So rather than systems with oversight, faces, and names attached to them, you would prefer an entirely programmatic system where all transactions are final and irreversible which is not beholden to any intervention? There’s an old adage about how all programmers hate technology or something like that and I worry that we are flying too close to the sun here with the crypto hubris.
The latest wave of "investors" aren't programmers.
But yeah, the trust issue illustrated by your comment speaks volumes. I just wish people didn't think our problems were as easy as "sprinkle a little tech on it."
> So rather than systems with oversight, faces, and names attached to them, you would prefer an entirely programmatic system where all transactions are final and irreversible which is not beholden to any intervention?
It's interesting that the Kimberley Process intended to prevent conflict diamonds is a chain of warranties, one of the criticisms thereto was that there was little proof that the previous warranty ever existed.
So even though you're being sarcastic, you might be on to something there :) (I'm not suggesting this is possible, just idle musings)