diff --git a/content/foundation/posts/thc-03-cooperating-on-blockchain.md b/content/foundation/posts/thc-03-cooperating-on-blockchain.md index 42534ad3..79a13489 100644 --- a/content/foundation/posts/thc-03-cooperating-on-blockchain.md +++ b/content/foundation/posts/thc-03-cooperating-on-blockchain.md @@ -17,26 +17,27 @@ This article is part of [The Hivemaker's Code](https://toolkit.ethswarm.org/) se - Article 5: [Anonymity in the Cryptosphere](https://blog.ethswarm.org/foundation/2023/anonymity-in-the-cryptosphere/) - Article 6: [Democracy and Decentralization](https://blog.ethswarm.org/foundation/2023/democracy-and-decentralization/) - Article 7: [Is Net Neutrality Important for Blockchains?](https://blog.ethswarm.org/foundation/2023/is-net-neutrality-important-for-blockchains/) +- Article 8: [Why Interoperability is the Bedrock of Digital Freedom](https://blog.ethswarm.org/foundation/2023/why-interoperability-is-the-bedrock-of-digital-freedom/) ## How to Manage Commons in Digital Ecosystems? ![pattern](/uploads/pattern3-0.png) **Authors: Oliver Lukitsch, Michal Matlon, Gregor Žavcer, Thomas Fundneider, Markus Peschl, Lena Müller-Naendrup** -How do we deal with something that’s neither privately owned nor managed by authorities on our behalf? Something that everyone, as well as no one, owns. In other words, how do we manage “commons” so that their tragedy doesn't become a reality? +How do we deal with something that’s neither privately owned nor managed by authorities on our behalf? Something that everyone, as well as no one, owns. In other words, how do we manage “commons” so that their tragedy doesn't become a reality? Commons are widely shared things such as goods, small-scale resources like irrigation systems, as well as more abstract and large-scale resources such as a shared language or a climate ecosystem. The issue of who takes over responsibility for something that no one owns but everyone uses has occupied political, philosophical, and psychological debates for centuries. What drives human cooperation in using the commons? And in crypto, can we collectively pursue goals in anonymous groups without clear institutionalized guidance and ownership? -Social psychologists, for example, say we have mental biases shaping our cooperation. For instance, we are more likely to cooperate with people we are related to, who we think belong to the same group as us, or who look familiar to us. +Social psychologists, for example, say we have mental biases shaping our cooperation. For instance, we are more likely to cooperate with people we are related to, who we think belong to the same group as us, or who look familiar to us. On the other hand, economists advocating for Rational Choice Theory have claimed that our actions and decisions are always motivated by self-interest, personal preferences, and benefits. -The question of human cooperation has witnessed a revival in light of the explosion of the internet. The commons evolving within the digital sphere are even less tangible and more far-reaching than what we have dealt with so far. +The question of human cooperation has witnessed a revival in light of the explosion of the internet. The commons evolving within the digital sphere are even less tangible and more far-reaching than what we have dealt with so far. Online networks and platforms stretch over ever-growing communities of diverse people dispersed around the globe. We connect with people we have never met and we cooperate with them extensively online. We overcome our alleged biases and together create wonders such as Wikipedia, which hosts human knowledge created purely on voluntary terms. - + The question remains. How can we cooperate sustainably in times of increasing digital anonymity? How do we build collective trust, counter free-riding, and use shared resources responsibly? How can we replicate the success of Wikipedia? @@ -44,23 +45,23 @@ The question remains. How can we cooperate sustainably in times of increasing di ![pattern](/uploads/pattern3-1.png) -Let's come back to the topic of the commons. The depletion of the Aral Sea, once the fourth-largest lake in the world, perfectly illustrates how a shared resource falls prey to a tragedy. +Let's come back to the topic of the commons. The depletion of the Aral Sea, once the fourth-largest lake in the world, perfectly illustrates how a shared resource falls prey to a tragedy. -Between the 1960s and 2018, the sea's surface decreased by over eighty percent, leaving behind a barren, toxic, and inhospitable desert. Millions of people and fish lost their home environment of 54 000 square kilometers of freshwater. The story of the Aral Sea is an environmental catastrophe, but even worse, it's a human-made one. And some might claim it’s a Tragedy of the Commons. +Between the 1960s and 2018, the sea's surface decreased by over eighty percent, leaving behind a barren, toxic, and inhospitable desert. Millions of people and fish lost their home environment of 54 000 square kilometers of freshwater. The story of the Aral Sea is an environmental catastrophe, but even worse, it's a human-made one. And some might claim it’s a Tragedy of the Commons. ![img](/uploads/blog3.png) *Image: NASA Goddard Space Center, https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/* -The Aral Sea's freshwater has been used for fishery and agriculture by Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan farmers for centuries. Until the Soviet leaders initiated a five-year plan of water-intensive cotton farming in the desert of Uzbekistan, the lake provided a perfectly healthy ecosystem. +The Aral Sea's freshwater has been used for fishery and agriculture by Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan farmers for centuries. Until the Soviet leaders initiated a five-year plan of water-intensive cotton farming in the desert of Uzbekistan, the lake provided a perfectly healthy ecosystem. -As the Soviet project involved redirecting two of the largest water-supplying rivers to use for irrigation purposes, the Aral lake rapidly lost a thousand cubic kilometers of freshwater to the cotton industry of the Soviet Union. The sea is a common water resource that used to be accessible to everyone. However, as one stakeholder overused the water resource, the lake's value for others declined massively. +As the Soviet project involved redirecting two of the largest water-supplying rivers to use for irrigation purposes, the Aral lake rapidly lost a thousand cubic kilometers of freshwater to the cotton industry of the Soviet Union. The sea is a common water resource that used to be accessible to everyone. However, as one stakeholder overused the water resource, the lake's value for others declined massively. -So what does the Tragedy of the Commons mean? In 1968, the socio-biologist Garrett Hardin published a Science article titled "The Tragedy of Commons." The article stated that the finite nature and open character of shared resources would inevitably lead to overuse and depletion. He wrote: +So what does the Tragedy of the Commons mean? In 1968, the socio-biologist Garrett Hardin published a Science article titled "The Tragedy of Commons." The article stated that the finite nature and open character of shared resources would inevitably lead to overuse and depletion. He wrote: "Therein is the tragedy. Each man is locked into a system that compels him to increase his herd without limit - in a world that is limited. Ruin is the destination toward which all men rush, each pursuing his own best interest in a society that believes in the freedom of the commons." (Hardin, G., 1968) -According to Hardin, without top-down interventions and governing authorities, the self-driven individuals who use common resources will eventually be confronted with a threefold problem. +According to Hardin, without top-down interventions and governing authorities, the self-driven individuals who use common resources will eventually be confronted with a threefold problem. The first issue is overuse. If a shared resource is finite, one person using it decreases its value for another person. Second, as the resource is open by default, no one is excluded from its use. This makes its monitoring and governance difficult. And last, any problem increases in complexity in a large community. Decision-making is much easier in local and intimate communities compared to anonymous, large groups. @@ -71,7 +72,7 @@ The symptoms of those three problems are so-called "free-riding individuals." Wh ## Ostrom's 8 Principles for Managing Commons ![pattern](/uploads/pattern3-2.png) -Hardin's Tragedy of the Commons can provide a simple explanation for all kinds of social dilemmas: traffic jams, overfishing of oceans, or dirty public toilets. Nevertheless, there are examples of successful, self-governed commons and collective management systems, like the [Acequias](https://lasacequias.org/) in New Mexico, sustainably managed by ordinary people for generations. +Hardin's Tragedy of the Commons can provide a simple explanation for all kinds of social dilemmas: traffic jams, overfishing of oceans, or dirty public toilets. Nevertheless, there are examples of successful, self-governed commons and collective management systems, like the [Acequias](https://lasacequias.org/) in New Mexico, sustainably managed by ordinary people for generations. And one scientist decided to find out what stands behind thriving communities that use their resources responsibly. In her Nobel Prize-winning research, Elinor Ostrom concluded that the reality of human cooperation in using commons might not be as grim as Hardin has sketched. @@ -80,13 +81,13 @@ Based on her decades-long research of well-managed commons, Ostrom strongly beli 1. **Commons require clearly defined boundaries:** It should be clear who has access to commons, under what conditions, and where they begin and end. 2. **Governing rules should match local needs and conditions:** Commons are context-sensitive, so people in the community should create the rules. 3. **Participatory decision-making:** People affected by rules are likelier to adhere to them if they have participated in defining them. -4. **Monitoring the commons systems and community:** The community must develop a system for checking and monitoring the community members' behavior. +4. **Monitoring the commons systems and community:** The community must develop a system for checking and monitoring the community members' behavior. 5. **Graduated sanctions for rule violators:** Commons work best when they include systems of warnings, fines, and informal reputational consequences before banishing members from the resource for good. 6. **Providing accessible, low-cost means for conflict resolution:** Members should be encouraged and enabled to bring up any issue so that problems can be solved by mediation rather than ignored. 7. **Other authorities should recognize the commons:** Commons can only sustain themselves if their rules are recognized as legitimate by higher authorities under which the community falls. 8. **Commons should be embedded in larger systems:** Many commons require large-scale cooperation and widespread responsibility to be managed successfully. -By outlining these principles, Ostrom illustrated how commons could be successfully managed and provided in-depth insights into why some groups fail to govern themselves. In line with Hardin's reasoning, Ostrom argued that communication and trust constitute critical challenges to group-based governance of shared resources. +By outlining these principles, Ostrom illustrated how commons could be successfully managed and provided in-depth insights into why some groups fail to govern themselves. In line with Hardin's reasoning, Ostrom argued that communication and trust constitute critical challenges to group-based governance of shared resources. Suppose there are neither efficient ways to monitor social behavior nor means to introduce sanctions in case of a dispute. In that case, the commons fall prey to their substractibility and openness. Free riders will then benefit from the community, and the collective overuse might initiate a tragedy. @@ -104,7 +105,7 @@ Generally, the blockchain constitutes a technological infrastructure for applica 2. Blockchain ledgers are accessible to anyone participating in the system. 