Why don’t Crypto and Blockchain end up with banks and notaries? – Opinion

The question in the title of this column was asked by a friend and made me think. My answer is based on two things that I have tried to experience and understand in recent years: technology and human behavior.

Starting with technology, its current rate of development is infinitely higher than what we humans can individually follow.

Examples abound. But, given my more experience, that of cryptocurrency, it’s clear that continuing with everything, or at least a small part of what’s being created and discussed, is a very tedious job, perhaps even impossible.

Everything happens 24/7 and in every corner of the globe. When you come across an initiative that you find impressive, and you start to understand it better, you are always amazed by others, often on the other side of the world, facing the same problem in a very different way.

A crypto fan who has never been surprised by a friend who has never been surprised about an initiative you’ve never heard of throws the first stone.

I can expand on that here, but I imagine you also have examples of other technologies that affect you, and you see that their development is faster than you can follow.

This requires a great deal of adaptation to the way we think and act. The seriousness and feeling of always being obsolete is constant. Knowing how to live and balance with this is an art.

Changing chat groups and checking with people in other industries has helped me realize that the discussions I have in crypto groups, which are often the source of this seriousness, are limited to crypto.

Conversations with people outside this sector, who have nothing to do with cryptography and who are now the majority of the population, and my friends, counterbalance that.

This has helped me bridge what I have learned about this sector and return it to people who are still far from this development.

This more individualized part that I described above is the main aspect of the second point that will answer my title question.

Our society is shaped by the rules that emerged in the decades of social interaction. They, unlike technology, have a different pace. As historian Yuval Noah Harari rightly points out in his two books, Sapiens and Homo Deus, man is the only creature capable of creating and living with fiction. This is the main link in the organization of our society.

But these fictions are not changing as fast as with technology. Religion and economic systems, such as capitalism, are developing, updating, but at a much slower pace than technology.

At least Harari’s first book, Sapiens, is recommended for anyone who wants to better understand this phenomenon.

For those who want to better understand the development of technology, as well as those who are a little afraid of what is available and what the future holds, this is Max Tegmark’s “LIFE 3.0”.

The work deals in a very simple way with the development of artificial intelligence and what is designed for the near future. It’s one of those books that I couldn’t stop reading until I finished.

Another interesting aspect is that technology is agnostic about this section of society. Crypto and blockchain can work the same way in any country or culture in the world. I say “maybe” because it’s not like that in practice. Its implementation is greatly influenced by social / cultural factors.

These aspects range from accounting and taxation to ethical and religious factors. Is it up to technology to adjust the user’s flexibility? Definitely. But then we touch on another point: the use of technology has different factors in each culture. Each society will choose its use cases and speed of adoption.

I see companies, big companies, notaries, banks and so on. as a representation of the fiction we construct. Their adaptations are slower, scattered, and different from each other.

Of course, if we built everything from scratch, it would be very different. There are many more effective ways to do everything we do today. In all areas. But society creates its own fiction and rules to put edges and adapt to the use of technology.

In this sense, I am looking for an example of cycling, a sport that I have loved and practiced for many years.

The UCI, the world’s top cycling organization, recently approved the use of disc brakes in its races. Since then, we have seen the predominance of bicycles with this type of brake in the Tour de France, the Giro d’Italia and many other competitions, which are considered to be much more effective than the usual brake for many years, especially on rainy days. .

But on the one hand, if this technology was included in the lawsuits, on the other hand, competition bikes still have a minimum weight limit of 6.8 kg, and competition bikes under 4.5 kg are now already manufactured.kg. Imagine climbing these huge mountains with less than 2 kg. That would be great. To do this, the technology is already there, all that is needed is the rules that allow it.

Fictional changes are far from keeping pace with technological change. And I see that distance growing. As I always say: there is technology to do better, but it is up to you to determine how and when the transition will be made.

What do you think? Come talk to me …

Instagram: @Findrender
Twitter: @Fitrender
LinkedIn: @GustavoCunha
Website: www.fentrender.com
Facebook: @Findrender
Youtube: @GustavoCunhaVideo
Podcast: Fintechs and New Investments

Invest in the cheapest cryptocurrency in the market: open a free XP account!

Leave a Comment