算法治理,代码即法律,以及区块链共同:区块链社会中的权力关系

Krystyna Kozak
{"title":"算法治理,代码即法律,以及区块链共同:区块链社会中的权力关系","authors":"Krystyna Kozak","doi":"10.3389/fbloc.2023.1109544","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"“Code is law” became a buzz term in Web3 and blockchain reality. Despite the term being already used much earlier by Lawrence Lessig in the year 2000 in his book titled “Code and Other Laws of Cyberspace,” when the internet and Web2 were emerging, the rise of smart contracts and complex algorithmic power made the term genuinely resonate with the (idealised) Web3 reality. The entrainment of technological solutionism in the brains of members of society gives an impression that a world governed by algorithms will be a fairer one. However, research has shown that many members of society are not standard statistical representations of the majority and whilst algorithmic governance leaves room for “standard deviation,” individuals that fall outside this standard deviation are, in fact, very disadvantaged. There are numerous research papers as well as popular science books that address the issue of algorithmic bias and unfairness in Web 2. The proponents of blockchain and web3 technology argue that with a DAO-governed, decentralised society, problems of biased algorithmic governance are solved as power and decision-making are decentralised, and members use their governance tokens to collectively decide on the law encoded in the smart contracts that are the ultimate law enforcement apparatus. Web3 promises a shift of power from governments and corporations to people and token holders, arguing it will make a Web3-governed society fairer. This paper is based on decoding this promise and using Althusser’s model of a state apparatus to show how the power relations changed in Web2 and Web3 realities. It shows that Web3 promises of the code becoming the law were already present in the Web2 discourse and discovers a model of an ideological apparatus power struggle between states and Web2 giants. Next, the power relations in the blockchain society are researched, starting from the idealised model of decentralised, token-holder governed power, which regulates the governments and corporations, to a discussion on what the actual power relations and struggles might result from encoding the law in the smart contract. Research shows that in Web3, “code is law” society. There will be power struggles and opposition on a vertical and horizontal level. The vertical struggle is the power enforcement (originally in the hands of the state in Althusser’s (1970) model between the code and individuals, governments and corporations not willing to conform with the code-enforced law or falling outside the standard deviation of statistics-based AI algorithms hence being disadvantaged by the smart contract enforced laws. The horizontal power struggle is based on what Althusser describes as the ideological apparatus. Here, the struggle is based on a fight between individuals (the society), corporations, and the state for code-modifying resources and/or leverage over the governance token holders. Overall, the paper argues and shows that blockchain-based “code is law” reality does not solve the issue of unequal power relations within societies but only as any technological revolution shifts the power relations and power struggles between existing and new actors. Unlike the founder of Polkadot, Gavin Wood states that blockchain, DAOs, smart contracts, and Web3 overall do not result in the new social sphere with revolutionised power relations. Where Web3 is now is much more similar to where Web1 and Web2 were 25–30 years ago—Creating a new space for social interactions and discourse yet being stuck within the same social sphere and uneven power relations that have governed our societies for centuries.","PeriodicalId":426570,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in Blockchain","volume":"16 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Algorithmic governance, code as law, and the blockchain common: Power relations in the blockchain-based society\",\"authors\":\"Krystyna Kozak\",\"doi\":\"10.3389/fbloc.2023.1109544\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"“Code is law” became a buzz term in Web3 and blockchain reality. Despite the term being already used much earlier by Lawrence Lessig in the year 2000 in his book titled “Code and Other Laws of