Great essay, Jordan. An attempted (and simplistic) synthesis of your essay: a “niche” has emerged to replace Trad(X). Now the question is — will the thing that fills the niche be central/top-down (multi-national corps, China)? Or decentralized/bottoms-up (DeFi, blockchain)? Accordingly, the way this thing plays out will dictate the power distribution in whatever’s next and have large implications for the sovereignty of agents in the future.
Beautifully written, Jordan, thank you. Thank you too for providing the final reason I needed to also migrate from Medium. Let's see how long Substack's 'independence' lasts...
Quick question: I am in the early stages of setting up the necessary data fields to report on the emerging SOCI you refer to. For simplicity's sake, I'm calling it Society 4.0 (where 1 was Agrarian, 2 was Global Trade and 3 was/is Industrial). What, in your mind, are good high level indicators to start with? In other words, what data might support the next essay you write in 2026?
This is what I have so far:
- Share of Voice (social media metrics)
- Share of Market (for tokens: metrics like those found in sites like https://coinmarketcap.com/, but mainly for projects focussed on 'regeneration')
Change in time? Something like a velocity vector on each of the above? And something like "evolutionary potential". Which is enormously hard to measure but nonetheless can be "called". For example, I'd say that within the blockchain SOCI, Bitcoin has the lowest evolutionary potential while one of the newer projects in DeFi or NFT would probably have the highest (depending on the *team*).
That's a very useful tip, thank you. I received early access to a PhD thesis which describes evolutionary characteristics, so this might not be as difficult as it appears. Many thanks, Jordan!
*Definition of Self-Organizing Collective Intelligence:* SOCI is the emergent force which appears when a group comes together, with no central control authority and no hierarchy, to solve problems that are beyond the ability of the individual alone. The premise that intelligence can be amplified by thinking together is based on examples from nature: fish school; birds flock; bees swarm.
Just putting this out there to see how it sticks. I've struggled to find a definition, so maybe this can get the conversation going. A collection of additional resources and related papers can be found at https://roamresearch.com/#/app/MichaelHaupt/page/HBXpOnwLI.
I've been researching emergent Collective Intelligence since the mid-80s and am publishing a blog about it here's a collection of definitions about CI: https://blogofcollectiveintelligence.com/category/definitions/ . My relatively recent one, inviting criticism is this:
Collective intelligence is the capacity of groups to evolve towards higher order complexity and harmony, through such innovation mechanisms as variation-feedback-selection, differentiation-integration-transformation, and competition-cooperation-coopetition.
I've been reading your blog since Barbara Nusbaum introduced me to it about three years ago - love it! "Evolve towards higher order complexity" seems to be the key piece to me in your definition. The triads make it a bit difficult to read, but it al makes sense to me. Thanks George!
Can't wait for the next one. This is going to be a fascinating decade. Lets see how much deepcode is worth on ideamarket in 5 years. Today it is worth the entry level base price of $0.10
I copied this criticism of the blockchain from someone in the anti-technocratic space, I think there are some legitimate concerns. To be fair, he wrote a long list of pro blockchain aspects as well, but I won't share them here since it feels like you are well aware of them. I loved your update, but wonder if the list below would change your perspective on the odds of decentralization winning the race.
"The cons (criticism) of the blockchain:
Forking debasement, meaning anyone can copy the blockchain code and create their own blockchain and money.
Fraud at Exchanges, with crypto keys and funds easily stolen or manipulated.
Mining pools controlled and manipulated by big tech and people with money.
Energy consumption - Carbon footprint. The amount of energy and earth resources needed to mine crypto is staggering!
Open-source developers need approval by programmers in order to make changes by the people in charge of the project. Those that approve can be corrupted and can add their own code.
Over 50% node attack can change ledger contents. This can happen if all miners collude with each other.
Blockchains can be modified via forking with additional layers, much like what happened to bitcoin in 2017 and when the Lightning Network 2nd layer protocol was added, that allowed the bypass of blockchain consensus.
There are more... just to name a few.
There are institutional blockchains and variants I call hybrids. Here are some of the features:
Hybrid systems blockchains are centralized.
