Innovating without permission

who knows what an economy driven by a decentralized community might become

_{That was from a post that @tarazkp wrote.}

Cryptocurrencies are surrounded with huge bubble of Fear, Uncertainty, Doubt in the main stream – I suppose, because I barely follow any main stream media. But I have read some critique, and bankers especially like to attack them as inadequate solution as a widespread economical solution. Unless it's their own and following their own rules, of course. However, I don't think everyone is saying that for their own hidden agenda, but simply because their thinking is distorted according to their own profession. This goes for all the people: you view every problem through a (usually) narrow view of a few thinking patterns you've learned.

The deformation caused by profession.

If someone drove down a bridge, an engineer would likely be thinking if there was a design error that let the driver through the edges, a police would think if the driver was driving above the speed limit and/or being under the influence of some substances, a psychologist might think it was a suicide, and a statistician would just resort to statistic as to find the leading cause of death when driving down from bridge.

So the reason why so many bankers and economists might be attacking cryptocurrencies (especially those of decentralized nature) is because, ironically, they know so much about economy – in the realm that currently exists. And when this model of decentralized ledger is introduced, it simply cannot fit into a mind with a framework firmly on centralized systems.

In this way, the larger acquired knowledge can actually make you more reluctant for a new type of information, especially if it threatens your own learned ideas around which you've built your identity. (This is the "professional psychologist" me talking.) Or maybe all the FUD is indeed to lower the prices so the banksters can buy and conquer the cryptos themselves. (This is the "conspiracy theorist" me... you get the idea.)

There's also the problem that the only established economic model is... whatever we have right now. I'm not an expert in economics (hardly expert in anything to be honest), but I'm pretty sure it is not a hard science the same way physics is. It certainly is prone to errors, at least, since it has collapsed a few times already with devastating consequences putting the whole world into a depression more or less.

But those facts are usually not what people think when being introduced by the concept of cryptocurrencies, because Uncertainty. Most of us are really bad at dealing with it. No guarantees, no certainty, not even any statistics to look for likelyhoods, just an obscure future that we simply cannot tell how is it going to turn out. Success or catastrophe? – That is the reason why we stay in the status quo even if we knew it might not be an ideal one or even a bad one.

Admittedly, cryptocurrencies are really volatile at the moment – hence why some of the FUD – but it should be taken to account that the value tied in the, is just a tiny, tiny amount compared to all the value that is in fiat, stocks, bonds and derivatives.

But, to get back to Taraz' quote that I started this with:

who knows what an economy driven by a decentralized community might become

This struck me, because I realized that we right now are creating and experimenting with a new type of economy on a small scale (that has a potential to spread worldwide). We are innovating without asking the world for a permission, because most people wouldn't approve, because they wouldn't understand the point of doing it. But all it took was this random guy creating Bitcoin, and suddenly people who never might've not even thought about the concept of decentralization found a use for it and started using it.

And guess what? We are doing something similar here; rewarding Steem for content contributions. Is it a perfect? Hell no, but do you really think a perfect content contribution rewarding system just appears out of nowhere with this new unestablished technology? No, because we are on the very front-end of figuring this new technology out and carving out the framework. There are no instructions on how to do this, because we are creating them as we go. That is the nature of things when exploring unseen territories, and not all can take the uncertainty that comes with it. But some of those who do, will end up being praised later for creating and finding something new on the process.

You can't join Columbus to find undiscovered America, but why not discover the new type of economy until you can jump onto a flight to Mars once Musk gets his business done?