Refine Your Ideas, Think Clearly, Think Pseudocode

So many people think they have a good blockchain idea.
"I want this!"
"I want that!"
"You must stop this!"
"You must stop that!"

Some awareness is needed.

I see far too many times the "We need feature X." Words are so easy - they give the illusion of an idea, without that idea being crystal clear at all.

There is no way to code intentions - one can only code actions and their consequences.

After some discussions, or worse, after implementing some code, we reach the stage of, "I want to see good(X) and we must stop bad(X)." All of which is merely the manifestation that X was not really such a good idea. The function of X needs refining so that the incentives that X has created are good for the longterm health of the chain. There are ways to define that,

One deep problem is that good and bad are often defined by human qualities. Computers are not human; they have no abilities to perceive qualities that have not been quantified. It is therefore up to the humans - both the concept creators and the coders - to try to quantify the qualitative. That is a hard problem. If that was easy, we would have a blockchain called UTOPIA - or PRECOG.

So, if you think you have a good idea, then try to do some extra thinking. Very few ideas are new. Feeling entitled that your opinion is so very important is not going to get you very far. BLURTING IT OUT in capitals is not going to improve your idea. Try thinking like a logical machine. I myself am not a coder, but I can quite easily write pseudocode, which is just a human-readable sequence of steps that can then be translated into a formal computer language. BUT, that process of translation will only be clear if the pseudocode is clear.

Taking the time to create all the logical steps required to implement an idea will (should) then reveal all the flaws, all the ways the naive code can be gamed, hijacked and abused. After I write a bit of pseudocode, I put on my black hat - think like a scammer. You must be able to break into your own house, as that will reveal to you how someone else can do it. Bad actors are always present - to assume that people will be good is naive to the point of self-destruction.

To also think you can stop individuals from using your great idea in a bad way is to totally misunderstand what a complex blockchain system should be doing. That's thinking like a policeman, that transgressors can somehow be punished in some way. That totally defeats the objective of creating a self-sustaining algorithmic system. That in itself might, or might not, be achievable, but to knowingly take a step backwards is not a sign of progress. We could also abandon that as an aim and just create lots of block-chains.

What I have seen in the years I have been involved in blockchain ecosystems is that the vast majority of people have no idea how they work, no idea how they are designed and do not have the psychological equipment to actually live in such a system. The condensation of the individual into belief-systems and group-think is deeply troubling within a system with stated aims of self-sovereignty. Hence, we get the socmedia we see.

Hence, we get the outside world.

Might is right.

Can we do better?

---

_{image: pixabay}