I've been playing with programmatic money since selling runescape gold for PayPal dollars. I guess I just need more idk

Huh? That's not what "programmatic money" means. You're confusing it with digital currency.

Programmatic money means you can define code/program with the money itself. In a trivial case I could easily program the money (called a smart contract) to pay you $1 every day. I could put $1000 in that contract and you could have near-total confidence of that payout schedule. The code itself is a property of that money, and its execution is enforced by the same system that secures the overall ledger.

Incorrect. You're confusing "enough trust to make the world go around" with "so trustworthy we're neglecting that it's bad for the world."

And I mean the latter more in terms of the brain drain than ecologically, which ironically may not get solved because of that brain drain.

The government needs to be in control of the money supply. Monetary and fiscal policy are important levers for maintaining the health of our economy. The government uses money to bolster trade, issue debt, maintain a high standard of living, etc.

Crypto is a bunch of investors and engineers that think that they should be in charge rather than our elected governments. It's not even a geniocracy since it rewards only early investors. It's an oligarchy of the lucky few that think they should have more leverage than governments and the populace. It disenfranchises the government's ability to help the poor, underserved, and disadvantaged.

Crypto not from the government is dangerous.

I predict that as this plays out more governments will move to shut it down.

While clearly an unpopular comment, the "investors" would like you to think that somehow the risks in crypto are any better than the comparably stable government system.

> The government needs to be in control of the money supply.

Not interested in bureaucrats determining my purchasing power, sorry

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.

> all programmers hate technology

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?

Yes, correct.

What good is a system, if it only benefits a few? And levers are used at the wrong time, benefits only a few people?

Antarctica will be happy to have you. /s

But seriously, functional governments are what hold society together. We can't have a system without levers.

Functional societies existed long before central banking and costless money creation

Straw man.

Those societies also existed alongside slavery and tons of other bad shit. So how does that change the value of a functional government?

Central banking caused the end of slavery? now that's a hot take

Have you heard of blood diamonds? I bet ETH solves that problem with a ledger /s

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)