Thread
So @JasonPLowery asked for good faith critiques to his masters thesis on Bitcoin as a form of 'Softwar'.
I've dedicated my professional life to #Bitcoin mining.
So here goes...
A huge 🧵
I've dedicated my professional life to #Bitcoin mining.
So here goes...
A huge 🧵
I like to begin by understanding under what pretenses this information is being presented.
That is:
- Who is writing it?
- What are motivations?
- What purpose might they be writing it for?
- What presuppositions or assumptions may someone in that position make?
Why?
2/
That is:
- Who is writing it?
- What are motivations?
- What purpose might they be writing it for?
- What presuppositions or assumptions may someone in that position make?
Why?
2/
Because an assumed 'honest inquirer', searching solely for 'the Truth', should find themselves in situations where their research surfaces things they had not previously considered, OR that shape & change their thesis.
Alternatively, you may be a hammer looking for a nail.
3/
Alternatively, you may be a hammer looking for a nail.
3/
I'll consider a few concepts he proposes, then specifically address his abstract.
I'll begin w/ his repeated maxim that, 'abstract power hierarchies are arbitrary'.
This is the crux of how he argues Abstract Power intermediates physical power/Ownership/Chain of Custody.
4/
I'll begin w/ his repeated maxim that, 'abstract power hierarchies are arbitrary'.
This is the crux of how he argues Abstract Power intermediates physical power/Ownership/Chain of Custody.
4/
On the face, and if you've listened to any @jordanbpeterson, you would question this idea.
Not because abstract power hierarchies do NOT exist, but, rather because they are not ARBITRARY.
5/
Not because abstract power hierarchies do NOT exist, but, rather because they are not ARBITRARY.
5/
This is the Peterson Lobster Meme.
His argument is that there are ancient serotonin systems that have been embedded in our evolutionary history that PHYSICALLY EMBODY hierarchy by managing serotonin in lobsters as a function of dominance.
6/
His argument is that there are ancient serotonin systems that have been embedded in our evolutionary history that PHYSICALLY EMBODY hierarchy by managing serotonin in lobsters as a function of dominance.
6/
Why is this important?
Because Lowery is correct on the conclusion, most animals do not WANT to fight and will avoid it, BUT he misstates the reason why.
It isn't because hierarchy is ARBITRARY & just signals.
It is because it's biologically expensive and physically risky.
7/
Because Lowery is correct on the conclusion, most animals do not WANT to fight and will avoid it, BUT he misstates the reason why.
It isn't because hierarchy is ARBITRARY & just signals.
It is because it's biologically expensive and physically risky.
7/
An unstated assumption:
As an aside here, Lowery ignores the idea that changes in a hierarchy come with BIG switching costs.
i.e. if you do have to fight to be the pack leader, you may die. If you don't die, the position you occupy is not arbitrary, but you must signal it.
8/
As an aside here, Lowery ignores the idea that changes in a hierarchy come with BIG switching costs.
i.e. if you do have to fight to be the pack leader, you may die. If you don't die, the position you occupy is not arbitrary, but you must signal it.
8/
Another Unstated Assumption:
Lowery has worked his entire professional career in military and government bureaucracy.
I too might believe abstract power WAS arbitrary if I had spent my entire career working in systems that often operate that way.
9/
Lowery has worked his entire professional career in military and government bureaucracy.
I too might believe abstract power WAS arbitrary if I had spent my entire career working in systems that often operate that way.
9/
Back to the chart.
For the above reasons, I believe he is drastically overvaluing the properties of Abstract Power in this schema and should consider MANY organizational styles outside of politics and government and see how generalizable his statement actually is.
10/
For the above reasons, I believe he is drastically overvaluing the properties of Abstract Power in this schema and should consider MANY organizational styles outside of politics and government and see how generalizable his statement actually is.
10/
And more, what if Abstract Power is, in fact, what keeps societies necessarily STABLE?
Mimetic theory argues a form of this, and does so without stating hierarchies are 'arbitrary'.
There is much existing study in hierarchy, and I'd like to see more thorough work here.
11/
Mimetic theory argues a form of this, and does so without stating hierarchies are 'arbitrary'.
There is much existing study in hierarchy, and I'd like to see more thorough work here.
11/
Explore what Lowery created below.
I'm not convinced that countries or internet companies are merely the arbitrary encoding of symbolic languages.
And if I DID...Why would I make the causal connection that they CAN physically constrain the real world in a meaningful way?
12/
I'm not convinced that countries or internet companies are merely the arbitrary encoding of symbolic languages.
And if I DID...Why would I make the causal connection that they CAN physically constrain the real world in a meaningful way?
12/
My gut reaction is that this largely overstates the actual power of a nation or an online company.
BUT, I would expect someone who works in gov't to believe the system they work within (while abstract) is THE MAJOR determining constraint over the physical world.
