So what if innovation slows? Who decided that unrestrained innovation was ever the goal? Why is innovation pace more important than everything else? Rather, shouldn’t we pursue innovation at the pace at which it generates the most societal benefit? If that happens to be a tad slower, so be it. We have speed bumps for a reason.
great one... IMO this is another form of the capitalism vs socialism, big government vs small government, societal responsibility vs individual responsibility and even nurture vs nature...
To me it ends up coming down to "degrees" ...; How big do we want government to be, how capitalistic vs socialistic, how much of your behavior is nurtured vs in your nature, how much should we leave it up to you as an indvidual vs society.
That said i'd argue there isn't much debate that regulation as we have experienced it historically slows innovation, maybe in some future brilliant vision we can avoid that but to me its sort of like stop lights. they will always slow down the car. I align with your thought that if "programmed" right the stop lights protect us and so its fine.
My issue is that people defining and enacting regulation often tend to either have limited knowledge and understanding or are intentionally biased (due to special interests). I'm fine with getting slowed down for safety reasons but IMO the people doing the slow down need to be Exceptional at their jobs (as good or better than the innovators). I want the smartest and most efficient people about the innovation doing the regulation not bureaucrats and pseudo politicians. Bitcoin is a perfect example of this... for the current head of treasury to say that BTC is haven for illicit activity 5+ years after this has been demonstrated to be nonsensical relative to fiat money is either terribly ignorant or intentionally biased.
Great point on speed to regulation... given how quickly adoption happens in current day and age.
great one... IMO this is another form of the capitalism vs socialism, big government vs small government, societal responsibility vs individual responsibility and even nurture vs nature...
To me it ends up coming down to "degrees" ...; How big do we want government to be, how capitalistic vs socialistic, how much of your behavior is nurtured vs in your nature, how much should we leave it up to you as an indvidual vs society.
That said i'd argue there isn't much debate that regulation as we have experienced it historically slows innovation, maybe in some future brilliant vision we can avoid that but to me its sort of like stop lights. they will always slow down the car. I align with your thought that if "programmed" right the stop lights protect us and so its fine.
My issue is that people defining and enacting regulation often tend to either have limited knowledge and understanding or are intentionally biased (due to special interests). I'm fine with getting slowed down for safety reasons but IMO the people doing the slow down need to be Exceptional at their jobs (as good or better than the innovators). I want the smartest and most efficient people about the innovation doing the regulation not bureaucrats and pseudo politicians. Bitcoin is a perfect example of this... for the current head of treasury to say that BTC is haven for illicit activity 5+ years after this has been demonstrated to be nonsensical relative to fiat money is either terribly ignorant or intentionally biased.
Great point on speed to regulation... given how quickly adoption happens in current day and age.