Hybrid systems have central authorities.
Hybrid systems are not P2P and have central servers.
Hybrid systems storage is distributed only on centralized servers.
Hybrid systems storage is possible if you are a node, and nodes/servers are housed in central locations and expensive.
Miners are servers/nodes and they can all be pooled, managed and centralized.
There is no mining in Hybrid systems and if the node belongs to a bank or any other central system.
In a hybrid system the centralized system is not obliged to use proof of work for competition.
In Hybrid systems, they can mint as many coins as they wish anytime they choose.
In Hybrid systems, you only get public address key (bank account) but not the private key.
In hybrid systems, there may be a need to be approved or some contract fulfillment before a transaction can take place and recorded.
In hybrid systems, there is no anonymity.
And then there is the big issue I have, is what happens to your cryptocurrency if it is delisted from all exchanges, blocked at vending machines and blocked by online merchants? Especially when the central banks create their own version of crypto in a cashless society? What happens if the entire supply chain becomes digitally inaccessible to your crypto?
Applications - such as human capital bonds.
Commoditization and tokenization of nature.
Tokenizing behavior such as workforce and educational space.
Buying and selling crypto as "gas" for smart-contract networks, such as AI-as-a-Service (AaaS) that requires crypto ETH for fulfillment of AI used in surveillance state operations and systems.
Again, these are just some of the pros, cons and concerns of blockchains. There are many more, but it requires more discussion."
And this does not even get into the Web 3.0 that will require ID login into the new internet."
Thanks Jordan for this essay! I've been searching for the thoughtful, non-dogmatic takes in this space and what it could become, and am glad to have found another one.
I appreciate especially your point about how blockchain projects could themselves have a hand in steering regulation and legislation. One counter though: if anyone inside the machine as it exists today catches a whiff that that's coming, won't they be incentivized to pull the brakes _as soon as possible_? Like, I don't see why regulation might not come down hard and fast to stop what is coming that would be existential risks for those institutions.
I think nature has shown us which method (SOCI vs centralized intelligence) is superior. I’m thinking of the way cells organize in the developing fetus, or the algorithms of Mother Nature that drive all life, chaotically, towards “perfection”.
Thanks, this is my first time reading you and not the last. I'm curious why you favor the blockchain and I assume DAO/smart contracts path to governance when it has the inherent issues that DAO have of hackability ... lots of 'contract' stuff can be coded into the bitcoin .... I agree smooth governance of guerilla enterprises that generate revenue is the way to be thinking; I'm just not sure of the method
I think what you are asking is whether is "prefer" some of the dedicated smart contract chains (like ETH) over the OG Bitcoin blockchain? I am chain agnostic. In fact, from my perspective, they are all part of the same SOCI. If I had to pick a path from where I stand right now, I'd expect that ETH or even one of the post-ETH DAO projects would "figure it out" largely because the development on Bitcoin has become much less innovative. The "Core" group seems to be mostly playing with sidechains and most of the creative intelligence seems focused elsewhere in the ecosystem. But, again, I'm formally agnostic.
Good question. I don't quite remember, but I definitely stumbled onto them somewhere on Reddit. Then read over the whitepaper. I'm still parsing that out and will read it again. To me, Zer0 seems to be lurking in the shadows, but in a good way. The depth of the tech is there. Extremely thought out with actual infrastructure architecture drawn out. I found a google doc that proposes the requirements of a full Zero ZNS system. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Z_lvPa4zqTHm4i1DOuVnn8bjzKPKkjF2IgPkcBh7VNA/edit?usp=sharing
Thank you. That is my instinct too but I guess I'm not aware of nitty-gritty smart contract packages that would actually make governance details smooth and transparent, and I'm not sure how far off they are. I have no platform allegiance either and I'm not interested in the investment aspects. We're ready to run a creative community now.
Great essay, Jordan. An attempted (and simplistic) synthesis of your essay: a “niche” has emerged to replace Trad(X). Now the question is — will the thing that fills the niche be central/top-down (multi-national corps, China)? Or decentralized/bottoms-up (DeFi, blockchain)? Accordingly, the way this thing plays out will dictate the power distribution in whatever’s next and have large implications for the sovereignty of agents in the future.
