Skip to main content

Against the IFP

Centralizing control over a currency’s infrastructure is a seemingly obvious mistake.

One would think any Austro-libertarian worth their salt would be able to see thru such a charade. Yet here we are, again. Face to face with economic illiteracy. Not garden variety lefist economic illiteracy, but one far more stinging and painful - one which comes from within our own community, rather than from without. 

First, Bitcoiners faced the economic illiteracy of maximalism and small blockers. Attempts to masquerade money’s primary function as value storage (Ammous) or rejecting Menger’s Regression Theorem altogether (Szabo) are luckily demonstrably false. Nevertheless, the shock of our fellow Bitcoiners illiteracy was like an unexpected slap in the face. Suddenly, we were forced to confront the fact that the ignorance of our allies in the fight for sound money, had led them astray. Yet, thru BCH we were thankfully able to keep Satoshi’s dream of peer to peer cash intact. 
Well, crypto anarch…

Against the IFP





Centralizing control over a currency’s infrastructure is a seemingly obvious mistake.

One would think any Austro-libertarian worth their salt would be able to see thru such a charade. Yet here we are, again. Face to face with economic illiteracy. Not garden variety lefist economic illiteracy, but one far more stinging and painful - one which comes from within our own community, rather than from without. 


First, Bitcoiners faced the economic illiteracy of maximalism and small blockers. Attempts to masquerade money’s primary function as value storage (Ammous) or rejecting Menger’s Regression Theorem altogether (Szabo) are luckily demonstrably false. Nevertheless, the shock of our fellow Bitcoiners illiteracy was like an unexpected slap in the face. Suddenly, we were forced to confront the fact that the ignorance of our allies in the fight for sound money, had led them astray. Yet, thru BCH we were thankfully able to keep Satoshi’s dream of peer to peer cash intact. 

Well, crypto anarchist, it’s time to turn the other cheek. You're in for another slap. 

Bitcoin ABC has put forward an Infrastructure Funding Plan whereby 8% of Coinbase mining rewards will be automatically diverted into their pockets. It appears they intend on forcing this change down the throat of the p2p cash community come hell or high water. 

Not to worry. Obviously, anybody with half a brain can figure out that allowing ONE development firm to pick and choose which projects to fund is far less efficient than the market-driven, entrepreneurial system of profit & loss. Right? 

I mean, any libertarian who’s familiar with Hayek knows that shifting responsibility for resource allocation from entrepreneurs to a centralized firm, forces reliance on a pretense of knowledge, inevitably bound for failure. And any austro-libertarian vaguely familiar with Mises’ economic calculation problem understands why a market deprived of the appropriate pricing mechanisms can never have an efficient allocation of resources. Indeed, all crypto-anarchists must surely know that the free rider problem is a myth - used only to justify market intervention & the forced subsidization of unsolicited goods & services. Right?

Think again, friends. 


If the seemingly crystal clear economic case isn’t clear enough, consider the historical case. 

There are exactly zero examples in all of human history of a sound currency’s infrastructure being developed by one centralized firm. The mere thought is ludicrous. Gold mints, mines, and banks were owned and operated by independently functioning market actors. The only information they used to coordinate with each other were prices. 

In stark contrast, infrastructure surrounding every fiat currency has been developed exactly as ABC proposes - with one centralized entity entirely determining the route development will take. 

In the case of USD, the Federal Reserve is led by Jerome Powell and decisions regarding future development are made by the FOMC. In our case, ABC is led by Amaury Sechet and decisions regarding future development are made by ‘the council.’ Just as politics determines who’s fit for the FOMC, so too will it determine who's deemed worthy for Sechet’s ‘council.’ Indeed, it already has. 

Who does the IFP benefit? 

On the surface, it may seem as if the IFP is in the interests of a small group of developers, but even this is overstating the case. The death of peer to peer cash & the imposition of peer to ABC to peer cash, means the prolongation of the Federal Reserve’s currency monopoly. In the long run, this doesn’t benefit Sechet, ABC or anyone else for that matter. 


