like a cancer, festering away in the body. Again, which is what we are seeing now in relation to politics and the economy.
China is a good example of this as back in the day when their economic growth was very, very strong, all of these various inefficiencies were manageable, because they could be absorbed into the economy, much like a startup company that has a lot of investor cash. However, the ore optimized they become through their processes to maximize wealth, the more efficient they have to become, but they are not. If they were a company and they haven't built a business model that is sustainable so they can stand on their own, investors will eventually stop throwing their cash at them and cut their losses. People not paying their mortgages in China is the investor response. If I am not getting an ROI, I am not going to invest.
And, this is what is happening at a global scale, where "investors" in society are no longer happy with the returns, meaning that they don't feel that they are being appropriately valued. As a result, there is a rise of populist politics that are leveraging a broken economy to garner the support of the people it is failing, using all kinds of emotional triggers to amplify the message. It will tear down community, culture and economy
This is very disruptive, unfortunately we don't seem smart enough to realize that in order to stop this from happening, we need to be inclusive. Not "inclusive" in the sense that every variation of identity is included, but economically inclusive, where there is opportunity for every to build an adequate life for themselves. The problem is of course, that we have an economy that is driven my monopolization mechanisms, not value mechanisms, so those who can make the most money regardless of the human value of the activities to do so, win.
And, it is exactly because of this increasingly small group winning that eventually, all centralized authorities fail, because they become increasingly less relevant, and increasingly expensive to maintain, so that eventually, the people they govern, revolt.
There are many facets to this conversation and a lot of complexity, but in a simple sense, we have to come to terms with the fact that homogenization of thought and practice holds us back from innovations to solve our problems. And, the diversity needed to innovate is going to cause continual conflicts. We have to accept that there is no perfect way, there is no way to cater for everyone, but it is also unacceptable to only cater for some, because that is going to lead to disenfranchisement and rebellion.
The problem is, the economic practices we employ to maximize will always lead down that path, and no one is ever going to want to give up control once they have it. So, rather than being able to appropriately distribute resources across populations, a few control the most and will use them to control more.
The only way out of this is to decentralize the control and allow people to make their decisions that best suit them. This would ultimately lead to collaborative efforts much like what we have today, except instead of a centralized authority having the power, the decision-making authorities will be dissolvable quickly and easily, with them having no recourse. This means that it is not in their best interest to maximize themselves to stay in power, because to say in power they would have to maximize the group they are making the decisions for. Get too greedy, and they are gone.
All centralized authorities collapse.
It is only natural.
Taraz
[ Gen1: Hive ]
Posted Using LeoFinance Alpha
We can definitely see it in real time, the collapsing of these centralized behemoths. The fallout is what’s going to be the biggest challenge, what is going to happen and when? Where are the good opportunities and where are the bad ones?
The crap going on in China is wild, not only are the buildings vacant but they are quite literally also falling apart and obscenely poorly constructed. The materials and craftsmanship are so poor that high rises have structural columns that you can walk over to and pull a chunk off with your fingers with little resistance. It’s appalling but it’s the definition of crony capitalism and the hideous baby they have when combined with a communist state. Everything is shoddy and horse shit over there, it’s baffling how people aspire to do what they are doing. Race to the bottom on a crumbling plane? No thanks, you get in that I will stay on the ground.
Decentralization is the way forward and I think it’s a balance that humanity has been undertaking for several hundred years, really back to the origination of widespread trade via the Silk Road. It prospered for a few generations then centralization and greed took over for a while and things fell apart again. It seems like we are at a similar stage but decentralization does win out in the end, the timeframe is the big question.
Did you see the videos of captured Russian munitions in Ukraine? The explosives were filled with blocks of wood. The incentive to cut corners is high, and there is little oversight.
Yep. And then there is the flipside of it, where they have some of the best tech, highest quality in other areas. iPhones are made there too. It is a case of shoemaker's children perhaps?
The difference with decentralization now, is that there is the technology to unite billions of people and support it. However, that same technology can be used to enslave billions of people. It really is up to the people which future we want.
I agree with what I think is one of your premises: Centralization looks expedient and decisive. But it is biased by nature towards the powerful elements. Centralized governance reflects a centralization of power and subsequently centralized wealth accumulation and further centralized influence.
