creation done by @wwworld4us
Paul Romer wrote Endogenous technological change, where he breaks down three basic premises:
P1: tech innovation provides incentive for capital accumulation
P2: change is sparked internally
P3: once instructions of a good is incurred it is repicable(copy and paste) beyond measures
Endogenous growth theory can best understood through this Wiki page. But the basis of this discussion is one where Bitcoin fits, or is mappable, accordingly to all those premises.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Endogenous_growth_theory
Bitcoin is a protocol, much like how the Internet is a protocol. It's a tool we use to engineer a service-information economic ecosystem (Gmail, Google, Facebook, Twitter, Reddit) and of course we have old economic systems (State and Private) Unfortunately this weirdly metamorphosis creates a sluggish downturn in our economic evolution, namely because of its monopolistic attributes. There is no true innovation when accumulation is centralized, therefore decentralized products emerge from within. Namely Bitcoin.
I mean, isn't it both weird and amazing that after the 2008 downturn, one year later, an anonymous character named Satoshi Nakamoto's magnum opus--the Bitcoin Whitepaper, and sparks a paradigm shift . After what it should have been an implosion of the system, only to be saved by cheap money printing, creates in itself, an innovated and systematically over utilization of a protocol called Bitcoin.
And of course, what comes after Bitcoin is you guessed it... replicable and creative platforms that borrow much of Bitcoin protocol (etherum, side chains, smart contracts etc.) The command c and command V follows suit, profoundly.
And so, what kind of paradigm shift are we leading towards? One that is not Capitalism, but Post-Capitalism, I believe of course. Because now, we have an ecosystem that has a very hard time to value, that's the key word, to value, information or general intellect as Karl Marx would put it. Especially in this nowness of our reality where views and likes is actually profitable. Where your social being is profitable. Far beyond the axis of industrial production . Many people point out to this market, like in the Steemit market as having innumerable value, or let alone Steemit. But just the totality of the internet: how much money, that is still left to be accounted for that at our current level, can't fully understand it.
This ideas was first brought to you by:
Philip De Franco's: How much $$$ do Youtubers really make
Where he talks about the difficulty to ascertain a real number because of various variables. He gives a very simplistic understanding, but doesn't go over the edge and seeks to understand why. But he does mentions how to go about, which is continue to invest in more sociable products, not necessarily tech, but more ideas than generate more profit.
update #2
I was in YouTube this morning and stumbled upon Phil De Franco's video: YouTube is shutting down my channel and I am not sure what to do
Maybe I didn't do justice on the earlier paragraph about monopolies, but this is what I was referring to, when I said how they create sluggish downturns. His video which I can't find atm had violated Youtubes update laws, where he used excessively strong language. Now how ambiguous can you get with that sort of explanation? This is coming after the video I just showed on top. I find interesting a) he's fine with it, he even says that it's protocol b) he'll still make money from his other ventures (clothing etc ) but it doesn't solve the underlining problem. YouTube is a monolithic giant at this point, and it has the power to control and dictate what flows in and out as it pleases. Which is the problem and has been the problems since the emergence of video journalist from the hubris of old style journalism--censorship. I've always said that censorship is the guillotine of our society. What marker forces reacted to this highly condensed forms of living? Platforms like Steemit if it can actually get a heartbeat at this moment, but projects like this and more so in the future. Listen Phil, if you ever get to read this don't trust people that easily. Especially when it comes to information and money. It doesn't matter how long you've been in the game, you are nothing more than replacable. If you can't fathom those words, then youve already lost.
And the other video that actually sparked this blog post, is Reggie Middleton's succinct explanation of what the Bitcoin protocol really is.
Reggie Middleton's Bitcoin, Autonomy, and the Audacity for access.
I really enjoyed the juxtaposition between fiat paper, to the malleability and programmability that is the Bitcoin. One thing that I would add to his understanding that would make it easier,at least for me of course, especially since I am a visual person, is a better representation of what kind of transformation Bitcoin can undertake. And for alot of people, cultural references are easier to remember and so I thought the best example for Bitcoin would be Pokemon. Which Pokemon, you might ask? Ditto.
Watch second 00:09-00:11 to see what a simplistic look Bitcoin undergoes. But more importantly hear what Ash says in 00:38-00:40 "imagine the strength of all the Pokemon in one."
Artwork done by Kyle draws
Yes Ash, imagine what the strength of only one Bitcoin has to the whole world.