3. Blockchains are immutable, holding that already existing information on the blockchain can never be deleted. -In addition, they are run by a distributed verification system (like “mining”), through which connected computers verify transactions added to the chain's final blocks. Joining the validation process is then rewarded, usually with a virtual currency the given community uses. The seemingly simple principle of a decentralized, non-exclusive system that rewards cooperation posits a promising scenario for the common's resources dilemma. +In addition, they are run by a distributed verification system (like “mining”), through which connected computers verify transactions added to the chain's final blocks. Joining the validation process is then rewarded, usually with a virtual currency the given community uses. The seemingly simple principle of a decentralized, non-exclusive system that rewards cooperation posits a promising scenario for the common's resources dilemma. ## The Immunity of the Blockchain @@ -132,11 +133,11 @@ For a successful commoning process, connecting people cooperatively via transpar Being a part of the hype often overshadows the desire to understand the underlying blockchain technology, resulting in an ever-growing community run by a small enclave of blockchain-skilled people. Especially in light of this rising unbalanced exclusivity, it is essential not to forget the blockchain's original transparent and decentralized culture. -Insights such as Elinor Ostrom's principles could serve as a guide for implementing blockchain technology as an infrastructure encouraging cooperation and trust. Many blockchain communities still struggle with governance, internal communication, decision mechanisms, and planning for future development. +Insights such as Elinor Ostrom's principles could serve as a guide for implementing blockchain technology as an infrastructure encouraging cooperation and trust. Many blockchain communities still struggle with governance, internal communication, decision mechanisms, and planning for future development. These communities could use Ostrom's principles as a framework for organizing themselves. Token-based membership models could clearly define a community's members and borders, allowing for inclusive growth and providing incentives for cooperation. And smart contracts could allow for fast, decentralized decision-making processes. Projects like [Giveth](https://giveth.io/) are already aligning themselves around creating purposeful social change. -We have used these principles as a model for decentralized, value-aligned ecosystems governance in our toolkit. Their potential goes far beyond pastures and irrigation systems as we enter the new era of global cooperation. +We have used these principles as a model for decentralized, value-aligned ecosystems governance in our toolkit. Their potential goes far beyond pastures and irrigation systems as we enter the new era of global cooperation. As we saw, overcoming the Tragedy of the Commons is not guaranteed. However, we believe that by learning from practices tested throughout centuries, new decentralized communities can successfully sustain themselves and use their potential purposefully. diff --git a/content/foundation/posts/thc-04-the-satoshis-dream.md b/content/foundation/posts/thc-04-the-satoshis-dream.md index f86b01a9..41cb1d0b 100644 --- a/content/foundation/posts/thc-04-the-satoshis-dream.md +++ b/content/foundation/posts/thc-04-the-satoshis-dream.md @@ -17,19 +17,20 @@ This article is part of [The Hivemaker's Code](https://toolkit.ethswarm.org/) se - Article 5: [Anonymity in the Cryptosphere](https://blog.ethswarm.org/foundation/2023/anonymity-in-the-cryptosphere/) - Article 6: [Democracy and Decentralization](https://blog.ethswarm.org/foundation/2023/democracy-and-decentralization/) - Article 7: [Is Net Neutrality Important for Blockchains?](https://blog.ethswarm.org/foundation/2023/is-net-neutrality-important-for-blockchains/) +- Article 8: [Why Interoperability is the Bedrock of Digital Freedom](https://blog.ethswarm.org/foundation/2023/why-interoperability-is-the-bedrock-of-digital-freedom/) ## Is Blockchain Really Zero-Trust? ![pattern](/uploads/pattern4-0.png) **Authors: Oliver Lukitsch, Michal Matlon, Gregor Žavcer, Thomas Fundneider, Markus Peschl, Lena Müller-Naendrup** -On February 11th, 2009, shortly after 10 p.m., a user with the pseudonym Satoshi Nakamoto wrote a post on the Peer to Peer Foundation forum. He announced that he had developed a new, decentralized online cash system. Satoshi’s idea was to remove trust from the process of paying. +On February 11th, 2009, shortly after 10 p.m., a user with the pseudonym Satoshi Nakamoto wrote a post on the Peer to Peer Foundation forum. He announced that he had developed a new, decentralized online cash system. Satoshi’s idea was to remove trust from the process of paying. “The root problem with conventional currency is all the trust that's required to make it work,” he wrote. “The central bank must be trusted not to debase the currency, but the history of fiat currencies is full of breaches of that trust. Banks must be trusted to hold our money and transfer it electronically, but they lend it out in waves of credit bubbles with barely a fraction in reserve.” He then continued to describe how publicly available encryption algorithms have already allowed people to take control of their privacy, removing the need to trust administrators of computer systems to protect their personal information. “It's time,” he said, “we had the same thing for money.” -Fast forward to 2022, and we still don’t know who Satoshi is. His creation, Bitcoin, however, started a new era of cryptocurrencies which captured worldwide attention and amassed almost 3 trillion US dollars in market value in November 2021. That’s almost as much as the value of the second biggest company in the world - Microsoft. Behind this story, an even more fundamental shift is taking place that challenges our established notion of trust. +Fast forward to 2022, and we still don’t know who Satoshi is. His creation, Bitcoin, however, started a new era of cryptocurrencies which captured worldwide attention and amassed almost 3 trillion US dollars in market value in November 2021. That’s almost as much as the value of the second biggest company in the world - Microsoft. Behind this story, an even more fundamental shift is taking place that challenges our established notion of trust. Our whole human society is built on trust. We trust complete strangers to such a degree, that if we started questioning it, virtually all of our daily activities would become impossible. At the same time, the main motto of the crypto world became “removing the need for trust”. So what does this mean for the future of human interactions? And why does this topic surface now, on the cusp of an ongoing fusion of the physical and virtual worlds in which we live? @@ -59,7 +60,7 @@ Another popular argument says that trust can make you resistant to change your v There are two approaches that makers of digital ecosystems can take towards solving the question of trust. On the one hand, they can embrace the risk that trust normally entails and take the so-called “trust-risk” approach. On the other hand, they can dispense with trust altogether, taking a “zero-trust approach”. -Both approaches have advantages and shortcomings. Embracing the balance of trust and risk allows you to grow the value of trust in your ecosystem. In contrast, zero-trust can minimize security risk in the system while also erasing any necessity for trust between people in it. While this approach increases security by removing the possibility to compromise some of the actors, it also encourages a trust-less value system. +Both approaches have advantages and shortcomings. Embracing the balance of trust and risk allows you to grow the value of trust in your ecosystem. In contrast, zero-trust can minimize security risk in the system while also erasing any necessity for trust between people in it. While this approach increases security by removing the possibility to compromise some of the actors, it also encourages a trust-less value system. Let’s take a closer look at these approaches and think about how to deal with the topic of trust when building digital ecosystems. After all, the original conditions under which people trust each other have changed significantly in recent years. We talk to others, share our secrets, buy clothes, close business deals, and start new relationships, all in the digital world. @@ -83,24 +84,24 @@ While we could say that even in the second case, there is always a person who we ![pattern](/uploads/pattern4-4.png) -Let’s dig a bit deeper and take a look at what is necessary for people to trust someone to behave a certain way. +Let’s dig a bit deeper and take a look at what is necessary for people to trust someone to behave a certain way. First, we have to believe (or hope) that the trustee is competent to do what they are entrusted to do. We could never trust someone in taking care of our children if we knew that they were incompetent to do so. -Second, to trust, we must also be optimistic about the other person’s commitment to what we expect him/her to do. Especially rationalist philosophers would claim that the trustee’s commitment and competence will be enough for making them trustworthy. +Second, to trust, we must also be optimistic about the other person’s commitment to what we expect him/her to do. Especially rationalist philosophers would claim that the trustee’s commitment and competence will be enough for making them trustworthy. They say that to trust another person, it doesn’t matter whether they are motivated by goodwill. If this were the case, you could, for example, trust someone who has your interest in mind even when it’s tied to their, possibly immoral, self-interest. Say you get a flat tire. You should trust someone who stops to help you change it, by this way of thinking, both when they do it altruistically, as well as when they do it to delay a date they are not looking forward to. -In contrast, the philosopher Annette Baier developed the influential idea that trust necessarily involves the goodwill of the trustee (to commit to what is expected of him). It is an idea that had a considerable impact outside of philosophy, in areas such as law and bioethics. The idea is that we trust a person only if that person’s commitment is driven by benevolence. One might wonder whether this is really necessary for trust. Yet, goodwill is what helps keep apart trust from mere reliance. +In contrast, the philosopher Annette Baier developed the influential idea that trust necessarily involves the goodwill of the trustee (to commit to what is expected of him). It is an idea that had a considerable impact outside of philosophy, in areas such as law and bioethics. The idea is that we trust a person only if that person’s commitment is driven by benevolence. One might wonder whether this is really necessary for trust. Yet, goodwill is what helps keep apart trust from mere reliance. -To take one example. You might rely on your business partner not to jeopardize your joint business. But you might also rely on him only because he is pursuing his own interest. You don't need to trust her to have such a reliable relationship. In contrast, you could have a business partner who also has your best interest in mind. That would be a person you actually trust because you can assume their good will toward you. +To take one example. You might rely on your business partner not to jeopardize your joint business. But you might also rely on him only because he is pursuing his own interest. You don't need to trust her to have such a reliable relationship. In contrast, you could have a business partner who also has your best interest in mind. That would be a person you actually trust because you can assume their good will toward you. -For digital ecosystems, reliance and security are major concerns. Trust, on the other hand, involves a moral concern any human ecosystem will face - whether digital or not. It’s one thing to build an ecosystem that minimizes the need for trust, but it’s quite another to build one which won’t enable or even discourages trust. Nevertheless, such ecosystems are often created today under the idea that trust is something undesirable. +For digital ecosystems, reliance and security are major concerns. Trust, on the other hand, involves a moral concern any human ecosystem will face - whether digital or not. It’s one thing to build an ecosystem that minimizes the need for trust, but it’s quite another to build one which won’t enable or even discourages trust. Nevertheless, such ecosystems are often created today under the idea that trust is something undesirable. How to reconcile both the enhanced reliability of a system with enabling trust between humans is a fundamental question for building