Moreover, Sechet’s preference for the short term gratification of mining rewards over the true prize of central bank disintermediation is indicative of a high time preference. This high time preference is itself brought about by existing central bank policies, and it’s in this roundabout way that the Fed is able to perpetuate it’s cycle of degeneracy and slavery. 

Nor does the IFP benefit agorists. Disrupting the nature of p2p cash to line ABC’s pockets is directly opposed to our mission of providing the public with sound money alternatives to Federal Reserve notes. Peer to peer cash is the tool Satoshi created, & it’s the tool Ross Ulbricht showed us how to use so effectively. 

Peer to ABC to peer cash is great for making ABC boatloads of money, but it's far less useful for counter-economic purposes. 

Comments

  1. Where's your bch Dobson address? Would love to support your work.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Absolutely outstanding analysis, thank you!

    ReplyDelete
  3. The miners requested this funding mechanism to make their donations fair (between BCH miners) to remove the "free rider miners" problem that disincentivized the other miner's desire to donate. ABC control over the funding is a problem I think needs to be fixed, but I see no evidence the funds will be used for anything but making BCH greater faster. If the miners want to donate like this to make BCH better, think about who would want to block that strategy of funding BCH developers. Note the anti-BCH troll army of social engineering agents created the anti-ABC and anti-IFP movement to harm BCH. Their arguments are mostly flawed but very well designed to seem true. Many have been fooled into thinking dividing BCH developers and the community is the best way to go here.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No they did not. 0% of miners voted for it in the lead up to 15 May 2020 and 0% are signaling for it now. LITERALLY ZERO.

      Delete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Technological Agorism I: Digital Feudalism

We live in the age of digital feudalism.

In earlier times, peasants saw their productive capital rerouted to their feudal lords. Likewise, we modern serfs see the monetary value of our digital presence being rerouted to big tech CEOs. And just as medieval lords used this capital to maintain their elaborate manors & their status in the nobility (thru kickbacks to the monarch), these modern day lords do precisely the same. The advent of tokenization promises to change this.



Big tech has profited enormously from the digital peasantry in two ways. 
They earn money based on the popularity of user-generated content. In other words, we use FB, Twitter, & IG to view content posted not by these companies, but by the individuals who use their platforms. Big tech collects & monetizes our personal data & has been doing so for quite some time. Own Your Content The tokenization of digital content has already started the process of disrupting legacy business models. Seeing as the fir…

Meatspace Pirate Pop-up Ads

----------------------------------------------------------------------- 
- The Spray Can, The Home Printer and the QR Code - ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 
"They got cash, which makes it legal devastation when they do it, and when we do it its vandalism, do it too much and get sent to prison" - Looptroop, Illegal Commercial

 The vulgar billboard commercial and the pre-roll advertisement that you click away as soon as possible when you watch Youtube are marketing tools to catch your interest in and shove a product in front of you someone wants to sell. Those two elements are pretty much what you can boil down the old art of advertisement to, even if marketers like to frame their craft with a more mystical aura[1].  

Which is totally legitimate to do in some cases, there are many wizards in the field that have built some really impressive campaigns that made millions in sales.

The scale we are looking at in this article has a lot less m…

The Economics of BTC Maximalism

BTC maximalism is a flawed doctrine, fallacious in numerous respects. 

First, if you'd prefer to hear these arguments in audio, check out this recent episode of ABNP, where @mrpseu & I discused these same topics. 

Also, a qualifier: I'm not capable of making, defending or refuting technical arguments. I'll leave that aspect of the debate to others. My concerns with BTC maximalism are entirely economic and can be divided into four areas. 


Based on the criteria for saleability as laid out by the austrian school, BTC is not the most marketable digital commodity.A lack of portability relative to other cryptocurrencies implies BTC isn't as sound of a commodity. Value storage is a secondary function of money and cannot satisfy the use-value requirement of regression theorem. BTC maximalism lays waste to the Hayekian notion of competition as a discovery procedure. This final point was addressed in detail on episode 50 of The Agora, Crypto-Economics and thus, isn't elabor…