Cyberspace,” when the internet and Web2 were emerging, the rise of smart contracts and complex algorithmic power made the term genuinely resonate with the (idealised) Web3 reality. The entrainment of technological solutionism in the brains of members of society gives an impression that a world governed by algorithms will be a fairer one. However, research has shown that many members of society are not standard statistical representations of the majority and whilst algorithmic governance leaves room for “standard deviation,” individuals that fall outside this standard deviation are, in fact, very disadvantaged. There are numerous research papers as well as popular science books that address the issue of algorithmic bias and unfairness in Web 2. The proponents of blockchain and web3 technology argue that with a DAO-governed, decentralised society, problems of biased algorithmic governance are solved as power and decision-making are decentralised, and members use their governance tokens to collectively decide on the law encoded in the smart contracts that are the ultimate law enforcement apparatus. Web3 promises a shift of power from governments and corporations to people and token holders, arguing it will make a Web3-governed society fairer. This paper is based on decoding this promise and using Althusser’s model of a state apparatus to show how the power relations changed in Web2 and Web3 realities. It shows that Web3 promises of the code becoming the law were already present in the Web2 discourse and discovers a model of an ideological apparatus power struggle between states and Web2 giants. Next, the power relations in the blockchain society are researched, starting from the idealised model of decentralised, token-holder governed power, which regulates the governments and corporations, to a discussion on what the actual power relations and struggles might result from encoding the law in the smart contract. Research shows that in Web3, “code is law” society. There will be power struggles and opposition on a vertical and horizontal level. The vertical struggle is the power enforcement (originally in the hands of the state in Althusser’s (1970) model between the code and individuals, governments and corporations not willing to conform with the code-enforced law or falling outside the standard deviation of statistics-based AI algorithms hence being disadvantaged by the smart contract enforced laws. The horizontal power struggle is based on what Althusser describes as the ideological apparatus. Here, the struggle is based on a fight between individuals (the society), corporations, and the state for code-modifying resources and/or leverage over the governance token holders. Overall, the paper argues and shows that blockchain-based “code is law” reality does not solve the issue of unequal power relations within societies but only as any technological revolution shifts the power relations and power struggles between existing and new actors. Unlike the founder of Polkadot, Gavin Wood states that blockchain, DAOs, smart contracts, and Web3 overall do not result in the new social sphere with revolutionised power relations. Where Web3 is now is much more similar to where Web1 and Web2 were 25–30 years ago—Creating a new space for social interactions and discourse yet being stuck within the same social sphere and uneven power relations that have governed our societies for centuries.\",\"PeriodicalId\":426570,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Frontiers in Blockchain\",\"volume\":\"16 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Frontiers in Blockchain\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3389/fbloc.2023.1109544\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in Blockchain","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fbloc.2023.1109544","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