purposeful and enabling digital ecosystems. In times when trust in other people and institutions is so low in our societies, we should strive for design decisions that start repairing this divide and build up social capital - the fundamental building block of a well-working society. - + @@ -112,7 +113,7 @@ The original Bitcoin Whitepaper describes blockchain as trust-free. It says that When we take a closer look though, we notice that trust hasn’t disappeared completely from the equation. As the anthropologist Bill Maurer and his colleagues suggested, while it’s true you don’t need to trust an intermediary, you still “must simply trust the code or, more precisely, the cryptographic algorithm.” (Maurer et al., p. 264) -Today, many scholars believe there is no such thing as trust in technology – but only the belief that technology is reliable. Since technology can’t have any goodwill on its own (at least not yet), you can’t really build up the same trust you would have in another person. +Today, many scholars believe there is no such thing as trust in technology – but only the belief that technology is reliable. Since technology can’t have any goodwill on its own (at least not yet), you can’t really build up the same trust you would have in another person. So in the context of blockchain, we might say that the technology is reliable and secure, but that the entity we actually trust is the group of people who participate in the network. To name this situation, Reid Hoffman, the founder of LinkedIn coined the term “trustless trust” or what Kevin Werbach called “distributed trust”. @@ -123,7 +124,7 @@ But how can we trust anyone if we lack any closer, contextual knowledge about th Our answer to the question of whether blockchain-based systems can be trustworthy will change depending on what part of the system we look at. -First, trust in individual people is really redundant when making transactions on the blockchain. +First, trust in individual people is really redundant when making transactions on the blockchain. Second, true trust in technology, and specifically, code, is also not required (or possible), because it’s a matter of reliability, as we mentioned earlier. @@ -142,7 +143,7 @@ For example, it describes how you can talk about Aspirin without knowing its che Or you might have no idea how to check whether the ring on your finger is really made of gold or is fake, but you can still talk about it as a gold ring because, at some point, you trusted an expert telling you that it really was gold. -The same applies to blockchain technology. If you are a programmer whose job is to build or research blockchain-based digital infrastructure, you are the expert in this case. But there are many more who have a rough-and-ready understanding of blockchain technology at best. Then, there are many more who are in it for the money without really knowing what they are investing in. +The same applies to blockchain technology. If you are a programmer whose job is to build or research blockchain-based digital infrastructure, you are the expert in this case. But there are many more who have a rough-and-ready understanding of blockchain technology at best. Then, there are many more who are in it for the money without really knowing what they are investing in. Even if the system is really built in a way that makes trust fully redundant, many people don’t have the means to test and prove this. They have to trust the word of engineers that the system will work as supposed. @@ -171,7 +172,7 @@ So far, we talked about what trust means in the context of blockchain-based digi ### Trust and Regulation -Regulation is often painted as the enemy of innovation. A highly regulated market is said to undermine people’s entrepreneurial freedom. However, historically, regulation has also provided for a safe environment for users to live in. +Regulation is often painted as the enemy of innovation. A highly regulated market is said to undermine people’s entrepreneurial freedom. However, historically, regulation has also provided for a safe environment for users to live in. In fact, the regulation of the internet is considered an important step towards its wider adoption. As Kevin Werbach, Professor of Legal Studies & Business Ethics at the University of Pennsylvania, suggests, “the knowledge that governments were operating to police abusive practices helped promote trust in the new and unfamiliar world of virtual transactions. Internet advocates began to call for government intervention to enforce network neutrality rules and privacy protections.” @@ -186,7 +187,7 @@ However, Werbach suggests the regulatory environment is not something we can ign We must answer these questions in ways that allow for freedom of expression, ideas, and innovation, yet provide for a trusting ecosystem that draws in new users. ### Sanctions Don’t Lead to Trust -Blockchain technology provides for a trust-less environment. Yet, the ecosystems that are built on such technology might actually aim for increasing trust between their users by using reputation and sanction mechanisms. +Blockchain technology provides for a trust-less environment. Yet, the ecosystems that are built on such technology might actually aim for increasing trust between their users by using reputation and sanction mechanisms. However, psychological studies have shown that an environment that sanctions people who don’t cooperate doesn’t increase the trust within a group. Instead, they diminish trust. This suggests that the mere presence of a sanctioning system can make people dependent on the system to police behavior – and therefore reduces the need for trust, to begin with. @@ -195,13 +196,13 @@ A similar, yet desirable effect might be driven by blockchain technology. As the ## Trust and knowledge-sharing in the digital domain ![pattern](/uploads/pattern4-10.png) -To conclude, we believe that blockchain-based ecosystems must overcome a paradox to succeed. +To conclude, we believe that blockchain-based ecosystems must overcome a paradox to succeed. -On the one hand, they must be reliable and secure without a man in the middle – in fact, they are poised to be more reliable and secure because there is no man in the middle. +On the one hand, they must be reliable and secure without a man in the middle – in fact, they are poised to be more reliable and secure because there is no man in the middle. On the other, a vibrant, living ecosystem needs trust to flourish, as much as it needs to reduce the risk of its users. For an ecosystem to thrive and for innovations to emerge, knowledge must be shared among its participants. -That means trust is essential for the exchange of knowledge. Any ecosystem that stands for open-source, the accessibility of knowledge, and its democratization through decentralized storage must embrace trust as a means to connect people. Moreover, people are more likely to share knowledge when they trust one another. +That means trust is essential for the exchange of knowledge. Any ecosystem that stands for open-source, the accessibility of knowledge, and its democratization through decentralized storage must embrace trust as a means to connect people. Moreover, people are more likely to share knowledge when they trust one another. Trust in a community is, therefore, an essential enabler for its growth and emergence of any knowledge-driven digital ecosystem. And we need to keep that in mind when designing new ecosystems, where people will interact in the future. diff --git a/content/foundation/posts/thc-05-anonymity.md b/content/foundation/posts/thc-05-anonymity.md index 3becde8c..1b5ee6fc 100644 --- a/content/foundation/posts/thc-05-anonymity.md +++ b/content/foundation/posts/thc-05-anonymity.md @@ -17,6 +17,7 @@ This article is part of [The Hivemaker's Code](https://toolkit.ethswarm.org/) se - Article 5: Anonymity in the Cryptosphere - Article 6: [Democracy and Decentralization](https://blog.ethswarm.org/foundation/2023/democracy-and-decentralization/) - Article 7: [Is Net Neutrality Important for Blockchains?](https://blog.ethswarm.org/foundation/2023/is-net-neutrality-important-for-blockchains/) +- Article 8: [Why Interoperability is the Bedrock of Digital Freedom](https://blog.ethswarm.org/foundation/2023/why-interoperability-is-the-bedrock-of-digital-freedom/) ## A balancing act between crime and an open society ![pattern](/uploads/pattern5-0.png) @@ -37,7 +38,7 @@ This is called a "rug-pull." A developer attracts investors to a project and pul This is only one example of criminal activity in the blockchain world. Cryptocurrencies and DeFi protocols can also be used as effective money-laundering instruments. They can be used for credit card fraud, online grooming, and the exploitation of disenfranchised people for criminal action. Moreover, cryptocurrencies can be used as an anonymous, untraceable payment method on darknet markets. Like the famous, now non-existent[ Silk Road](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silk_Road_(marketplace)). - + The anonymity of blockchain can create a safe harbor for illegal activities. Yet, it is also a vital instrument to safeguard the values of an open, democratic society. In this article, we explore the tension between anonymity/privacy and the need for policing in the cryptosphere. And we look at whether the former contradicts the latter. @@ -73,11 +74,11 @@ One final note on the topic of rug pulls: Sometimes, it is easy to identify a cr At least as of 2020, there was only a little evidence that terrorist organizations have yet turned to the "cybersphere as a revenue-generating tool," according to Isaac Kfir from the Institute for Economics and Peace. Instead, they used digital platforms for propaganda and recruitment. One reason could be that terrorists see themselves as less technologically literate than national governments and their cyber intelligence services. - -However, many terrorist organizations have made their members aware of cryptocurrencies as anonymous payment options. The "Islamic State" reportedly transferred Bitcoin, which was worth millions of dollars at the time, Kfir claims. - +However, many terrorist organizations have made their members aware of cryptocurrencies as anonymous payment options. The "Islamic State" reportedly transferred Bitcoin, which was worth millions of dollars at the time, Kfir claims. + + Still, for now, cryptocurrencies might be of limited use for terrorist organizations since, ultimately, their operations require goods that cannot be bought with Bitcoin and similar tokens. Moreover, the value of cryptocurrencies is volatile (even in the case of stablecoins, as Terra demonstrated). The upshot: terrorist organizations might find cryptocurrencies and blockchain assets simply too impractical for their goals. diff --git a/content/foundation/posts/thc-06-decentralization-and-democratic.md b/content/foundation/posts/thc-06-decentralization-and-democratic.md index 4dbbdc4a..396d0511 100644 --- a/content/foundation/posts/thc-06-decentralization-and-democratic.md +++ b/content/foundation/posts/thc-06-decentralization-and-democratic.md @@ -17,6 +17,7 @@ This article is part of [The Hivemaker's Code](https://toolkit.ethswarm.org/) se - Article 5: [Anonymity in the Cryptosphere](https://blog.ethswarm.org/foundation/2023/anonymity-in-the-cryptosphere/) - Article 6: Democracy and Decentralization - Article 7: [Is Net Neutrality Important for Blockchains?](https://blog.ethswarm.org/foundation/2023/is-net-neutrality-important-for-blockchains/) +- Article 8: [Why Interoperability is the Bedrock of Digital Freedom](https://blog.ethswarm.org/foundation/2023/why-interoperability-is-the-bedrock-of-digital-freedom/) ## How Do They Fit Together? @@ -24,12 +25,12 @@ This article is part of [The Hivemaker's Code](https://toolkit.ethswarm.org/) se **Authors: Oliver Lukitsch, Michal Matlon, Gregor Žavcer, Thomas Fundneider, Markus Peschl, Lena Müller-Naendrup** - + The world we live in today is unjust. Glaring inequalities exist between the global North and the South, but also within European economies. All this can make it challenging to feel like there is progress happening. It seems we are moving backward, leaving humankind in a worse state than we found it. Nonetheless, there is progress to report. Despite all the atrocities, our democracies have evolved for the better. Minority rights have become more important to policymakers, and although there are setbacks to be felt everywhere, we live in more liberal, democratic societies than we did four decades ago. -It's easy to get lost in the face of major setbacks, like the devastating blows to women's rights in the US. But the public reaction to Black Lives Matter and #metoo shows that our moral standards have refined too and that we are increasingly sensitive to injustice and unequal power relations. Though democratic values are at the height of their moral punch, they are being threatened by reactionary and authoritarian bents in almost equal measure. +It's easy to get lost in the face of major setbacks, like the devastating blows to women's rights in the US. But the public reaction to Black Lives Matter and #metoo shows that our moral standards have refined too and that we are increasingly sensitive to injustice and unequal power relations. Though democratic values are at the height of their moral punch, they are being threatened by reactionary and authoritarian bents in almost equal measure. A similar ambivalence has gripped the digital sphere. Internet giants have gained more power than ever. They collect information and exert a growing influence on elections and other political processes. In contrast, there is the GDPR in Europe and the vision of decentralized digital infrastructure, the Web3. Especially the latter is a bearer of hope and potential a realizer of democratic ideals. And we'll now take a look precisely at this technology. @@ -39,18 +40,18 @@ Although they were heralded as saviors for freedom and autonomy, the Internet an The vision of a free Web3 is opposed to this prospect. It gave us a new perspective on how we can organize socially. It holds the promise of redistributing power, creating a genuinely self-organized, decentralized economy in which everybody who participates can own a piece of the pie. Is it set in stone that Web3 delivers on its promise, however? - + **One of the biggest threats to Web3 is that its promise of a self-sovereign and decentralized internet remains broken while becoming a playground for venture capitalists and early adopters.