I recently wrote a post describing how the disaster relief efforts led by the community on Maui, to help the residents of Lahaina, whose city burned down, were initially highly decentralized and distributed, thus they provided food, clothing and first aide island wide, as the population of the burned down town distributed themselves widely to find shelter for their families.
However when the government agency FEMA and nongovernment agency the Red Cross, showed up on day 4, the first things they did were centralization of supplies, money, and control. This reduced benefits to the scattered populatoion of Lahaina, who were homeless, and lacking transportation, and documentation of their previous residence. In addition, the centralized powers required the relief vistims to travel back to ground zero, which is traumatic.
The centralization of relief and the need for proper documentation was and is counter productiove when the populous is without wallets, cellphones, computers, and transportation, as many vehicles burned up in the overnight fire. Plus the victims lost their wallets, cellphoones and computers, in addition to their homes and loved ones.
These centralized systems succeeded in imposing control and being decisive. They failed in delivering relief supplies, food and healthcare because they refused to distribute it, because that meant losing control and control appears to be priority number one.
Right now there is a growing public discontent, and I fear when they 1000 unaccounted for which everyone thinks are children and elderly who were trapped in their homes are revealed a protest will eruptr and possibly violence. These centralized agencies may find themselves very unwelcome and be forced to leave.
It's quite the disaster after the disaster.
I am sorry I am late commenting on this and I can't add much, other than it is a good highlight of why governments are inefficient. They can effectively do their job as defined by them, even if it doesn't help the people they are meant to be helping.
No problem, it is amazing how much engagement you get on your posts, and more amazing that you take the time to reply. I also appreciate the timing of your post, which highlighted what I was feeling. And your last sentence said it very well: governments do their main job well, but their main job is not helping people, it is establishing control, through centralization.
Thank you
I think the China issue is more than just about the returns. The companies don't really have the funds to build new housing either as they rely on new money to fund the projects. I have been seeing more news about those property builders planning on defaulting on their US debt.
I don't know anything about normal english and br english. It's a weird thing to me that there is a difference.
No they don't, especially since people aren't paying their mortgages, so the banks aren't releasing the funds to build.
Yes. Considering US English was once British English - why change?
The struggles of juggling between American and British English is a real one.
I've studied under the British curriculum all my life, but every bit of content I consumed during my younger days was 90% in American English. The same goes these days for YouTube/Movies, and other social media, which is dominated by creators from the NA region.
I really don't know if I should put in the effort to stick to just one, or still just keep juggling according to the place/platform. 😂
I think these days, a lot of people you likely interact with don't know the difference, other than the obvious ones like the Z or S. The other ones like Traveling or travelling don't seem to get picked up as much. So, just stick to one perhaps on the big things and most won't notice! :D
That is true, most don't notice nor do they care. But still, naturally about 60% of the time I do lean more towards the British side; since I grew up learning under their curriculum. Sometimes I just wish it wasn't such a jumble.
My accent and pronunciation is even more messed up I'd say. 😂
accent is a hard one to improve, but not impossible. It just takes practice. What I have found with many Indians, is that what affects their accent the most is that they are used to speaking so fast in for instance Bengali, that when they speak English, it is far faster than I speak! :D
It was funny. One of my high school friends is Bengali, but was mostly raised in Australia. His Bengali is good, but people think he is "slow" because his speech is so slow to them. But in English, it is like he is speed rapping.
He owns a law firm now :)
My father had almost zero accent. What he did was slow down his speech and really concentrate on getting the sounds correct, before speeding up a bit again. But never as fast as when he spoke Bengali.
Now that you mention it, I realize that we do speak quite fast, especially when speaking in Bangla. Wow! Took me that many years to realize it, after a little side by side comparison. I'm Bangladeshi btw.
I have quite a few friends who've settled down in Australia after finishing up with their higher studies, it's been a decade almost. A few family members and relatives live there too, but most of them are in Melbourne.
I was supposed to move there as well, Sydney was the city I chose, but after facing some family and financial problems I decided to stay back and do what I can over here.