Agree?
Agree
A weighty yet swift assessment as usual, Jordan. Starting to think of you as the lone 10,000 lb hummingbird :)
Beautifully written, Jordan, thank you. Thank you too for providing the final reason I needed to also migrate from Medium. Let's see how long Substack's 'independence' lasts...
Quick question: I am in the early stages of setting up the necessary data fields to report on the emerging SOCI you refer to. For simplicity's sake, I'm calling it Society 4.0 (where 1 was Agrarian, 2 was Global Trade and 3 was/is Industrial). What, in your mind, are good high level indicators to start with? In other words, what data might support the next essay you write in 2026?
This is what I have so far:
- Share of Voice (social media metrics)
- Share of Market (for tokens: metrics like those found in sites like https://coinmarketcap.com/, but mainly for projects focussed on 'regeneration')
- Team Reputation (longevity, track record, etc.)
What am I missing?
Change in time? Something like a velocity vector on each of the above? And something like "evolutionary potential". Which is enormously hard to measure but nonetheless can be "called". For example, I'd say that within the blockchain SOCI, Bitcoin has the lowest evolutionary potential while one of the newer projects in DeFi or NFT would probably have the highest (depending on the *team*).
That's a very useful tip, thank you. I received early access to a PhD thesis which describes evolutionary characteristics, so this might not be as difficult as it appears. Many thanks, Jordan!
*Definition of Self-Organizing Collective Intelligence:* SOCI is the emergent force which appears when a group comes together, with no central control authority and no hierarchy, to solve problems that are beyond the ability of the individual alone. The premise that intelligence can be amplified by thinking together is based on examples from nature: fish school; birds flock; bees swarm.
Just putting this out there to see how it sticks. I've struggled to find a definition, so maybe this can get the conversation going. A collection of additional resources and related papers can be found at https://roamresearch.com/#/app/MichaelHaupt/page/HBXpOnwLI.
I've been researching emergent Collective Intelligence since the mid-80s and am publishing a blog about it here's a collection of definitions about CI: https://blogofcollectiveintelligence.com/category/definitions/ . My relatively recent one, inviting criticism is this:
Collective intelligence is the capacity of groups to evolve towards higher order complexity and harmony, through such innovation mechanisms as variation-feedback-selection, differentiation-integration-transformation, and competition-cooperation-coopetition.
I've been reading your blog since Barbara Nusbaum introduced me to it about three years ago - love it! "Evolve towards higher order complexity" seems to be the key piece to me in your definition. The triads make it a bit difficult to read, but it al makes sense to me. Thanks George!
Can't wait for the next one. This is going to be a fascinating decade. Lets see how much deepcode is worth on ideamarket in 5 years. Today it is worth the entry level base price of $0.10
I copied this criticism of the blockchain from someone in the anti-technocratic space, I think there are some legitimate concerns. To be fair, he wrote a long list of pro blockchain aspects as well, but I won't share them here since it feels like you are well aware of them. I loved your update, but wonder if the list below would change your perspective on the odds of decentralization winning the race.
"The cons (criticism) of the blockchain:
Forking debasement, meaning anyone can copy the blockchain code and create their own blockchain and money.
Fraud at Exchanges, with crypto keys and funds easily stolen or manipulated.
Mining pools controlled and manipulated by big tech and people with money.
Energy consumption - Carbon footprint. The amount of energy and earth resources needed to mine crypto is staggering!
Open-source developers need approval by programmers in order to make changes by the people in charge of the project. Those that approve can be corrupted and can add their own code.
Over 50% node attack can change ledger contents. This can happen if all miners collude with each other.
Blockchains can be modified via forking with additional layers, much like what happened to bitcoin in 2017 and when the Lightning Network 2nd layer protocol was added, that allowed the bypass of blockchain consensus.
There are more... just to name a few.
There are institutional blockchains and variants I call hybrids. Here are some of the features:
Hybrid systems blockchains are centralized.
Hybrid systems have central authorities.