** - + Emphasizing the importance of decentralization is a good premise for a more open and fair web. But will it suffice? A fundamental value of a truly open and democratic community is that a society must maintain a balance between individual freedom and restriction. We can only achieve personal freedom by preventing other individuals from undermining each other's ability to act. - + This culminates in philosopher Karl Popper's idea that an open society must defend its openness if it’s not to compromise its liberal democratic foundation. Any restriction an open society accepts must ultimately increase the individual's freedom, sovereignty, and possibilities. - + Let's take Popper's principle as a starting point as we look at how blockchain and Web3 can promote a genuinely democratic Internet. In other words, let us look at how a Web3 ecosystem can enable a fundamentally open society. @@ -183,7 +184,7 @@ You might object that Proof of Stake will create an even playing field for every ## Web3: How to Create an Open Society? ![pattern](/uploads/pattern6-4.png) - + In many global economies, the unequal distribution of resources is a fundamental systemic condition. But there are political institutions that can counteract these tendencies. For instance, states impose taxes, prevent monopolies, and regulate fair competition between market players. Hence, while it is not (and cannot be) the main function of a blockchain to counter inequality, it can only be the role of its governance. Some might see this as a political intervention that undermines the neutrality of an otherwise basic, neutral infrastructure. However, we must not confuse the question of neutrality and political partisanship with the question of openness and freedom. The question is how to think of basic infrastructure as democratic or open. @@ -263,7 +264,7 @@ In many cases, DAOs can help organizations to sustain their autonomy and to incr Blockchain, a technology that enables financial autonomy and self-determination for those who use it, has been criticized for its contradictory vision. One that emphasizes the participatory virtues and self-empowerment of shareholders, users, and members. However, this vision is undermined by the reinforcing feedback loops that allow those with the biggest stakes to gain even more. - + One of the biggest threats to Web3 is that its promise of a self-sovereign and decentralized internet remains broken while becoming a playground for venture capitalists and early adopters. A democratic internet should be sufficiently open to allow entrepreneurs and investors to do their business. But it must also give rise to ecosystems where truly democratic, self-empowering, decentralizing processes and communities can emerge. @@ -303,6 +304,3 @@ One of the biggest threats to Web3 is that its promise of a self-sovereign and d - Rice-Oxley, Mark. “Democracy Is Good for Your Health and Heart, Major Study Finds.” The Guardian, March 13, 2019, sec. World news. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/mar/13/democracy-is-good-for-your-health-and-heart-major-study-finds. - Weyl, Eric Glen, Puja Ohlhaver, and Vitalik Buterin. “Decentralized Society: Finding Web3’s Soul.” SSRN Electronic Journal, 2022. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4105763. - Young, Sage D. “Will a Proof-of-Stake Ethereum Lead to More Centralization?,” May 18, 2022. https://www.coindesk.com/layer2/2022/05/18/will-a-proof-of-stake-ethereum-lead-to-more-centralization/. - - - diff --git a/content/foundation/posts/thc-07-swarm-neutrality.md b/content/foundation/posts/thc-07-swarm-neutrality.md index 56e8552c..d80e2f01 100644 --- a/content/foundation/posts/thc-07-swarm-neutrality.md +++ b/content/foundation/posts/thc-07-swarm-neutrality.md @@ -17,6 +17,7 @@ This article is part of [The Hivemaker's Code](https://toolkit.ethswarm.org/) se - Article 5: [Anonymity in the Cryptosphere](https://blog.ethswarm.org/foundation/2023/anonymity-in-the-cryptosphere/) - Article 6: [Democracy and Decentralization](https://blog.ethswarm.org/foundation/2023/democracy-and-decentralization/) - Article 7: Is Net Neutrality Important for Blockchains? +- Article 8: [Why Interoperability is the Bedrock of Digital Freedom](https://blog.ethswarm.org/foundation/2023/why-interoperability-is-the-bedrock-of-digital-freedom/) ## How to Balance a Challenging Demand ![pattern](/uploads/pattern3-7.png) diff --git a/content/foundation/posts/thc-08-swarm-interoperability.md b/content/foundation/posts/thc-08-swarm-interoperability.md new file mode 100644 index 00000000..724b6931 --- /dev/null +++ b/content/foundation/posts/thc-08-swarm-interoperability.md @@ -0,0 +1,280 @@ ++++ +banner = "/uploads/8-THC.png" +categories = [ "Ecosystem" ] +date = 2023-10-04T00:00:01.000Z +description = "The European Union is a remarkable project granting us many freedoms so convenient it’s all too easy to take them for granted. We can easily move our goods, our bucks, and ourselves between different countries within it. This freedom to move and provide services anywhere is the cornerstone of the democratic and open way of life and economy in Europe." +references_and_footnotes = [ ] +title = "Why Interoperability is the Bedrock of Digital Freedom" +_template = "post" ++++ + + +This article is part of [The Hivemaker's Code](https://toolkit.ethswarm.org/) series: +- Article 1: [Introduction](https://blog.ethswarm.org/foundation/2023/the-hivemakers-code-introduction/) +- Article 2: [How do Ecosystems Grow?](https://blog.ethswarm.org/foundation/2023/the-hivemakers-code-how-do-ecosystems-grow/) +- Article 3: [Cooperating on Blockchain](https://blog.ethswarm.org/foundation/2023/cooperating-on-blockchain/) +- Article 4: [The Satoshi’s Dream](https://blog.ethswarm.org/foundation/2023/the-satoshis-dream/) +- Article 5: [Anonymity in the Cryptosphere](https://blog.ethswarm.org/foundation/2023/anonymity-in-the-cryptosphere/) +- Article 6: [Democracy and Decentralization](https://blog.ethswarm.org/foundation/2023/democracy-and-decentralization/) +- Article 7: [Is Net Neutrality Important for Blockchains?](https://blog.ethswarm.org/foundation/2023/is-net-neutrality-important-for-blockchains/) +- Article 8: Why Interoperability is the Bedrock of Digital Freedom + + + +**Authors: Oliver Lukitsch, Michal Matlon, Gregor Žavcer, Thomas Fundneider, Markus Peschl, Lena Müller-Naendrup** + +## Why Interoperability is the Bedrock of Digital Freedom +![pattern](/uploads/pattern1-8.png) + +The European Union is a remarkable project granting us many freedoms so convenient it’s all too easy to take them for granted. We can easily move our goods, our bucks, and ourselves between different countries within it. This freedom to move and provide services anywhere is the cornerstone of the democratic and open way of life and economy in Europe. + + + +When we use the internet, we often don't think about freedom. We may create and store our data on one platform, but it’s often stuck in one place and cannot be easily moved. This is called "data silos" - platforms and ecosystems that keep their information within their own network and limit what their users can or cannot do with it. + + +The solution to this problem is called “data interoperability.” It refers to the possibility of sharing information and data without losing or having to change any part of it, even when shared between different platforms and systems. + + +For many of us, data interoperability sounds abstract and might not be a concern. But have you ever played a video game, got a new console, and couldn't seamlessly transition to playing it on the new platform while keeping your saves and progress? Then you know how it feels to suffer from diminished interoperability. + + + +Or you are using Signal as a messenger with most of your friends, but two folks only use Telegram. Your bad. You have just been the victim of poor interoperability again. But if you are a Gmail user and send a message to a Yahoo account, that’s not a problem. You just experienced the bliss of data interoperability. + + + +As you can see, data interoperability is deeply useful. But it is not just a matter of usability. It is also a matter of digital freedom and control – a matter of digital agency and self-sovereignty. + + +## Data Interoperability is Necessary for a Vital Web3 +![pattern](/uploads/pattern1-5.png) +We already know that legal and technical data ownership is paramount to the mindset of a blockchain-based web – we have covered this aspect in our other articles. + + + +However, data ownership is only one side of the coin of safeguarding fully-fledged data sovereignty. We can distinguish between data ownership and data agency. While the first denotes the idea that you are the owner of your data, the second means that you can also decide what the user can do_ _with it. Hence, while you can have one without the other, the idea of a sovereign Web3 combines these two concepts. + + + +A final benefit of Interoperability is that it can be an asset for knowledge ecosystems and can foster the creation of novel ideas and innovation. Think of the biological mechanism of crossbreeding or interbreeding. By exchanging genetic information across different subspecies, you can give rise to new ones. + + + +To summarize, interoperability matters and unfolds its benefits on three different levels: + +1. Usability +2. Data sovereignty +3. Knowledge creation + + +We shall now delve into these three topics in more detail. + + +## 1. Usability +![pattern](/uploads/pattern1-3.png) + +It is easy to see why interoperability is user-friendly. Just imagine how you can move your crypto assets freely between various DApps or entire blockchain ecosystems. Imagine a future blockchain metaverse in which you can move crypto art from one digital real estate to another. + + + +Or you might have earned an NFT in a blockchain game and want to use it outside of the game in which you earned it. You might also want to pay for some crypto asset embedded in another blockchain ecosystem with a cryptocurrency that is not native to this ecosystem. Moreover, with the rise of IoT ecosystems, there must be reliable and secure interfaces between them. + + + +All these things require interoperability. And all things considered, data interoperability increases the usability of entire ecosystems by enabling the free flow of information and data between them. The increase in usability is thus an increase in the user’s ability to move data or communicate across ecosystems - preventing vendor lock-in. + + +### Interoperability of Different Blockchains + + + +Increasing usability must be carefully weighed against security concerns. This is especially relevant for the interoperability between different blockchains. While a