That's actually the correct way to learn I guess, and it sounds a lot more mature too. We should really take our time when we speak, no matter what language it may be.
Was your father Bengali?
I think it was an old model here, and doesn't exist anymore. You buy a completed house/flat in full cash or some cash some mortgage. I wouldn't prefer paying a construction company for an uncompleted building.
Here, there is "buy off the plan" and in order to get developer funding, something like 50% of the building needs to be sold.
Dear bro @tarazkp !
I have a hard time understanding your European English style!
So, I hope you understand my awkward and rude English first! 😅
I understood that you argued that the collapse of China's economy would lead to the collapse of centralization.
Hmm, By the way, Most East Asians, like myself, tend to predict that the collapse of China's economy will lead to new war crises on the Korean Peninsula and Taiwan.
Since ancient times, the East Asian world has solved the problem of food and resource shortages caused by population growth through war.
Most East Asians, myself included, think that the two world wars occurred to solve the economic depression!
So, I guess the collapse of China's economy ushered in a new era of warfare!
1. The relationship between Hitler and the East Asian overlords.
Why do Chinese people hate America?
China is currently in a serious crisis.
I hope you understand my awkward English! 😄
No, I used it as an example of how centralization leads to collapse eventually. Every empire fails.
Dear my bro @tarazkp !
Yeah, As you claim, all empires have disintegrated over time!
But before that, wars on the scale of World War II had to break out!
Perhaps you remember that European empires, including the British Empire, collapsed through two world wars.
So, many East Asians speculate that China will start World War III in future!
Most likely. War is always an economic balance of some kind - even so-called "religious" wars.
Financial inclusion is a tough problem. A while back there was some uproar and discussion of what the Bell curve reveals about intelligence. The USA military, for example, will not accept anybody with an IQ below 83. They discovered through trial and error that less intelligent soldiers were a menace to themselves and others. It required too many resources to get them to perform anywhere near what was needed.
Globally, about 16% of the population has an IQ below 83. Of the 8.1 billion people on Earth, almost 1.3 billion would struggle to carry out simple jobs. This is in a world that increasingly leans towards technocracy and knowledge work. This is a big part of the challenge. How do we include people into an economy that is increasingly complex, increasingly automated, and increasingly demanding of skill?
How do we provide jobs for challenged people that is real, useful, and dignified? How do we ensure equality of opportunity when not everybody has the capacity to take advantage an opportunity?
I'm not implying that populism is a revolt by the less intelligent. I think populism is a revolt against exactly what you said, centralization that does not take into account the differences between people. We are just statistical data with margins of error to big government.
And, how do they affect things like voting outcomes, when they don't necessarily understand the complexities of the economy, society, or the technological needs? 1 person, 1 vote in a room full of idiots, leads to idiotic decisions.
Yes. But, it is being hijacked by the intelligent knowing they can use people's pain to control them and take power. Populism is just another power grab.
I read this book, which discusses much the same idea. Here's an excerpt.
The implication is that the more our technology and knowledge progresses, the less we are bound by virtue and basic humanity.
The book takes much of its inspiration from The Abolition of Man by C. S. Lewis
It sounds interesting
One of the funny thing is it's a cat and mouse game. Decentralize innovates and centralize turns it into its own domain. So exchanges were made to convert decentralize things into centralize which kind of killed crypto. Point of decentralization is you don't need centralized exchanges lol.
Decentralized exchanges are going to get increasingly popular in coming years I think, once the technology catches up.
I absolutely do not see the difference between British and American English. Google translates them the same way for me.
And the Chinese should save themselves, I don't want the world economy to go into recession, my favorite HIVE is already worth $0.31.
Into American.
If you look up homogenisation, it will only give results with a Z.
I think the Chinese are trying to save themselves. The Chinese government however, is trying to save itself.
This reminds me just how huge some companies can grow without most of us even knowing it. Here in America, take Disney for example, the average person might think it's all resorts and movies, but looking into it the Walt Disney Corporation owns around 200 other companies. All of that influence and power and money flow upward to a small number of people that make decisions that affect millions of people's lives.
