jer979Purpose Struggle
Yesterday, I decided that my blogging career should come to an end. I was doing myself a disservice. I told myself that the goal of the posts was to dig deeper, peel back the layers, get down to the core. But by publishing online (or on-chain as the case may be), I was subconsciously writing for others, even if I told myself that I didn't care if others read. So, in an effort to be more authentic, I figured I'd stop publishing and start doing a private journal. Within 2 hours of that decision...
jer979Value. Happiness.
I feel happy. It's fun, it's light, like a feather floating at the beginning of Forrest Gump. But, like the feather, it's not grounded. It can flitter and float away. Value is also ephemeral. We know it when we see it. We feel it, somewhere deep inside. Something connects to us, saying "yes, this is worth it." The "it" that it's worth is energy. Energy in the form of time, attention, money. The things of which our possession is limited. There's a reason why all the great traditions point to "...
jer979Coffee with AI
Every day for the past month, I’ve had a coffee date with AI. I literally sit down, with a cup of coffee, with an appointment on my calendar that says “coffee with AI”. During that time, AI (I’ve used ChatGPT, Gemini, Perplexity, Claude, and Venice) and I literally have a chat, the way I would with a friend. It’s not “write this letter for me” or “do this or that.” No, it’s a chance for us to have a conversation about whatever topic I want. Many days, recently, at least, it’s been about quant...
www.twitter.com/jer979
Support jer979
jer979Passionately Dispassionate Governance
Subscribe to jer979
Support jer979
jer979Passionately Dispassionate Governance
jer979Purpose Struggle
Yesterday, I decided that my blogging career should come to an end. I was doing myself a disservice. I told myself that the goal of the posts was to dig deeper, peel back the layers, get down to the core. But by publishing online (or on-chain as the case may be), I was subconsciously writing for others, even if I told myself that I didn't care if others read. So, in an effort to be more authentic, I figured I'd stop publishing and start doing a private journal. Within 2 hours of that decision...
jer979Value. Happiness.
I feel happy. It's fun, it's light, like a feather floating at the beginning of Forrest Gump. But, like the feather, it's not grounded. It can flitter and float away. Value is also ephemeral. We know it when we see it. We feel it, somewhere deep inside. Something connects to us, saying "yes, this is worth it." The "it" that it's worth is energy. Energy in the form of time, attention, money. The things of which our possession is limited. There's a reason why all the great traditions point to "...
jer979Coffee with AI
Every day for the past month, I’ve had a coffee date with AI. I literally sit down, with a cup of coffee, with an appointment on my calendar that says “coffee with AI”. During that time, AI (I’ve used ChatGPT, Gemini, Perplexity, Claude, and Venice) and I literally have a chat, the way I would with a friend. It’s not “write this letter for me” or “do this or that.” No, it’s a chance for us to have a conversation about whatever topic I want. Many days, recently, at least, it’s been about quant...
<100 subscribers
<100 subscribers
I know I’m about to walk onto shaky ground here, but sometimes you just have to do it.
I’m ok with the Supreme Court’s decision in Roe v. Wade.
But it’s not because I think abortion should be illegal.
It’s because of governance systems and “rules of the game.”
In my view, the Supreme Court has one job within the US system of governance: decide if something is unconstitutional or not.
Their job is not to legislate. It’s to interpret and according to many legal scholars, even many progressive ones, Roe was unconstitutional.
And, yes, the interpretation of the Roe v. Wade opinion was different today than it was 50 years ago, but that’s the way the “game” is played. That’s happened many times before in 1896 Plessy v. Ferguson and the infamous Dred Scott case.
The rules of the game are simple.
Supreme Court justices are nominated by Presidents. Presidents are elected by the Electoral College.
Don’t like the Supreme Court justices? Well, eventually they retire or die, so keep electing the Presidents you want to win.
Don’t like the fact that it’s the Electoral College that elects them?
Well, there are ways to change that. Or get enough Electoral College votes to win.
The fact is that the US system of governance has, at its core, the ability to “fork” and update itself.
But, in order for the “fork” to happen, there are certain thresholds that need to be met.
That’s the game.
Don’t like the rules of the game?
Change the rules, within the context of the game.
Now, I’m not writing this because I want to get in a flame war about Roe v. Wade, I’m writing this because crypto is going down the same path.
You join networks (which are kind of mini-‘nation-states’) and they have rules of the game.
To update the network, you need to change the rules, but changing the rules has rules.
It’s not about how you FEEL, it’s about how the rules are written.
While I, or you, may not personally like the Roe decision, what I think is important is to remember that effective governance systems are supposed to operate fairly, independent of feelings.
We’re about to enter an age where governance, by virtue of its enforcement via Web3 is going to become more impartial, so people are going to have to learn how to play more by the rules.
Or they can leave freely.
And that’s part of the game.
I know I’m about to walk onto shaky ground here, but sometimes you just have to do it.
I’m ok with the Supreme Court’s decision in Roe v. Wade.
But it’s not because I think abortion should be illegal.
It’s because of governance systems and “rules of the game.”
In my view, the Supreme Court has one job within the US system of governance: decide if something is unconstitutional or not.
Their job is not to legislate. It’s to interpret and according to many legal scholars, even many progressive ones, Roe was unconstitutional.
And, yes, the interpretation of the Roe v. Wade opinion was different today than it was 50 years ago, but that’s the way the “game” is played. That’s happened many times before in 1896 Plessy v. Ferguson and the infamous Dred Scott case.
The rules of the game are simple.
Supreme Court justices are nominated by Presidents. Presidents are elected by the Electoral College.
Don’t like the Supreme Court justices? Well, eventually they retire or die, so keep electing the Presidents you want to win.
Don’t like the fact that it’s the Electoral College that elects them?
Well, there are ways to change that. Or get enough Electoral College votes to win.
The fact is that the US system of governance has, at its core, the ability to “fork” and update itself.
But, in order for the “fork” to happen, there are certain thresholds that need to be met.
That’s the game.
Don’t like the rules of the game?
Change the rules, within the context of the game.
Now, I’m not writing this because I want to get in a flame war about Roe v. Wade, I’m writing this because crypto is going down the same path.
You join networks (which are kind of mini-‘nation-states’) and they have rules of the game.
To update the network, you need to change the rules, but changing the rules has rules.
It’s not about how you FEEL, it’s about how the rules are written.
While I, or you, may not personally like the Roe decision, what I think is important is to remember that effective governance systems are supposed to operate fairly, independent of feelings.
We’re about to enter an age where governance, by virtue of its enforcement via Web3 is going to become more impartial, so people are going to have to learn how to play more by the rules.
Or they can leave freely.
And that’s part of the game.
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
No activity yet