Cyber Seagull on Nostr: #6 In almost every cultural tradition Angels are part of a government structure. ...

#6 In almost every cultural tradition Angels are part of a government structure. There is always some king, or in the case of angels, God.

#20 You admit the desirabilty of escrow. Drivechain/hash escrow offers this but with the direct similarity to and protection by Bitcoins own security, miners. Also, you fail to point out that the additive trust of a fedimint also contains the additive risk of its participants. This is slightly different than a betrayal.
A fedimint of a group of 5 is also liable to the risks of 5 peoples lives. Your whole model ignores the role and power of hidden, individual custody of money. In a village, a child of one member might become sick. Whereas before, someone could say they simply do not have the money to help, now everyone knows they have the money. This money could have been saved for next years seed purchase, but now it must go to the child. Someone else's child. Ones own survival is now at risk. Thus any money that would find its way into a common structure like a fedimint, would already be "gift" money, money that can be afforded to be lost. Such money is, in ethnographic terms, better spent in public acts of generosity p2p. In the bitcoin context, lightning micro transactions, not long term fedimint holds.

The whole basis for fedimint is based on an anthropological error made by wealthy westerners AND wealthy disconnected Africans about the people they are trying to help. Somehow Bitcoin has something to learn from cultures that are bad with money.

Fedimints attempts to appeal to a minor economic demographic that do not actually share their money the way they claim. Outside of funerals where money is put into a common pot, or specific projects that benefit everyone(themselves) everyone is trying to make and keep their money, FROM others. These specific scenarios can already by met by a direct utxo to the person they trust in charge of the project as is done with cash.

There is a saying:"A stranger is a potential friend, a neighbor is a dire enemy."

The game theory and principals behind bitcoin supercede local cultural expression of the use of money. Property rights are individual. The individual is universal. You either play the game in line with these fundamental properties or you suffer, in a long enough timeline. When we observe communal behavior, we are still observing individual behavior, outside of anything but insects.

--------------

Wow, what a slog. Often repetitive and all over the place. The background floating graphic and the need to switch to reader mode to avoid it for each mini article made this entire attempt at reading your work very very unpleasant. Please compile your points into a TLDR, for this mess that would mean one or two long form articles. I mean, you bought a whole domain and repost links to it, so you want people to read this stuff right ?

Each post could have just been neatly organized on a single page with subheadings. Anyways, enough about the presentation, what about the substance?

You are on to something, it's just not ever clear what. It appears your point is: "Trust in institutions scaled civilization to a point where things are enjoyable." Wow, groundbreaking.

As a fellow writer, please take my critique in the lightess of touches. You put this out there and you use it as a response to several ongoing existential debates about bitcoins future, but there isn't really anything adding to the conversation. We know custodial and trusted structures scale.

The goal is to scale without trust not because of the nature of trust, but because of the nature economic self determination/innovation and the trend towards instituional corruption.