State and p2p
In the minds of many, especially the young and those working in the field of IT, the relation to p2p-technologies has the connotation of something rebellious, opposing not just centralized technologies, but centralized structures, including states.
Moreover, states are perceived not as legitimate authorities, but as shelters of usurpers of power, with which they must be fought by creating systems not controlled by them, including those using p2p technologies, in order to fall out of control of the “big brother”.
I believe that the present development and application in all spheres of life of p2p-technologies will be carried out with the full support of the state.
Isaac Asimov. Founders and Empire
In my previous article, I provided a rationale for why peer-to-peer technologies will crowd out “conventional” technologies (which can be called client-server technologies). It's all about a significant increase in efficiency.
')
However, if this is the case, why is there no explosive growth in the use of peer-to-peer technologies? It would seem that the efficiency is higher, implement and rejoice ...
Why is there no support at the state level, but on the contrary, there are attempts at struggle and “regulation”? Examples of the relationship of rights holders with torrents and the American state with Bitcoin confirm this.
The reason is in the general approach, which is used by all people, and even those in power and even more so.
In programming, this approach is expressed by the phrase "work - do not touch."
The functionality that can be implemented by peer-to-peer technologies has already been implemented in other ways. Ecological niche is occupied. And while this implementation will be quite effective, peer-to-peer technologies will be content with the role of small mammals in dominant dinosaurs.
Yes, with an equally developed infrastructure, the peer-to-peer monetary system may be cheaper and more reliable than modern banks, but until the flaws of the old systems show up in all their glory, until they begin to confiscate deposits, or take draconian interest, there will be no incentive for the average user to switch to a more reliable one. the system.
The first example of this was the increase in interest in Bitcoin after the events in Cyprus.
In the “fat years” of dinosaurs the chances of mammals were quite small. It took a meteorite (well, or whatever it was), which freed the living space from dinosaurs.
From the point of view of the introduction of new technologies, it is necessary to change the external situation, making the effectiveness of existing systems insufficient. That is a crisis is needed.
The signs of this crisis are already visible: a decline in production, growing unemployment, attempts by states to patch holes with emergency measures, such as canceling bank secrets, fighting offshore companies, confiscating deposits in Cyprus, printing money.
The cause of the crisis is quite simple.
The modern economic system and technologies that provide it can exist only in the context of "growth". In this case, an increasing profit is provided not due to the emergence of more efficient technologies, but due to geographical expansion and the emergence of new markets.
But the possibilities of expansion will soon come to an end. The land is limited. Regions with cheap labor develop and the price of this labor grows. The number of people is limited, which means that the demand will not grow forever either.
Everything that is vital is necessary for people already invented. Niches are occupied by dinosaurs.
The volume of markets that sell "air", i.e. all sorts of "secondary securities" in monetary terms has already exceeded the volume of the real sector of the economy! But all sorts of securities (and the money itself, in fact, too) are only real resource management tools. The bubble cannot swell forever.
When all possible ways of making a profit by expanding in various real and virtual directions stop working, it is time to increase efficiency, as a way to reduce costs.
This will be the "fall of the meteorite." "Dinosaurs" centralized systems will not survive. The main thing is that by this moment the peering "mammals" would already have answers to the arising requests from users in order to occupy the vacated niche.
Let's see what happens in the economy when it reaches the limits of the ecumene in every sense.
What do people get financially from their business activities? Two things: salary and profit. Where are they spending them? Also on two things: consumption and investment. And how much do they cost? Our system has become closed, which means in the whole system:
salary + profit = consumption + investment.
All who received the money, spend it, consuming produced by them, and the remaining money is invested for profit.
If you invest in the real sector of the economy, then this will require new people who will work (and they are not, we have reached the border), and markets where to sell products, and even with profit (and they are not, either, because people have no free of money). In the modern world, this problem has already stood up in full growth. Now the profit on the invested money is provided by issuing and investing in “financial assets” for which the bubble grows.
For example , the issue of money in the United States now has virtually no effect on the real sector of the economy, but on the inflation bubble.
Here is another example of reaching the border.
Of course, all this will collapse and entail serious changes. It will not be possible to make profit using old methods.
The equilibrium formula to which everything must come is as follows:
salary = consumption + investment
Profit is zero, but only on average for the ecumene. But in reality - someone has a small profit, but someone has a loss. And that means competition.
In such a situation, for example, two percent that payment systems charge for a transaction will be too much.
If there are no superprofits, then there is no power, and if you withdraw it from the population by force, this will lead to unprofitability of production, degradation and defeat in the competition of states.
Only socially oriented states will survive. This is, in fact, the end of capitalism, predicted by Marx. Capitalism lived for so long after Marx only due to geographical expansion and the “invention” of financial bubbles.
Reduction of costs will be a priority for all, but not at the expense of people (they are consumers, who keep their wages, reduce demand), but due to the development of technologies, including technologies for controlling equity and management quality in the interests of all.
This is the “psychohistory” that guarantees the introduction of peer-to-peer technologies in the future.