single blockchain and its protocols safeguard its user’s privacy and security, a cross-chain token transfer is a somewhat predetermined breaking point of the security web. A reason for this is the lack of a distributed consensus mechanism that applies only to transactions within a blockchain network_ _but not between two distinct blockchains. + + + +Interoperability is a challenge to implement. It’s sometimes called the “interoperability trilemma” (not to be confused with the so-called blockchain trilemma). + + + +A blockchain's interoperability features cannot satisfy its security, extensibility (scalability or speed), and data agnosticism (its universal application across any blockchain) simultaneously. An ideal blockchain bridge would work for and across every blockchain and be fast, trustless, and secure: + + + + + +1. Secure / trustless: trustless requirements beyond the underlying blockchains' requirements. +2. Extensibility / speed: low communication latency between blockchains. +3. Data Agnostic: the architecture's capacity to be easily modified and integrated on a new blockchain. + + +## 2. Data Sovereignty +![pattern](/uploads/pattern1-2.png) + +To promote data sovereignty, interoperability is essential to maintain control over personal data and is, therefore, as important as data ownership. Only when users are able to move their data freely and without restrictions can the benefits of data ownership be fully realized. + + + +Today, users have little control over their personal data. However, particularly in Europe, data protection policies have evolved positively, at least to some extent, including the introduction of the General Data Protection Regulation. + + + +But while users' rights have improved, the big social media companies still control personal data in increasingly subtle ways. Users are often encouraged to stay within a single ecosystem, making it difficult for them to move their personal data freely. This restriction directly affects the interoperability of personal data and limits user control. + + + +For the big tech companies, this may be an economic measure to protect their own ecosystems from the competition. But it does not bode well for users. Social media platforms, cloud and IoT services are in the hands of a small number of companies protecting their oligopoly - and that means sacrificing interoperability to keep their customers in line. + + + +You might ask whether staying in a closed ecosystem can be beneficial to the user. Think Apple products, which work great but often undermine data interoperability and cross-platform functionality. But interoperability is not only a usability issue; it is also a policy issue. + +This is a very timely issue: European legislators are aware of the need to set policy, as reflected in the EU's Digital Marketing Act (DMA). Large technology companies are seen as gatekeepers with overly concentrated power in the market, disenfranchising smaller players at the expense of user freedom and choice. The DMA aims to achieve its goals by forcing large companies to enable data interoperability and portability for their users, thereby creating conditions for fair competition and platform innovation. + + + +In summary, by ignoring the need for interoperability, users are disempowering themselves and giving more power to the big technology companies that manage our data. In doing so, they are providing these companies with a very valuable asset, our personal data, and they are doing so without making them pay a fair price. + + +### Unionizing Data Vending + + + +Ownership of personal data can be used as leverage to empower users. If users know what their data is worth and if they really own and control it, they can also influence the price that an interested party has to pay for its acquisition. + + + +In this context, the interoperability of data is a necessary prerequisite for personal data to be used as leverage and a commodity by their original owners. In other words, to be able to sell and withhold personal data in a value-conscious manner, the user must also be able to control it. + + + +Interoperability opens up different pathways across platforms and ecosystems, and thus the possibility of exercising control over your own data. For example, if you don't like Facebook having your data, you need to be able to take your personal data stored on the platform and use it elsewhere without losing the function of the data. + + +### Interoperability is Not an End in Itself + +A final note on the bigger picture: interoperability alone is not enough to achieve data sovereignty and user empowerment. In fact, some large IT companies want to increase interoperability between different ecosystems. That is, they are aware of the usability value of interoperable ecosystems. + + + +Data interoperability greatly increases the viability of IoT devices, such as smart sensors, that can communicate in an interoperable environment across ecosystems from different companies. Just consider “Matter”, a new smart home standard that allows devices from Apple, Google, Amazon, and Samsung to communicate across their respective ecosystems. + + + +While this is a positive development for the usability of smart devices, it does not give users full control over their personal data. Rather, the involved companies provide the consumer with another argument to cease ownership once again. + + + +In a Web3 environment that delivers on its promise, interoperability is not an end in itself but a means to promote data sovereignty and empower users to decide where their (self-owned) data is stored. + + +## 3. Knowledge Creation +![pattern](/uploads/pattern1-1.png) + + +One of the ways that interoperability is being standardized today is the so-called “[European Interoperability Framework](https://joinup.ec.europa.eu/collection/nifo-national-interoperability-framework-observatory/european-interoperability-framework-detail).” It does not only apply to digital ecosystems but to any kind of infrastructure that is not harmonized across the EU. + + + +Take the European railway system. For a train to travel from Paris to Warsaw, it has to comply with different and sometimes conflicting national standards - technical, legal, organizational, and semantic ones. + + + +For example, railcars of different national railway services must match, and their digital systems must be able to communicate with one another. Otherwise, signals must be translated and interpreted correctly. + + + +Simply put, interoperability involves an agreement on the harmonization of the meaning of things that cut across the boundaries of distinct ecosystems. In the context of Web3, this means that the function and value of a token must retain its meaning for the users even upon being moved across different platforms. + + + +Thus, the primary function of data interoperability is to preserve the meaning and functionality of data. + + + +In the context of blockchain platforms and ecosystems, data interoperability can be seen as the interoperability that enables tokens to be used across platforms. To give an example: Using Swarm as a decentralized data storage platform, companies could upload and download data related to their products and services. This would allow consumers to select their order on a DApp. + + + +The DApp uploads your chosen menu items to Swarm, generating a unique code for the order. The cashier then accesses the order code with their own DApp, which downloads the data from Swarm and translates it into a list of orders to be processed and served. This is a notable case of interoperability as two distinct DApps can communicate and agree on the same reference codes for products. + + +### The Meaning of a Token + +In many cases, however, we can expect the meaning of data to change as the context of its blockchain environment changes. + + + +For example, the way crypto tokens are used and issued, and what can be done with them, is very different between the Bitcoin blockchain and Ethereum. If it were possible to move your Bitcoin wallet to Ethereum, you would be storing your Bitcoins in a completely different environment, potentially creating new forms of use and thus changing the meaning of Bitcoin tokens altogether. + + + +To provide you with an example of how strongly the meaning of a “semantic object” can change when its contextual framework changes, just consider what historians have called “scientific revolutions.” + + + +The historian Thomas Kuhn observed that scientific systems do not grow indefinitely but rather collapse at some point when their limits become apparent and progress halts. Sometimes, this is when a new generation of scientists takes over and introduces a new paradigm - a new framework that radically restructures the beliefs and premises previously held by a scientific community. + + + +Scientific revolutions involve the radical transformation of meaning (semantics) while the vehicle of the meaning (the sign or symbol) is retained. So while you can use the linguistic symbol “mass” in both Newtonian and Einsteinian physics, it has a radically different meaning across these two scientific frameworks – meaning that “mass” has an entirely different meaning before and after a scientific revolution. + + + +This shows how a symbol, such as a token moved across different blockchain ecosystems, can change (its _meaning_) as it shifts its context or knowledge framework. + + + +As different blockchain ecosystems also have varying beliefs about the future of the economy, modalities of social interaction, or the potential of consensus mechanisms, any transfer of an ecosystem’s native tokens to another ecosystem has transformative power. + + + +While of course, this is only possible if we accept that the meaning of a token might change, sometimes fundamentally, it is critically important for ecosystems that are designed to be nimble, agile, and open to transformation. + + +### Living Ecosystems Must Interbreed + +Another argument for this type of interoperability without meaning-conservation is that it is critical for the vitality of an ecosystem. So let us first turn to a biological metaphor. + + + +By exchanging data between different platforms and ecosystems, you can foster a process of “interbreeding.” External information intrudes a relatively closed system, thereby leading to a reciprocal change of the system and the newly introduced information. + + + +For living beings and biological ecosystems, such externally-induced “shake-ups,” often called “perturbations”, are essential for reproductive fitness. New genetic information introduces new [potentials](https://blog.ethswarm.org/foundation/2023/the-hivemakers-code-how-do-ecosystems-grow/), which allow the ecosystem to change course and nest in new niches by realizing such potentials. + + + +The ability to get “perturbed” by an external impulse attests to an ecosystem’s vitality and “alive-ness.” After all, it is a fundamental property of life that it can radically transform and bring forth new forms of being and niches. You could thus say that the “interoperability”of biological ecosystems, their ability to exchange genetic material, is critical for their ability to change, grow, and survive. + + + +In other words, if you want your DApps and crypto-platforms to thrive and feel alive, they must be interoperable and permeable. We can set free a vast potential by allowing DApps, blockchain platforms, and ecosystems to interact openly with one another. It is key to the essential value proposition of Web3: the creation of a network in which users take ownership of and assume agency over their data. + + + +Interoperability not only vastly increases the usability of DApps and control over our own data. It also unleashes the innovative potential inherent to such systems by allowing them to interact both seamlessly and creatively. It is something any decentralized ecosystem should strive for, especially if they bet on their vitality and self-sustainability. + + +## Key insights +![pattern](/uploads/pattern1-6.png) + + + +- Data interoperability increases the usability of blockchain applications by allowing data exchange across different platforms and ecosystems +- Data interoperability—if done right—increases our control over personal data +- Interoperability has to be realized on a technical, semantic, organizational, and legal level +- Semantic interoperability is key for basic forms of interoperability by allowing the meaning of tokens to remain altered upon transferral across various ecosystems +- Even if the meaning of a token does not remain constant upon transferral, cross-platform token-exchanges can be positively disrupted, driving innovation and meaningful change. + + +## References +![pattern](/uploads/pattern1-7.png) + +- Bhuptani, Arjun. 