The Tokenomy

Permissionless Commons

Open Contribution | Collective Action | Permissionless Feature | Cohabitation of Institutions

Open Contribution

a. trustless loyalty

The growing Economy widened wealth gaps while scaling.
Decentralized networks display an interesting countertrend.
They show the potential to redefine wealth and power dynamics.
More distribution revolves around contribution rather than privilege.
Tokens give rights, not the other way around.
Earned authority grow from disinterested and active commitment.
Peer-to-peer organizations prosper thanks to independent contributors.
They are free to collaborate on unmet and random needs where they see fit.
They are the active citizens working on public utility for their own good.
The merit granted for shared value ensures a consensual prioritization.
Synergies govern the decentralized management of price systems.
Petty busywork preserving central administration can't compete or sustain.
Developers' permissionless impact ripples throughout global markets.
Token exchanges are not only the key to open participation and demand.
The pricing mechanism creates trust into a collaborative capacity.
All protocol participants have skin in the game.
Trustless features are quite emphatic in the blockchain space.
Advocates cannot see trust when it is diluted in millions of promises.
They are unlikely to be broken altogether.
One cannot see trust when it is everywhere in the air.
Trustless is not unreliable.
Trustless is the idea that we are one, together.
NFTs are an expression of that idea.

Collective Action

b. technological transition

Nobel Prize recipient Ostrom dedicated a life to a neglected prospect.
She studied a viable alternative to nationalization and privatization.
She envisaged a mode of governance for particular use cases: the commons.
They suit the needs of an ecosystem better than public or private admins.
Commons accommodate numerous economic strategies.
They are allowed to capitalize on sustainable and varied objectives.
Controlled freedom diversifies needs, less likely to exhaust resources.
Agents benefit from supporting structures in a shared environment.
In commons, users exercise management powers collectively.
They are incentivized to work together.
The tragedy of resource depletion without coordinated action is avoided.
For they benefit from something they share, they find common grounds.
They manage to rule together over their own institutions.
On records, some agricultural commons have existed since the Middle Ages.
Even though the most famous commons have not been around for that long;
their financial scale is unprecedented.
They have taken the form of computing blockchains.

Permissionless Feature

c. original right

Commons tend to form as a spontaneous administrative solution.
They emerge in pastoral lands, irrigation systems, groundwater basins.
That is, commons emerge in the management of open environments.
They suit resources where it is difficult to exclude users.
Inclusive resource rights are granted when weighted against alternatives:
a one-off privatization discounts sustainable resources over time;
independent federations or local knowledge discredits nationalization.

Commons legislate the exclusive or inclusive inclusion of users.
Exclusive inclusion applies typically to natural resources within borders.
Commons where inclusive inclusion is allowed are said permissionless:
anyone within reach of a resource or service can interact with it.
Borderless rules are considered comprehensive and flexible enough.
At odds with common practice, trust does not grant or revoke access.
Indeed, mainstream businesses frequently identify physical persons.
Thus, operators can discharge themselves from active duties of compliance.
They are detached from the protocol to fall back on the individual.
From login, gatekeepers conduct only passive monitoring of the delegation.
Identity check is the notice of a statement valid within crossed borders.
It says that the system of rules or enforcement is incomplete.
Unenforced system compliance relies on other laws or civil responsibility.

In a holistic protocol, anonymous users enjoy outright rights.
All possible actions are granted thanks to live enforcement.
They are regulated satisfactorily in immediate costs and rewards.
Innovation is unrestricted by outdated laws in other systems.
That is how flash loans were made possible.
Quality loans are offered to anonymous borrowers without collateral.
The feat is not even thinkable in legacy law.
Amazingly, permissionless commons offer a double edge:
they create versatility and robustness, more opportunities for less fraud.
Even so, they look largely unregulated from the outside.
Outlaw impressions stem from the dissimilarity of markets to judiciaries.
One does not find loopholes in a price curve.
That is the sense of exact justice highlighted by Montesquieu.
Price systems apply succinctly a large range of regulations at once.
They make up adaptable protocols, which leave actions open with a P&L.
Replacing parameters and fixed rules by a price curve removes loopholes.
Trade refines reciprocal interests with greater protocol adaptability.

Magistrates could read "The Spirit of Laws" again for trade's justice.
Surely, they are more comfortable with private property:
a protecting substitute where commons do not exist.
Within private boundaries, permissionlessness is guaranteed.
Opening the door to guests gives them free access to the house.
Swaths of land have also been appropriated under private property law.
They can constitute havens for wild animals.
They couldn't negotiate commons with lawmakers.
A dumbfounded rhino enjoys permissionlessness within a Namibian ranch.
That rhino's land happened to be authoritatively delimited.
Similarly, digital gates enclose web users in safe but restricted spaces.
Public barriers are substitutes for better managed alternatives.
The lawful jungle is not very welcoming for the lay public.
Live prices strike far more deals than lawyers.

One can read a sign above Etosha reserve from space. It says:

Welcome to Permissionless Commons. The Trustless Land.

Cohabitation of Institutions

d. right to exist

Outright rules do not help.
Outlaws do.
Change must be progressive to sustain.
Remember the teachings in the legend of the bad hacker:
corrective action is distributed.
Lone hackers can't be evil.
They target grouped netocrats looking for control;
and perform a healthy function of regulation.
Permissionless hackers discover what should not be part of the protocol.
Lawmakers' loopholes, exploitable and unwritten rules, did not disappear.
Hackers are thorough auditors, who do not work for a fixed price.
They do not leave a stamp of approval but a lesson making History.
Permissionlessness reinforces wild systems.
Hackers are engineers of chaos, experimenting in prod to build confidence.
They determine the system's capability to withstand before broad adoption.
Hackers are selfish Robin Hoods.
They transparently disappropriate honeypots, which do not feed the hive.
Hackers help to make clear what does not help the network:
collecting decentralized wealth to leave it in a single booty.

In Hayek's own words, part VI:

The problem is precisely how to extend the span of our utilization of resources beyond the span of the control of any one mind;

A permission, a single rule like a single mind, have something in common.
They restrict utilization of all others.
If we are to build a better world but do not safeguard diverging views:
we will be back to square one at the start of the next iteration.
We must respect maximum viable rights, past and future.
That is why smart contracts are immutable.
Progress is building up in parallel.
Coders support outdated and light versions of software.
They understand that every user environment defines a different harmony.
Elaborations of Marx and Schumpeter relied on a belligerent world vision.
Disagreeing with the premise of creative destruction refutes the argument.
Knowledge is at the tip of ignorance.
To keep something behind is to evolve.
The mirror of the past inverts our vision for the future.
Breaking it causes bad luck.
Traces of conservative thinking backs up critical thinking.
The arbitrary maximalist mentality takes away our choices.
We are here to stay and enjoy the landscape.
Hold on for dear life and consensus.
We need both ends of the spectrum and every color of the rainbow.