“代码就是法律”在Web3和区块链现实中成为了一个流行语。尽管这个术语早在2000年就被Lawrence Lessig在他的《网络空间的代码和其他法则》一书中使用过,当互联网和Web2出现时,智能合约和复杂算法的兴起使这个术语真正与(理想的)Web3现实产生共鸣。技术解决方案主义在社会成员大脑中的影响给人一种印象,即由算法统治的世界将是一个更公平的世界。然而,研究表明,许多社会成员并不是大多数人的标准统计代表,虽然算法治理为“标准偏差”留下了空间,但超出这个标准偏差的个人实际上处于非常不利的地位。有大量的研究论文和科普书籍讨论了Web 2中的算法偏见和不公平问题。区块链和web3技术的支持者认为,在dao治理的去中心化社会中,随着权力和决策的去中心化,有偏见的算法治理问题得到了解决,成员使用他们的治理令牌来集体决定智能合约中编码的法律,而智能合约是最终的执法机构。Web3承诺将权力从政府和公司转移到个人和代币持有者,并认为这将使Web3治理的社会更加公平。本文在解读这一承诺的基础上,利用阿尔都塞的国家机器模型来展示Web2和Web3现实中的权力关系是如何变化的。它表明Web3中代码成为法律的承诺已经存在于Web2话语中,并发现了国家与Web2巨头之间意识形态机器权力斗争的模型。接下来,研究区块链社会中的权力关系,从去中心化的理想模型开始,代币持有者管理权力,规范政府和公司,讨论在智能合约中编码法律可能导致的实际权力关系和斗争。研究表明,在Web3中,“代码即法律”的社会。无论在纵向还是横向,都会有权力斗争和反对。垂直的斗争是权力执行(在Althusser(1970)的模型中最初掌握在国家手中)在代码和个人之间,政府和公司不愿意遵守代码执行的法律或落在基于统计的人工智能算法的标准偏差之外,因此在智能合约执行的法律中处于不利地位。横向权力斗争基于阿尔都塞所描述的意识形态机器。在这里,斗争是基于个人(社会)、公司和国家之间的斗争,以争夺代码修改资源和/或对治理令牌持有者的影响力。总体而言,本文认为并表明,基于区块链的“代码即法律”现实并不能解决社会内部不平等的权力关系问题,而只是因为任何技术革命都会改变现有和新参与者之间的权力关系和权力斗争。与Polkadot的创始人不同,Gavin Wood表示,区块链、dao、智能合约和Web3总体上不会产生具有革命性权力关系的新社会领域。Web3现在所处的位置与25-30年前Web1和Web2的位置非常相似——为社会互动和话语创造了一个新的空间,但却被困在同一个社会领域和几个世纪以来统治我们社会的不平衡的权力关系中。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Algorithmic governance, code as law, and the blockchain common: Power relations in the blockchain-based society
“Code is law” became a buzz term in Web3 and blockchain reality. Despite the term being already used much earlier by Lawrence Lessig in the year 2000 in his book titled “Code and Other Laws of Cyberspace,” when the internet and Web2 were emerging, the rise of smart contracts and complex algorithmic power made the term genuinely resonate with the (idealised) Web3 reality. The entrainment of technological solutionism in the brains of members of society gives an impression that a world governed by algorithms will be a fairer one. However, research has shown that many members of society are not standard statistical representations of the majority and whilst algorithmic governance leaves room for “standard deviation,” individuals that fall outside this standard deviation are, in fact, very disadvantaged. There are numerous research papers as well as popular science books that address the issue of algorithmic bias and unfairness in Web 2. The proponents of blockchain and web3 technology argue that with a DAO-governed, decentralised society, problems of biased algorithmic governance are solved as power and decision-making are decentralised, and members use their governance tokens to collectively decide on the law encoded in the smart contracts that are the ultimate law enforcement apparatus. Web3 promises a shift of power from governments and corporations to people and token holders, arguing it will make a Web3-governed society fairer. This paper is based on decoding this promise and using Althusser’s model of a state apparatus to show how the power relations changed in Web2 and Web3 realities. It shows that Web3 promises of the code becoming the law were already present in the Web2 discourse and discovers a model of an ideological apparatus power struggle between states and Web2 giants. Next, the power relations in the blockchain society are researched, starting from the idealised model of decentralised, token-holder governed power, which regulates the governments and corporations, to a discussion on what the actual power relations and struggles might result from encoding the law in the smart contract. Research shows that in Web3, “code is law” society. There will be power struggles and opposition on a vertical and horizontal level. The vertical struggle is the power enforcement (originally in the hands of the state in Althusser’s (1970) model between the code and individuals, governments and corporations not willing to conform with the code-enforced law or falling outside the standard deviation of statistics-based AI algorithms hence being disadvantaged by the smart contract enforced laws. The horizontal power struggle is based on what Althusser describes as the ideological apparatus. Here, the struggle is based on a fight between individuals (the society), corporations, and the state for code-modifying resources and/or leverage over the governance token holders. Overall, the paper argues and shows that blockchain-based “code is law” reality does not solve the issue of unequal power relations within societies but only as any technological revolution shifts the power relations and power struggles between existing and new actors. Unlike the founder of Polkadot, Gavin Wood states that blockchain, DAOs, smart contracts, and Web3 overall do not result in the new social sphere with revolutionised power relations. Where Web3 is now is much more similar to where Web1 and Web2 were 25–30 years ago—Creating a new space for social interactions and discourse yet being stuck within the same social sphere and uneven power relations that have governed our societies for centuries.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信