2022. “The Interoperability Trilemma.” Medium. February 28, 2022. https://blog.connext.network/the-interoperability-trilemma-657c2cf69f17. +- “Blockchain Interoperability: Challenges & Opportunities | NGRAVE.” n.d. Accessed November 21, 2022. https://www.ngrave.io/en/blog/blockchain-interoperability-challenges-opportunities. +- Schulte, Stefan, Marten Sigwart, Philipp Frauenthaler, and Michael Borkowski. 2019. “Towards Blockchain Interoperability.” In _Business Process Management: Blockchain and Central and Eastern Europe Forum_, edited by Claudio Di Ciccio, Renata Gabryelczyk, Luciano García-Bañuelos, Tomislav Hernaus, Rick Hull, Mojca Indihar Štemberger, Andrea Kő, and Mark Staples, 3–10. Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing. Cham: Springer International Publishing.[ https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-30429-4_1](https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-30429-4_1). +- Ström, Timothy Erik. 2022. “Capital and Cybernetics.” New Left Review, no. 135 (June): 23–41. +- “What Is Blockchain Interoperability?” n.d. Accessed November 21, 2022. https://lisk.com/blog/learning/what-blockchain-interoperability. + diff --git a/content/foundation/posts/thc-how-do-ecosystems-grow.md b/content/foundation/posts/thc-how-do-ecosystems-grow.md index dfb39c17..a331a330 100644 --- a/content/foundation/posts/thc-how-do-ecosystems-grow.md +++ b/content/foundation/posts/thc-how-do-ecosystems-grow.md @@ -17,6 +17,7 @@ This article is part of [The Hivemaker's Code](https://toolkit.ethswarm.org/) se - Article 5: [Anonymity in the Cryptosphere](https://blog.ethswarm.org/foundation/2023/anonymity-in-the-cryptosphere/) - Article 6: [Democracy and Decentralization](https://blog.ethswarm.org/foundation/2023/democracy-and-decentralization/) - Article 7: [Is Net Neutrality Important for Blockchains?](https://blog.ethswarm.org/foundation/2023/is-net-neutrality-important-for-blockchains/) +- Article 8: [Why Interoperability is the Bedrock of Digital Freedom](https://blog.ethswarm.org/foundation/2023/why-interoperability-is-the-bedrock-of-digital-freedom/) ## How do Ecosystems Grow? ![pattern](/uploads/pattern0.png) @@ -24,19 +25,19 @@ This article is part of [The Hivemaker's Code](https://toolkit.ethswarm.org/) se **Authors: Oliver Lukitsch, Michal Matlon, Gregor Žavcer, Thomas Fundneider, Markus Peschl, Lena Müller-Naendrup** -In 1993, James F. Moore published an article in Harvard Business Review. Inside, he presented an idea that was quite unusual at that time. He claimed that business networks, consisting of interacting companies, products, and users, could be understood similarly to natural [ecosystems](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecosystem). +In 1993, James F. Moore published an article in Harvard Business Review. Inside, he presented an idea that was quite unusual at that time. He claimed that business networks, consisting of interacting companies, products, and users, could be understood similarly to natural [ecosystems](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecosystem). -Moore argued that business ecosystems contain various species interacting with each other. And the types of those species co-evolve, just like species in a biological ecosystem. +Moore argued that business ecosystems contain various species interacting with each other. And the types of those species co-evolve, just like species in a biological ecosystem. -In hindsight, none of this should surprise us. Early evolutionary biology and ecology were heavily influenced by economics. We know, for example, that the economist Thomas Robert Malthus influenced Charles Darwin. +In hindsight, none of this should surprise us. Early evolutionary biology and ecology were heavily influenced by economics. We know, for example, that the economist Thomas Robert Malthus influenced Charles Darwin. On the other hand, humans are biological beings that evolved and are still embedded in living ecosystems. Moreover, our economies are nothing more than a technological extension of our natural ecosystems (for better or worse). -Today, the understanding that social and economic systems are ecosystems is widespread. New technologies have always given rise to new niches and even newer technologies, just as the emergence of new species has often given rise to newer species developing and inhabiting newly created niches. +Today, the understanding that social and economic systems are ecosystems is widespread. New technologies have always given rise to new niches and even newer technologies, just as the emergence of new species has often given rise to newer species developing and inhabiting newly created niches. The flower enabled the bee. Web 1.0 enabled email and websites, but also Web 2.0, involving social media, blogging, and online games. And that, in turn, spawned the vision of Web3. -But is it justified to call today’s heavily digitized socioeconomic systems ”ecosystems”? After all, they seem more disembodied, functionalist, and mechanized than any pre-digital or biological ecosystem could ever be. +But is it justified to call today’s heavily digitized socioeconomic systems ”ecosystems”? After all, they seem more disembodied, functionalist, and mechanized than any pre-digital or biological ecosystem could ever be. To answer these questions, we take a brief detour to the basic principles of evolutionary ecology, Darwinism, and the concept of niche creation. The latter, in particular, is critical to understanding why a digital ecosystem can be genuinely alive and exhibit ecological characteristics initially considered unique to biological ecosystems. @@ -46,28 +47,28 @@ To answer these questions, we take a brief detour to the basic principles of evo ### Autonomy and Self-Organization -Before we wonder why digital ecosystems deserve to be treated as “living systems,” we should revisit the very basics of biology. What does it mean for an organism or object to be a living system? +Before we wonder why digital ecosystems deserve to be treated as “living systems,” we should revisit the very basics of biology. What does it mean for an organism or object to be a living system? -Many biologists list a set of features only present in living organisms. These can be growth, sensitivity to external stimuli, reproduction, homeostasis, adaptivity and learning, and being composed of cells. Such definitions, however, do not fully capture the uniqueness of living systems. +Many biologists list a set of features only present in living organisms. These can be growth, sensitivity to external stimuli, reproduction, homeostasis, adaptivity and learning, and being composed of cells. Such definitions, however, do not fully capture the uniqueness of living systems. -The mathematical models of theoretical biology are based on more fundamental assumptions about life. For instance, the biologist Stuart Kauffman contends we must define life in terms of its “autonomy.” Living systems are self-organized systems. They bring about their very own organization. +The mathematical models of theoretical biology are based on more fundamental assumptions about life. For instance, the biologist Stuart Kauffman contends we must define life in terms of its “autonomy.” Living systems are self-organized systems. They bring about their very own organization. You might find this definition too simple for something as complex as life. Though surprisingly spartan, it’s a definition that performs well. Stones do not organize themselves. Cars don’t organize themselves. Even intelligent machines organize themselves only because we designed them to do so. Not because they evolved that way themselves. -On the contrary, life was created by no one and for nothing. If it were not self-organized and autonomous, it would do nothing at all. Life came about by itself, simply reproducing its own emergent structure. +On the contrary, life was created by no one and for nothing. If it were not self-organized and autonomous, it would do nothing at all. Life came about by itself, simply reproducing its own emergent structure. The biologists Humberto Maturana and Francisco Varela coined the term “autopoiesis” to capture this fundamental feature of life. According to them, life does not only create and organize itself. It also creates its very own domains of meaning, its niches. In doing so, it can sustain its unstable internal state against an unstable environment. Hence, life creates its very own environmental conditions for sustaining itself. -### Bottom-Up Versus Top-Down: The Emergence of Life Forms +### Bottom-Up Versus Top-Down: The Emergence of Life Forms -To a large extent, life is the engine of its own creativity. Life is profoundly autonomous. Since there can be nothing that transcends life and gives it form and meaning, there is only one “direction of creation”: life arose from the bottom-up. It just “emerged” from the self-reproducing patterns of interacting molecules. +To a large extent, life is the engine of its own creativity. Life is profoundly autonomous. Since there can be nothing that transcends life and gives it form and meaning, there is only one “direction of creation”: life arose from the bottom-up. It just “emerged” from the self-reproducing patterns of interacting molecules. -These features of life do not only apply to individual organisms. They apply to single cells, individuals, groups, and entire ecosystems. Like a single organism constantly brings forth its own organization, so does the ecosystem. There is no external entity guiding the fate of an ecosystem. Its structure and organization emerge from themselves until they no longer do, and the ecosystem ceases to exist. +These features of life do not only apply to individual organisms. They apply to single cells, individuals, groups, and entire ecosystems. Like a single organism constantly brings forth its own organization, so does the ecosystem. There is no external entity guiding the fate of an ecosystem. Its structure and organization emerge from themselves until they no longer do, and the ecosystem ceases to exist. -You might argue that there actually is something that shapes life, a force greater than its internal organization: natural selection. Natural selection is considered the driving force of evolution. It forces organisms to play by their own rules and, more importantly, by the laws of the environment around them. It imposes on life. +You might argue that there actually is something that shapes life, a force greater than its internal organization: natural selection. Natural selection is considered the driving force of evolution. It forces organisms to play by their own rules and, more importantly, by the laws of the environment around them. It imposes on life. -But is the course of evolution really determined by an external force? Is natural selection a substitute for the idea of a higher being, who was said to have formed all living things on earth? We will show you in a moment that even Darwin rejected the notion that natural selection is the sole driving force of evolution. +But is the course of evolution really determined by an external force? Is natural selection a substitute for the idea of a higher being, who was said to have formed all living things on earth? We will show you in a moment that even Darwin rejected the notion that natural selection is the sole driving force of evolution. ## Misconceiving Darwin   @@ -91,41 +92,41 @@ Being small, simple, and highly reproductive will always be effective for life. When does a heap become a heap? You may wonder why the topic of the evolution of complexity has led us to this question. You will soon see that it's vital to the question of how increasing biological sophistication arises. -There are two ways to explain the emergence of growing complexity. As we mentioned, some biologists have chosen to explain everything about the emergence of life's complexity with the concept of natural selection. But it's by no means anti-naturalist or "esoteric" to assume that natural selection is not all there is to biological evolution. +There are two ways to explain the emergence of growing complexity. As we mentioned, some biologists have chosen to explain everything about the emergence of life's complexity with the concept of natural selection. But it's by no means anti-naturalist or "esoteric" to assume that natural selection is not all there is to biological evolution. -Other mechanisms have already been identified. The most important concept