@fabgenovese@fuserleer@radixdlt 1/n It is very difficult to step back to gain perspective. 1. It is conceivable that any sort of exchange as we think of it is not needed 2. We are balancing opposites, areas of intrinsic tension
i. The DLT/dApps on top
ii. Mechanical laws/human preference
@fabgenovese@fuserleer@radixdlt 2/n
And 3. false opposites e.g.
i. Trust/trustless
Possibly also
ii. Decentralisation/law
Each huge subjects
I trust the entity on the other side of a code as contract if I understand there incentives and disincentives
There are other forms of more human trust that bring up
@fabgenovese@fuserleer@radixdlt 3/n 4. Anonymity/Known entity
All play together.
I think it is fair to say that financial instruments have never previously actively encompassed these crucial elements by design (and others I haven’t thought of).
Meanwhile the legal landscape evolves
@fabgenovese@fuserleer@radixdlt 4/n
Simplicity and complexity are implied by mechanical law/human whim or preferences
There is another crucial aspect:- 5. Transparency and knowledge discovery.
This is the primary appeal of the public ledger.
But millions of rows of uncorrelated data won’t do it!
@fabgenovese@fuserleer@radixdlt 5/n
AI is inevitable here
AI that will itself have to be transparent and factored in to the cost/value of arbitraged knowledge
I also think that using Rust (#Scrypto) on top of Radix DLT which, to my knowledge, uniquely creates essential extra data is a very good start!
n=5
@fabgenovese@fuserleer@radixdlt 1/n In my other replies I have outlined some of the tensions found in this area.
The point being made here is both about compliance and knowledge surfacing.
One hypothesis is that it is better to have few profitable CEX as they will have funds
@fabgenovese@fuserleer@radixdlt 2/n
With funds they attract clients so serve more who (might) otherwise get caught up in the nefarious
We can already see it’s a weak argument
Another, not mutually exclusive, argument is to have an automatic vetting regime.
@fabgenovese@fuserleer@radixdlt 3/n @fuserleer@radixdlt
This consumes different data points with the means to evaluate reliability
—
What is also needed is
a. The means to model different risk and risk mitigation scenarios
b. With the models available off chain before deploying them
This is not test net
@TaschaLabs@im_jakescott@radixdlt#Logic 1/n I have no concerns about the team delivering
I’m sure there will be difficulties and decisions to be made on the road from theory —> working PoC —> scheduled milestone release
That’s reality for you
Found here reddit.com/r/Radix/commen…
@TaschaLabs@im_jakescott@radixdlt#Logic 2/n Radix is in a unique position at the moment. The way the limits of the problem domain are technically defined is in terms of decentralisation, scalability and security.
@IntuitMachine I followed Carlos down his threadreader roll page.
Carlos E. Perez Profile picture
Carlos E. Perez @IntuitMachine
23 Jun 19
It's ironic that Von Neumann described the circuits of his new invention (i.e. the computer) in terms of McCulloch-Pitts logic for neurons.
@IntuitMachine Walter Pitts was homeless at 13 and hid in the local library. In the library, he read all 3 volumes of Bertrand Russell's Principia Mathematica. nautil.us/issue/21/infor…
@IntuitMachine Godel however proved later that Russell's ambitions to frame all knowledge using mathematical logic had fundamental limits in its completeness. This sentiment was also expressed by Norbert Wiener (while as a student of Russell).