Hybrid systems are not P2P and have central servers.
Hybrid systems storage is distributed only on centralized servers.
Hybrid systems storage is possible if you are a node, and nodes/servers are housed in central locations and expensive.
Miners are servers/nodes and they can all be pooled, managed and centralized.
There is no mining in Hybrid systems and if the node belongs to a bank or any other central system.
In a hybrid system the centralized system is not obliged to use proof of work for competition.
In Hybrid systems, they can mint as many coins as they wish anytime they choose.
In Hybrid systems, you only get public address key (bank account) but not the private key.
In hybrid systems, there may be a need to be approved or some contract fulfillment before a transaction can take place and recorded.
In hybrid systems, there is no anonymity.
And then there is the big issue I have, is what happens to your cryptocurrency if it is delisted from all exchanges, blocked at vending machines and blocked by online merchants? Especially when the central banks create their own version of crypto in a cashless society? What happens if the entire supply chain becomes digitally inaccessible to your crypto?
Applications - such as human capital bonds.
Commoditization and tokenization of nature.
Tokenizing behavior such as workforce and educational space.
Buying and selling crypto as "gas" for smart-contract networks, such as AI-as-a-Service (AaaS) that requires crypto ETH for fulfillment of AI used in surveillance state operations and systems.
Again, these are just some of the pros, cons and concerns of blockchains. There are many more, but it requires more discussion."
And this does not even get into the Web 3.0 that will require ID login into the new internet."
Thanks Jordan for this essay! I've been searching for the thoughtful, non-dogmatic takes in this space and what it could become, and am glad to have found another one.
I appreciate especially your point about how blockchain projects could themselves have a hand in steering regulation and legislation. One counter though: if anyone inside the machine as it exists today catches a whiff that that's coming, won't they be incentivized to pull the brakes _as soon as possible_? Like, I don't see why regulation might not come down hard and fast to stop what is coming that would be existential risks for those institutions.
I think nature has shown us which method (SOCI vs centralized intelligence) is superior. I’m thinking of the way cells organize in the developing fetus, or the algorithms of Mother Nature that drive all life, chaotically, towards “perfection”.
Thanks, this is my first time reading you and not the last. I'm curious why you favor the blockchain and I assume DAO/smart contracts path to governance when it has the inherent issues that DAO have of hackability ... lots of 'contract' stuff can be coded into the bitcoin .... I agree smooth governance of guerilla enterprises that generate revenue is the way to be thinking; I'm just not sure of the method
I think what you are asking is whether is "prefer" some of the dedicated smart contract chains (like ETH) over the OG Bitcoin blockchain? I am chain agnostic. In fact, from my perspective, they are all part of the same SOCI. If I had to pick a path from where I stand right now, I'd expect that ETH or even one of the post-ETH DAO projects would "figure it out" largely because the development on Bitcoin has become much less innovative. The "Core" group seems to be mostly playing with sidechains and most of the creative intelligence seems focused elsewhere in the ecosystem. But, again, I'm formally agnostic.
for a good post-ETH DAO example, check out Zer0.
homepage: https://zer0.io/a/home
whitepaper: https://res.cloudinary.com/fact0ry/image/upload/v1602993979/ZER0_WHITEPAPER_-_v0.8_-_Official_wkjgwe.pdf
Interested in your take on this.
I'm following Zer0 closely. How did you come across them?
Good question. I don't quite remember, but I definitely stumbled onto them somewhere on Reddit. Then read over the whitepaper. I'm still parsing that out and will read it again. To me, Zer0 seems to be lurking in the shadows, but in a good way. The depth of the tech is there. Extremely thought out with actual infrastructure architecture drawn out. I found a google doc that proposes the requirements of a full Zero ZNS system. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Z_lvPa4zqTHm4i1DOuVnn8bjzKPKkjF2IgPkcBh7VNA/edit?usp=sharing
Thank you. That is my instinct too but I guess I'm not aware of nitty-gritty smart contract packages that would actually make governance details smooth and transparent, and I'm not sure how far off they are. I have no platform allegiance either and I'm not interested in the investment aspects. We're ready to run a creative community now.