is the idea of "natural drift" or "genetic drift." Some properties of organisms can emerge without any selective pressure from the outside. They can materialize even though they are merely viable despite being necessary for survival and reproduction. +Other mechanisms have already been identified. The most important concept is the idea of "natural drift" or "genetic drift." Some properties of organisms can emerge without any selective pressure from the outside. They can materialize even though they are merely viable despite being necessary for survival and reproduction. -While it was a given for a long time that natural selection was the only mechanism driving evolution, so-called "neutral" theories emerged from the 1960s onward, attempting to explain how complexity arises in the absence of natural pressures. +While it was a given for a long time that natural selection was the only mechanism driving evolution, so-called "neutral" theories emerged from the 1960s onward, attempting to explain how complexity arises in the absence of natural pressures. -One such theory, the "theory of constructive neutral evolution," argues that biological changes do happen even without selective pressure. The story goes like this: Evolution can bring forth so-called "silent" changes (that don't serve any purpose or function) and functional changes (that give rise to new functions). +One such theory, the "theory of constructive neutral evolution," argues that biological changes do happen even without selective pressure. The story goes like this: Evolution can bring forth so-called "silent" changes (that don't serve any purpose or function) and functional changes (that give rise to new functions). Evolution proceeds without being imposed by the external environment when such changes occur by mutation and are passed on to new generations. It is purely constructive rather than selective. -Stephen J. Gould, for example, described the evolution of some traits that initially had no function or at least a different function. He calls such features "exaptations." Usually, you could think that as long as a biological trait cannot fulfill a function, nature has no "reason" for selecting it. Why should she? There is simply no advantage for an organism to have "useless" traits. +Stephen J. Gould, for example, described the evolution of some traits that initially had no function or at least a different function. He calls such features "exaptations." Usually, you could think that as long as a biological trait cannot fulfill a function, nature has no "reason" for selecting it. Why should she? There is simply no advantage for an organism to have "useless" traits. -Nonetheless, such seemingly useless traits must first emerge to later grow into a functional unit. There's a clear-cut finishing line that defines when a complex structure (such as an organ) attains its identity: it's when it can obtain a purpose or function. And only once it does can it be selected by nature. +Nonetheless, such seemingly useless traits must first emerge to later grow into a functional unit. There's a clear-cut finishing line that defines when a complex structure (such as an organ) attains its identity: it's when it can obtain a purpose or function. And only once it does can it be selected by nature. -To give an example, think of the evolution of some skeletal structure that will, later in its evolutionary history, allow the descendants of some creature to fly. Note that the skeletal structure will not perform its purpose at the beginning of its evolution. It will resemble wings ever so slightly – but it's still a long way. First, it will exist for no reason at all. Hence, there are no grounds for “selection.” The structure will have to evolve over multiple generations without notable prospects of usefulness. +To give an example, think of the evolution of some skeletal structure that will, later in its evolutionary history, allow the descendants of some creature to fly. Note that the skeletal structure will not perform its purpose at the beginning of its evolution. It will resemble wings ever so slightly – but it's still a long way. First, it will exist for no reason at all. Hence, there are no grounds for “selection.” The structure will have to evolve over multiple generations without notable prospects of usefulness. -At some point in time, a distant descendant of the original creature will suddenly have a subtly different skeletal endowment than its immediate ancestor. The latter looks like a promising flyer, but he isn’t. For the former, however, it will be just enough to get it up into the air. Only then can we speak of a new organic feature that can be selected for its novel purpose. +At some point in time, a distant descendant of the original creature will suddenly have a subtly different skeletal endowment than its immediate ancestor. The latter looks like a promising flyer, but he isn’t. For the former, however, it will be just enough to get it up into the air. Only then can we speak of a new organic feature that can be selected for its novel purpose. ## Niches Spawn Niches, Spawn Niches… ![pattern](/uploads/pattern1-3.png) The above story also affects how we think about ecological niches. Every organism on our planet occupies a niche. Niches provide a space where an organism has little competition for resources because it adapts to its environment in ways other organisms can't. It's simply a "nice place" for any organism to be. More importantly, you could say that an organism's niche defines its functions and place in nature - its purpose. -Thus, a niche is what transforms an "exaptation" (a previously useless trait) of an organism into something "meaningful." It enables and further shapes the purpose of that trait. +Thus, a niche is what transforms an "exaptation" (a previously useless trait) of an organism into something "meaningful." It enables and further shapes the purpose of that trait. -Organisms can find their niches even in extreme environments where no other species can live. For instance, take one of the most primitive forms of single-cell microorganisms called "archaea." They inhabit areas with very high levels of salinity, acidity, and extremely high temperatures. And such species have been ecologically highly dominant in evolutionary history. +Organisms can find their niches even in extreme environments where no other species can live. For instance, take one of the most primitive forms of single-cell microorganisms called "archaea." They inhabit areas with very high levels of salinity, acidity, and extremely high temperatures. And such species have been ecologically highly dominant in evolutionary history. -One thing is remarkable about this fact. Archaea are very primitive organisms. On the other hand, more highly evolved organisms usually occupy niches, whether other organisms thrive too. They have co-evolved with other organisms and not just with their inorganic environment. +One thing is remarkable about this fact. Archaea are very primitive organisms. On the other hand, more highly evolved organisms usually occupy niches, whether other organisms thrive too. They have co-evolved with other organisms and not just with their inorganic environment. It's no accident that more organized and complex organisms live this way. The reason is that living organisms provide potential niches for other organisms to occupy. They increase the number of contexts in which other species can accidentally use novel traits, thus giving them meaning. ### A Short Story About Evolution -Imagine a free-swimming protozoan, a single-cell organism. It happens to develop a property that allows it to firmly attach itself to rocks in the ocean where it lives. Its offspring also stick to the seafloor and consume anything that washes up in their direction. Soon, all rocks on the seafloor are covered by this new species. +Imagine a free-swimming protozoan, a single-cell organism. It happens to develop a property that allows it to firmly attach itself to rocks in the ocean where it lives. Its offspring also stick to the seafloor and consume anything that washes up in their direction. Soon, all rocks on the seafloor are covered by this new species. Another type of cell, a different, free-floating species, might appear nearby. By chance, it might have developed the ability to eat other cells. Among them, the settling, immobile protozoan organism stuck on the rocks. It gets its energy from them, allowing it to create new offspring and consume even more settling protozoans. But since the rock-sticking protozoans reproduce more quickly than the predator, both species can occupy their respective niches in the long term. @@ -137,34 +138,34 @@ This case shows that life creates the potential for new niches. It is a catalyst ## Niches in Human Ecosystems and the Economy ![pattern](/uploads/pattern1-4.png) -So what does all of this have to do with the economy? Evolutionary biologist Robert Cazzolla Gatti and his colleagues have explored how to translate the story above to the human context. +So what does all of this have to do with the economy? Evolutionary biologist Robert Cazzolla Gatti and his colleagues have explored how to translate the story above to the human context. -Many economists have used biological and ecosystem metaphors to explain how markets evolve. Many also conceive of a market ecosystem as a predefined space into which their products need to fit. And we will soon show it might not be entirely correct. +Many economists have used biological and ecosystem metaphors to explain how markets evolve. Many also conceive of a market ecosystem as a predefined space into which their products need to fit. And we will soon show it might not be entirely correct. -These economists say a company can identify its future niches in advance. They think a market ecosystem can be divided into narrower niches, which the companies can then occupy. However, sticking with this notion of niches can lead an organization to focus on incremental improvement and optimization. +These economists say a company can identify its future niches in advance. They think a market ecosystem can be divided into narrower niches, which the companies can then occupy. However, sticking with this notion of niches can lead an organization to focus on incremental improvement and optimization. -For example, think of the bicycle. It occupies a niche as a means of transportation. It excels in many uses, where the train or ship doesn't. And the bicycle niche was sliced into many distinct niches. There are racing, commuter, mountain, gravel, and e-bikes. +For example, think of the bicycle. It occupies a niche as a means of transportation. It excels in many uses, where the train or ship doesn't. And the bicycle niche was sliced into many distinct niches. There are racing, commuter, mountain, gravel, and e-bikes. -None of these types, when invented, reinvented the wheel. They are just versions of the original bicycle. Some are faster and lighter, and some are more casual and practical. However, a bike remains a bike with additional features, functionalities, and applications. +None of these types, when invented, reinvented the wheel. They are just versions of the original bicycle. Some are faster and lighter, and some are more casual and practical. However, a bike remains a bike with additional features, functionalities, and applications. Niche partitioning certainly increases diversity within a socioeconomic system like a market. However, it does not create genuine novelty. It doesn't lead to radical innovation. -True innovation arises only through what is called "niche creation." A new niche is created when it's not a subset of an existing one, enabling a new way of interacting with the environment. +True innovation arises only through what is called "niche creation." A new niche is created when it's not a subset of an existing one, enabling a new way of interacting with the environment. -Think of the first organisms that were capable of photosynthesis. Their emergence led to an explosion of opportunities for other organisms to emerge. They enriched the Earth's atmosphere with oxygen and enabled the emergence of organisms with lungs. +Think of the first organisms that were capable of photosynthesis. Their emergence led to an explosion of opportunities for other organisms to emerge. They enriched the Earth's atmosphere with oxygen and enabled the emergence of organisms with lungs. -Genuinely new niches create an entirely new context. This is why niche emergence is said to have an "autocatalytic" (self-enabling) dynamic. That is, niche emergence leads to more niche emergence, as