Not sure how much that has to do with the original article but it's what it made me think of. I have been reading a bit about China and its growing problems too. My town is not to date when it comes to empty buildings but I know other places where it's a growing problem such as New York and maybe LA.
These company conglomerates are nations in a sense. Look at Blackrock for instance, where they have a piece of just about everything, including other investment firms.
It creates rules that generate alignment that work in the background, but aren't actually legislated.
"Absolute power corrupts absolutely." -- Lord Acton
Even in our SPL DAO, there are whales and shrimp and the mighty whales have much more power than the weakly shrimp. I also support decentralization, one of the reasons I'm still here gaming and commenting on Hive, but there still needs to be some authority to enact the will of the community/whole. Of course, there is also the issue of enforcement, which of course begets the power struggle of who is responsible for enforcing and maintaining the will of the DAO.
Bit by bit, the whales will lose some power, but it takes years. Especially in SPL where it is constantly making them more powerful.
People have not yet realized how important decentralization is, but I know that eventually they will realize it. As you said, there are not many leaders who are starving, but there are many leaders who are swimming in wealth, and they are swimming in their relatives. This sounds familiar to me from somewhere but I won't say more about it XD
Birds of a feather, flock together as they say.
I know this isn't the main topic of your post, but the difference between the Queen's English (King's English now?) and American English is more prominent when in its spoken form. Spelling is one thing, but when we vocalise it, it's a whole new ballgame. Especially as most of the consumption is through audio and video, it gets confusing when in the same sentence, you use the different pronunciations....
Living in Finland, older people tend to have studied the Br. Eng, but they consume in Am. The younger consume so much Am and seemingly can hardly read. It gets weird when people talk with both and it annoys me that my daughter does it too, as her mother uses some American pronunciations. I will have to beat it out of her when she is a little older.
It's hard.......the beating part. Not sure if English has changed from my days, but it just seems everything is less structured. An example which bothers me about my daughter is when she uses "Me and my friend" instead of "My friend and I".
I was always taught the correct way was "My friend and I" and keep correcting her for it. But then when I read the books she reads, they write it as "Me and my friend" and it seems like that's what her teacher says as well.....so which is the correct way??
Even though it's been decades I still occasionally get irrationally irritated at having to use American spelling when coding XD
Somewhat vaguely related, eldest and I were discussing how stupid the economy is. His specific thing was that people at the "bottom of the pyramid" such as primary producers weren't "valued" (making as much money) as people who did what he considered pretty useless things (in terms of basic human survival, he specifically mentioned investors and touched on management), and how fast everything would collapse if the farmers and all went you know what screw you guys we're going home and just stopped participating and went off and did their own thing.
I said I was kind of waiting for that to happen and then we talked about how to keep things in early stage capitalism and agreed that it was probably not possible.
The problem with that discussion was that it was in the car on a 10min drive and we hit our destination before we were able to expand on any ideas XD
It pains me!
Maybe it is. If everything was decentralized and had the ability to be opted out of, if any single entity got too controlling, people would just opt out, forking the use case to another who promises to do things more fairly. This is what happened with the move from steem to hive :)
We did also discuss how you could just switch to another economic (or anything really) model despite the desperate efforts (including legal shenanigans) that the old thing might put in place to try to maintain the status quo XD
P.S.
I forgot to mention that I never thought about how challenging it must be to write in American English, while being a native speaker of British English from Australia. It must be complicated, but I sincerely feel you do it well.
It is a bit of a challenge, but these days the tools make it easier with the spellchecks. However, evn back then it wasn't so bad, because most people don't know all the implications and Americans aren't very literate ;)
LOL!
Proto AI to the rescue. :)
Very important and really an informative content.
These comments, aren't very good comments.
That comment made me laugh, thank you man 😂
The fall of evergrande is just the tip of the iceberg. Recent reports shows that China has slowed in growth which is a sign of worse things to come. Decentralization is the solution yes. But with the ccp currently in leadership this is more of an impossibility than a dream. Well in this part i hope that i am wrong. And i just hope that more people will be globally connected where the actual power resides in the people not to a single authority.
This is the secret to sculpting. You want to sculpt a lion, just start with a block of marble, and chip away all the bits that don't look like a lion.
Sculpting is so easy.