Moreover, states are perceived not as legitimate authorities, but as shelters of usurpers of power, with which they must be fought by creating systems not controlled by them, including those using p2p technologies, in order to fall out of control of the “big brother”.
I believe that the present development and application in all spheres of life of p2p-technologies will be carried out with the full support of the state.
You have tried lies and bribes, played on fear and on
ambition, but, despite all efforts, did not achieve anything. Moreover,
you suffered one fiasco after another.
And under the ripples raised by you, a wave of tide was rising, predicted
Seldon; she rose slowly but surely.
Isaac Asimov. Founders and Empire
In my previous article, I provided a rationale for why peer-to-peer technologies will crowd out “conventional” technologies (which can be called client-server technologies). It's all about a significant increase in efficiency.
')
However, if this is the case, why is there no explosive growth in the use of peer-to-peer technologies? It would seem that the efficiency is higher, implement and rejoice ...
Why is there no support at the state level, but on the contrary, there are attempts at struggle and “regulation”? Examples of the relationship of rights holders with torrents and the American state with Bitcoin confirm this.
The reason is in the general approach, which is used by all people, and even those in power and even more so.
In programming, this approach is expressed by the phrase "work - do not touch."
The functionality that can be implemented by peer-to-peer technologies has already been implemented in other ways. Ecological niche is occupied. And while this implementation will be quite effective, peer-to-peer technologies will be content with the role of small mammals in dominant dinosaurs.
Yes, with an equally developed infrastructure, the peer-to-peer monetary system may be cheaper and more reliable than modern banks, but until the flaws of the old systems show up in all their glory, until they begin to confiscate deposits, or take draconian interest, there will be no incentive for the average user to switch to a more reliable one. the system.
The first example of this was the increase in interest in Bitcoin after the events in Cyprus.
In the “fat years” of dinosaurs the chances of mammals were quite small. It took a meteorite (well, or whatever it was), which freed the living space from dinosaurs.
From the point of view of the introduction of new technologies, it is necessary to change the external situation, making the effectiveness of existing systems insufficient. That is a crisis is needed.
The signs of this crisis are already visible: a decline in production, growing unemployment, attempts by states to patch holes with emergency measures, such as canceling bank secrets, fighting offshore companies, confiscating deposits in Cyprus, printing money.
The cause of the crisis is quite simple.
The modern economic system and technologies that provide it can exist only in the context of "growth". In this case, an increasing profit is provided not due to the emergence of more efficient technologies, but due to geographical expansion and the emergence of new markets.
But the possibilities of expansion will soon come to an end. The land is limited. Regions with cheap labor develop and the price of this labor grows. The number of people is limited, which means that the demand will not grow forever either.
Everything that is vital is necessary for people already invented. Niches are occupied by dinosaurs.
The volume of markets that sell "air", i.e. all sorts of "secondary securities" in monetary terms has already exceeded the volume of the real sector of the economy! But all sorts of securities (and the money itself, in fact, too) are only real resource management tools. The bubble cannot swell forever.
When all possible ways of making a profit by expanding in various real and virtual directions stop working, it is time to increase efficiency, as a way to reduce costs.
This will be the "fall of the meteorite." "Dinosaurs" centralized systems will not survive. The main thing is that by this moment the peering "mammals" would already have answers to the arising requests from users in order to occupy the vacated niche.
Let's see what happens in the economy when it reaches the limits of the ecumene in every sense.
What do people get financially from their business activities? Two things: salary and profit. Where are they spending them? Also on two things: consumption and investment. And how much do they cost? Our system has become closed, which means in the whole system:
salary + profit = consumption + investment.
All who received the money, spend it, consuming produced by them, and the remaining money is invested for profit.
If you invest in the real sector of the economy, then this will require new people who will work (and they are not, we have reached the border), and markets where to sell products, and even with profit (and they are not, either, because people have no free of money). In the modern world, this problem has already stood up in full growth. Now the profit on the invested money is provided by issuing and investing in “financial assets” for which the bubble grows.
For example , the issue of money in the United States now has virtually no effect on the real sector of the economy, but on the inflation bubble.
Here is another example of reaching the border.
Of course, all this will collapse and entail serious changes. It will not be possible to make profit using old methods.
The equilibrium formula to which everything must come is as follows:
salary = consumption + investment
Profit is zero, but only on average for the ecumene. But in reality - someone has a small profit, but someone has a loss. And that means competition.
In such a situation, for example, two percent that payment systems charge for a transaction will be too much.
If there are no superprofits, then there is no power, and if you withdraw it from the population by force, this will lead to unprofitability of production, degradation and defeat in the competition of states.
Only socially oriented states will survive. This is, in fact, the end of capitalism, predicted by Marx. Capitalism lived for so long after Marx only due to geographical expansion and the “invention” of financial bubbles.
Reduction of costs will be a priority for all, but not at the expense of people (they are consumers, who keep their wages, reduce demand), but due to the development of technologies, including technologies for controlling equity and management quality in the interests of all.
This is the “psychohistory” that guarantees the introduction of peer-to-peer technologies in the future.
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/186406/
All Articles