the biologist Stuart Kauffman argued. +Genuinely new niches create an entirely new context. This is why niche emergence is said to have an "autocatalytic" (self-enabling) dynamic. That is, niche emergence leads to more niche emergence, as the biologist Stuart Kauffman argued. -### Life Enables Novelty +### Life Enables Novelty Take, for example, the invention of the personal computer, which, in turn, enabled the creation of word processors. The creation of word processors then led to an explosion of files, subsequently promoting the exchange of files. According to Stuart Kauffman, this was ultimately the basis for developing the internet protocol. The advent of the Internet, in turn, created a new niche with unprecedented scale and impact on every aspect of our lives. It created a new context that spawned many other new niches, such as social media and digital platforms. -To summarize, there is a clear difference between the emergence of new niches and the partitioning of existing ones. The former is likely to provide an ever-new context for the emergence of new niches. The latter is a path to relatively predictable optimization, adaptation, and specialization. +To summarize, there is a clear difference between the emergence of new niches and the partitioning of existing ones. The former is likely to provide an ever-new context for the emergence of new niches. The latter is a path to relatively predictable optimization, adaptation, and specialization. -Both phenomena have their place in nature, culture, and economics. However, any project which aims to change society (be it an analog or a digital one) must pay attention to the idea that novelty evolves only when enabling the cascading dynamics of niche emergence. +Both phenomena have their place in nature, culture, and economics. However, any project which aims to change society (be it an analog or a digital one) must pay attention to the idea that novelty evolves only when enabling the cascading dynamics of niche emergence. ## Conclusion: Niche Creation is a Foundation of Living Digital Ecosystems @@ -175,18 +176,18 @@ If an ecosystem cannot enable new forms of life, it may not deserve to be called We began the article by asking whether digital systems, such as Web 2.0 and Web3, are real ecosystems – whether they are genuinely living systems. Digital ecosystems, more than any other social ecosystem, seem highly disembodied, rule-based, and mechanized, especially when compared to a pre-digital ecosystem. Living ecosystems seem to be quite the opposite. -Moreover, our behavior on today's web is often driven and shaped by algorithms that act in the interest of the companies that made them. We seem to lack the autonomy of living beings embedded in living ecosystems. +Moreover, our behavior on today's web is often driven and shaped by algorithms that act in the interest of the companies that made them. We seem to lack the autonomy of living beings embedded in living ecosystems. While in living ecosystems, no central authority guides the behavior of various species, what we do on Web 2.0 is shaped by the platform owners in a more or less top-down manner. On the other hand, living ecosystems get organized and emerge from the bottom-up. -The idea that Web 2.0 is a living ecosystem seems far-fetched. It is a stretched metaphor. It is too strongly controlled and shaped by the top-down influence of various tech giants. +The idea that Web 2.0 is a living ecosystem seems far-fetched. It is a stretched metaphor. It is too strongly controlled and shaped by the top-down influence of various tech giants. But what about the prospects for Web3? Aren't decentralized infrastructure and the possibility of strengthening the autonomy of individual users the right way to breathe life into a digital system? ### A Living Web3 -There is a case to be made for designing Web3 ecosystems that strive for liveliness. Living ecosystems are truly decentralized ecosystems. Nothing truly steers an ecosystem. Nobody imposes values onto an ecosystem precisely as planned, even though it can be designed for a purpose. Nobody wholly owns or controls it. +There is a case to be made for designing Web3 ecosystems that strive for liveliness. Living ecosystems are truly decentralized ecosystems. Nothing truly steers an ecosystem. Nobody imposes values onto an ecosystem precisely as planned, even though it can be designed for a purpose. Nobody wholly owns or controls it. One of our next articles on Web3 and democratic values shows that blockchain-based ecosystems often leave the promise of decentralization and user empowerment unfulfilled. Power can quickly accumulate and lead to the same centralized structures that Web3 seeks to overcome. @@ -197,19 +198,19 @@ On the contrary, a truly decentralized and living blockchain ecosystem will have ![pattern](/uploads/pattern1-6.png) In the 1960s, the biologist Robert Paine carried out a series of studies to show how predators influence the diversity of species in an ecosystem. What happens if they are removed? Does the number of species increase if top-level predators prey less on ecosystem members? -For the community of ecologists and biologists, the answer to these questions was somewhat surprising. Paine had an unorthodox hypothesis. Predators at the top of the ecosystem might reduce the number of their preferred prey. However, their absence might lead to a radical decrease in species diversity upon leaving the ecosystem. +For the community of ecologists and biologists, the answer to these questions was somewhat surprising. Paine had an unorthodox hypothesis. Predators at the top of the ecosystem might reduce the number of their preferred prey. However, their absence might lead to a radical decrease in species diversity upon leaving the ecosystem. To test this, Paine selected a piece of the shoreline of the Washington State coast. He then removed the starfish preying on mollusks in the said area and observed how this changed the biodiversity. The experiment confirmed his hypothesis. A year later, the species in the observed area declined from fifteen to just eight. Another striking example of how the decimation of a species can change the tides of an ecosystem and reduce its biodiversity is the gray wolf in the United States. Because the wolf hunted livestock primarily in Yellowstone National Park, the U.S. government intervened and killed all wolves inhabiting the area. -Because gray wolves mainly hunted elk, the population of its prey quickly recovered and eventually exploded. However, more elk do not bode well for the well-being of the rest of the ecosystem. More elk eat more plants, and plants provide food, shade, and shelter for other species. They form niches for other members of the ecosystem. Through this intervention, these niches disappeared. Once again, the vanishing of a predator at the top of the food chain led to ecological devastation rather than recreation. +Because gray wolves mainly hunted elk, the population of its prey quickly recovered and eventually exploded. However, more elk do not bode well for the well-being of the rest of the ecosystem. More elk eat more plants, and plants provide food, shade, and shelter for other species. They form niches for other members of the ecosystem. Through this intervention, these niches disappeared. Once again, the vanishing of a predator at the top of the food chain led to ecological devastation rather than recreation. -In the 90s of the last century, the wolf was resettled in the Yellowstone ecosystem. This increased the population of different plant species, such as the willow, which led to an increase in the beaver population. The reintroduction of the wolf led to the recreation of the original ecosystem. +In the 90s of the last century, the wolf was resettled in the Yellowstone ecosystem. This increased the population of different plant species, such as the willow, which led to an increase in the beaver population. The reintroduction of the wolf led to the recreation of the original ecosystem. This is why wolves started to be considered "keystone species" for the Yellowstone ecosystem. Ones whose presence is foundational to the functioning of the whole system and thriving of other species. -It's important to note that the keystone species concept does not consider ecosystems as having any "optimal" states into which they can be engineered by reintroducing top predators. +It's important to note that the keystone species concept does not consider ecosystems as having any "optimal" states into which they can be engineered by reintroducing top predators. The only thing we can achieve is re-attain the historical dynamics of such an ecosystem. However, we can say that keystone species play a critical role in an ecosystem's biodiversity, enabling the proliferation of niches and, thus, species inhabiting it. @@ -218,11 +219,11 @@ We can also use the concept of keystone species when thinking about the creation One way to overcome this problem is to identify one such keystone species, a specific user group, and invest most of the organization’s energy into attracting these users. Their presence will, in turn, attract the other groups and enable the rest of the value chain to complete itself. -## Key Insights +## Key Insights ![pattern](/uploads/pattern1-7.png) -* Living digital ecosystems should be decentralized, just like living biological ecosystems. +* Living digital ecosystems should be decentralized, just like living biological ecosystems. * Living digital ecosystems provide the framework for ever new niches. * A purely “selectivist” approach to enabling the creation of new niches deteriorates the autonomy of an ecosystem’s members. diff --git a/content/foundation/posts/thc-introduction.md b/content/foundation/posts/thc-introduction.md index 653a6dfd..ffc797c1 100644 --- a/content/foundation/posts/thc-introduction.md +++ b/content/foundation/posts/thc-introduction.md @@ -17,6 +17,7 @@ This article is part of [The Hivemaker's Code](https://toolkit.ethswarm.org/) se - Article 5: [Anonymity in the Cryptosphere](https://blog.ethswarm.org/foundation/2023/anonymity-in-the-cryptosphere/) - Article 6: [Democracy and Decentralization](https://blog.ethswarm.org/foundation/2023/democracy-and-decentralization/) - Article 7: [Is Net Neutrality Important for Blockchains?](https://blog.ethswarm.org/foundation/2023/is-net-neutrality-important-for-blockchains/) +- Article 8: [Why Interoperability is the Bedrock of Digital Freedom](https://blog.ethswarm.org/foundation/2023/why-interoperability-is-the-bedrock-of-digital-freedom/) ## What is This Document About? @@ -36,8 +37,8 @@ This document is a result of collaboration between: We believe that in today’s state of the decentralized, blockchain, and crypto world, it’s crucial to take a step back and look at the bigger picture. We now see an environment ripe with fierce competition, where players are motivated by extrinsic motivation - the vision of getting rich. -In this regard, Swarm wants to be different. We want to approach the challenge of building a thriving ecosystem by starting from virtues and purpose. We want to think consciously about how our technology can impact and advance society. +In this regard, Swarm wants to be different. We want to approach the challenge of building a thriving ecosystem by starting from virtues and purpose. We want to think consciously about how our technology can impact and advance society. This is important, especially when building fully-encrypted systems like Swarm. When you can’t control what your system is used for, your options for maximizing its positive impact are limited. You have to start by creating the right set of values and working to align the ecosystem’s participants around them. You must enable its positive uses and engage people to develop an intrinsic motivation to do good. -By releasing this document, we want to start a movement. One that will attract those of you who want to build decentralized ecosystems consciously and gradually change how the scene looks. So that purposeful technology will soon help people regain sovereignty over their data, identities, and lives. \ No newline at end of file +By releasing this document, we want to start a movement. One that will attract those of you who want to build decentralized ecosystems consciously and gradually change how the scene looks. So that purposeful technology will soon help people regain sovereignty over their data, identities, and lives. diff --git a/static/uploads/8-THC.png b/static/uploads/8-THC.png new file mode 100644 index 00000000..bb078259 Binary files /dev/null and b/static/uploads/8-THC.png differ