the early plan for btc was to break the spine of central banking cartels and to eventually threaten the reserve status of the greenback. 2008 was still fresh in our minds, and back then it was fashionable to blame fiat currency and the pratcise of fractional reserve lending. The original ‘zeitgeist’ movie was a big influence on the whole scene.
Eventually people began to figure out that btc was most likely a vehicle for oligarchs and elites to shelter their assets from the next financial crash which killed the libertarian enthusiasm for the project. Now btc is exclusively for tech-bros and other finance-adjacent types just trying to personally enrich themselves.










the search providers (especially that famously ‘not evil’ one) had a huge hand in centralising and then gatekeeping access to ‘the web’. They have such a disproportionately powerful effect on how users discover content, and huge power to drive self-fulfilling ‘network effects’ where people go where people already are, which has become so normalised that most people couldn’t imagine ‘the web’ without them.
i’m not suggesting it was ever realistic or possible, but what we needed was for that one search provider and indexer of content to be broken up, partially nationalised, and partially integrated into the network specification itself. Only they are powerful enough to become a model for how to functionally disentangle their operations into public and private parts.
the only alternative is to break the centralisation of the web as china is doing and other BRICS nations intend to do, by creating ‘national internets’ which in some ways federate together and in other ways do not. I don’t like this model of development for the future of the internet but the security considerations of the present require this kind of approach.