You’ve never talked to a single socialist, anarchist, leftist, etc. about civilian firearm ownership before? It’s very commonly thought of as a necessary evil to prevent systemic oppression. Maybe don’t spend so much of your time talking to trumpers and neoconservatives?

To wit: there is no “right people” to want to shoot, and anyone who thinks there is probably has their own tribalism issue to work out. Community defense specifically does not have a target right up until the point someone else is an aggressor, and ends when violence is no longer needed. This is why you never saw “antifa burns down trump supporter’s house” or whatever in the news.

Yeah, but there’s a solution for that.

Are they still victims when they become violent? Or when they promote violence? At some point the threshold is crossed.

I hear this point all the time, but it’s simply not true. The total power that humanity consumes could perhaps eventually be generated with wind and solar, but they don’t generate on demand, scalable power to provide the actual base load needed.

Don’t get me wrong, I think every new building (and probably the old ones too) should have solar panels, but that doesn’t negate the need to move the base power generation to nuclear from coal and oil.

Or even regular ones

Nah. At least not as a replacement for USD any time in the near future.

It’s in a weird position where it’s best as very anti-consumer or very pro-consumer implementations.

For example, digital concert or sports tickets sell out to scalpers almost immediately. If they were issued via blockchain and invalidated if resold again it would be extremely difficult for scalpers to continue (like, having to sell a whole physical device or spoof private keys or something). This would eventually make the practice die out, and people could just buy tickets to things without an artificially inflated market.

Conversely, an audio and/or video codec could prevent “unauthorized” devices from playing digital media they aren’t “authorized” to play. This would have quite the impact on the complexity of media piracy. Similar to Steam some time ago, this makes paying money for things easier than pirating again, but is extremely prone to said corporations misbehaving.

There’s also more complex possibilities, like digitizing municipal voting or permanent record keeping on private chains. Most people get confused about these and without a technology and cryptography background, and realistically at least some background in social services or macro logistics, the average person only has scammers and finance bro wannabees to learn from. That goes exactly as well as you’d expect.

Money is just made up in the first place. If instead you mean using it as an efficient way to represent allocating specific physical resources, perhaps. In the upcoming dystopian apocalypse where people still have to go work meaningless jobs to survive while the search burns around them, perhaps using a blockchain for ‘fuel points’ and ‘drinkable water points’ or something makes sense.

But as a general purpose currency it seems needlessly complex, and we already have a needlessly complex financial system. Changing the complexity doesn’t solve enough problems to be worth it.

As a currency? Yes please. Kill it all.

As a niche technology that very few people would otherwise know exists and even fewer would know how to use, but can be surprisingly effective if implemented properly? It’s ok.

But what about the feelings of the rich people? They might not like that!