| Interesting post! > Sure, you might still be able to access the internet, but is that relevant? I think that's the core point being made: if transaction are built into the infrastructure, then all the financial controls inevitably get built into the infrastructure such that you can't access the network any more. I feel like your response rests on the assumption that Facebook/Google/<Provider that can choose to lock you out> _are_ the internet. But the defining point of the Web that succeeded for many was the long tail part of it, people and provider who aren't motivated to reject people for monetary related reasons. As long as we're on the Web without transactions, there'll always be somewhere/someone you can go and interact with. If transactions and subsequent monetary policy were implemented in the low level protocol, then you could be locked out in a way which meant you can't reach/find the people who would still want to interact with you. One allows subcultures and counter-cultures to grow if they want, the other doesn't. |