Now,
13/
BUT, I would expect someone who works in gov't to believe the system they work within (while abstract) is THE MAJOR determining constraint over the physical world.
Now,
13/
this is not an ad hominem.
i.e. Jason is a Fed, Fed statements aren't worth considering.
I'm saying:
It isn't novel for a gov't employee to believe gov't power is arbitrary AND a real constraint on the world.
i.e. The research breaks no obvious conceptual boundaries.
14/
i.e. Jason is a Fed, Fed statements aren't worth considering.
I'm saying:
It isn't novel for a gov't employee to believe gov't power is arbitrary AND a real constraint on the world.
i.e. The research breaks no obvious conceptual boundaries.
14/
But now, to the abstract (I'll be brief because this is getting long)...
What I notice when I read the below are the following.
15/
What I notice when I read the below are the following.
15/
Bitcoin is never introduced or conceptualized under its stated purpose, that is a 'Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System'.
Only hashing appears relevant to Lowery.
This isn't a thesis on Bitcoin, it seems this is a thesis on Bitcoin AS A useful tool of war.
16/
Only hashing appears relevant to Lowery.
This isn't a thesis on Bitcoin, it seems this is a thesis on Bitcoin AS A useful tool of war.
16/
In P1 we get the assertion that computers 'changed' human psychology to distinguish software/hardware.
This is relevant to Lowery, because Bitcoin 'may' distinguish hardwar from softwar (very cute).
Why this is CAUSAL is unclear, but that's to be shown in the thesis.
17/
This is relevant to Lowery, because Bitcoin 'may' distinguish hardwar from softwar (very cute).
Why this is CAUSAL is unclear, but that's to be shown in the thesis.
17/
P2 asserts that bitcoin tokenizes the physical cost of hashing...
Again, why the focus on only hashing and not the stated purpose of disintermediating financial institutions?
IMO this does a disservice to the stated purpose/utility of BTC.
18/
Again, why the focus on only hashing and not the stated purpose of disintermediating financial institutions?
IMO this does a disservice to the stated purpose/utility of BTC.
18/
I won't go into the 'programs doing battle with other programs' because I believe it's essentially a banal statement.
Most across the political spectrum believe we already live in an age of information war...
19/
Most across the political spectrum believe we already live in an age of information war...
19/
Because of that (state-algos battling each other), I don't take the introduction of BTC to that space to fundamentally change the existing reality of the present info-war.
Aside from the idea that 'maybe' BTC is actual proof of 'power', vs. the current 'fiat' info-war.
20/
Aside from the idea that 'maybe' BTC is actual proof of 'power', vs. the current 'fiat' info-war.
20/
But again, why would that materially change things?
If I'm NOT powerful, but can appear powerful with my current fiat-world info-war, WHY would I battle w/ BTC, where there is actual proof of my power?
The incentive is unclear to me here.
21/
If I'm NOT powerful, but can appear powerful with my current fiat-world info-war, WHY would I battle w/ BTC, where there is actual proof of my power?
The incentive is unclear to me here.
21/
P3 cites a few of his inspirations in the work.
And this is where I have a big gripe with the thesis.
IMO a thesis should go extremely deep and assert a novel point within a field.
We should add novel knowledge in a NARROW sense.
22/
And this is where I have a big gripe with the thesis.
IMO a thesis should go extremely deep and assert a novel point within a field.
We should add novel knowledge in a NARROW sense.
22/
This thesis seems to aspire to the opposite.
It generates a novel 'theory', and it then hunts across various domains to find conceptual support.
It is assuredly NOVEL, but because I take issue with so many of the conceptual & causal leaps, I'm unconvinced it's USEFUL.
23/
It generates a novel 'theory', and it then hunts across various domains to find conceptual support.
It is assuredly NOVEL, but because I take issue with so many of the conceptual & causal leaps, I'm unconvinced it's USEFUL.
23/
This is a beast of a thread, but as someone who lives full time in #Bitcoin Mining, I take interest in anyone who wants to say something about my field of work.
I'm especially interested when there is a chance a government takes advice from this person.
24/
I'm especially interested when there is a chance a government takes advice from this person.
24/
Final thought:
I don't believe @JasonPLowery is an intentional bad actor.
I think he's trying to conceptualize #Bitcoin within a realm he understands BEST.
That is:
Force projection in the context of military & war strategy.
It's not about BTC. It's about war.
END 🧵
I don't believe @JasonPLowery is an intentional bad actor.
I think he's trying to conceptualize #Bitcoin within a realm he understands BEST.
That is:
Force projection in the context of military & war strategy.
It's not about BTC. It's about war.
END 🧵
Mentions
See All
Mark Moss @1MarkMoss
·
Nov 30, 2022
Wow great thread! 👏