Ethical and Philosophical Issues Surrounding Permissionless Blockchain Systems.

One of the most interesting technological advances in the modern digital world is permissionless blockchain systems. In a permissionless blockchain, anyone is free to take part and participate in a blockchain as she needs not be approved by a central authority. Individuals are free to be part of the network, make transactions, authenticate and even develop applications on the network.

Such popular blockchain networks as Bitcoin and Ethereum work in this manner. Although this open structure has several advantages including transparency and decentralization, it also has several philosophical and ethical concerns. These questions are devoted to such issues as responsibility, freedom, fairness, and what misuse such systems can be.

The issue of responsibility is one of the largest ethical questions of permissionless blockchains. Since such systems lack a central person who controls its operations, it may be hard to identify the person who should be accountable in case of a malfunction. To illustrate, in case a hacker robs money or somebody commits an illegal act through the network, they have no central body that can easily prevent it and undo the harm.

This brings a key ethical issue: are the makers of technologies accountable of the way of usage of their systems or should users be the ones to handle the issue? This is the question that I always consider when reading about blockchain technologies, and this demonstrates that the ethical aspect of decentralization may be complicated.

The other philosophical question is that of freedom versus control. Permissionless block chains are constructed on the basis of liberty. Any person may use the system without permission. To a large extent, this is indicative of a powerful ideology of personal freedom and free engagement.

Image Source

Such freedom, according to proponents, benefits individuals in the countries that have stringent financial systems or restricted access to banks. At that, cryptocurrencies such as Bitcoin can enable people to transfer funds beyond the boundaries without getting financial institution consent.

Nevertheless, total liberation may be an issue, too. In the absence of a central control, individuals can utilise the technology to engage in bad practices like fraud, scams, or even illegal trade.

This poses a philosophical question: should the society have absolutely free systems in case they can be abused? There are those who think that too much freedom without controls may be disastrous to the society. There are other people who defend that innovation and personal rights are more valuable than rigorous control.

Another relevant ethical concern linked to the existence of permissionless blockchain systems is privacy. The privacy provided by blockchain is important to many users since it gives them the freedom to regulate their monetary transactions without governments and companies following them everywhere.

Blockchain technology is a substitute to digital surveillance that is taking place in the world, and it preserves personal autonomy. Personally, I believe that privacy is a valuable human right, and such technologies that safeguard it may be useful.

Nonetheless, confidentiality on blockchain systems may also pose a problem. In case transactions cannot be traced, the criminal can go through such systems to conceal unlawful companies like money laundering. This issue is the concern of governments and regulators.

Thus, the question of the extent to which financial systems should have privacy remains debatable. There are those who advocate enhanced surveillance and those of the opinion that privacy must be placed at the center stage.

Fairness and equality is another philosophical issue. Permissionless blockchains purport to bring about equal opportunities since everyone can be part of the network. Theoretically, all participants are equal to the system. But practically it may turn out to be otherwise.

Big companies and strong mining groups can possess bigger resources compared to regular users. In cryptocurrencies such as Bitcoin, the expensive hardware used in mining can be able to control the transaction validation process.

This scenario begs an ethical question regarding whether blockchain systems really create equality or they merely generate new digital power. When few individuals own most of the resources within the network, then the system might not be as decentralized as it was initially meant to be. I occasionally question whether the design of blockchain in the future will resolve this issue or inequality will persist in the networks.

The philosophy of permissionless blockchain systems is also closely related to the concept of trust. The traditional financial systems rely on the banks, governments, and other financial institutions trust.

The blockchain technology tries to substitute this trust with mathematic and codes. The point is that citizens must have faith in the system as opposed to having faith in people or organizations.

This is a radical strategy yet it brings about concerns. Is it really possible to substitute human judgment and responsibility with code? Smart contracts on networks such as Ethereum automatically verify contracts when some requirement is fulfilled.

Although this automation can help in reducing the corruption and manipulation, it may cause problems when there are errors in the code or where something unforeseen may occur. Under these circumstances, one might not have an easy solution to rectify the error.

Lastly, permissionless blockchain systems interfere with conventional concepts of control and power. Governments in most societies formulate and implement laws and rules. However, decentralized blockchain networks are not confined by national boundaries and in many cases are not regulated by conventional laws.

This puts another philosophical question; who ought to be in charge of these systems? Other blockchain communities are community-based and decentralized. Nevertheless, such processes remain in the process of formation and do not necessarily represent the interests of all the users.

To sum up, permissionless blockchain systems are associated with challenging but potentially exciting opportunities as well as real ethical and philosophical issues. They encourage freedom, decentralization and transparency but they bring up the issues of responsibility, privacy, fairness and governance.

With the development of blockchain technology, these questions will have to be thought of in the society. In my opinion, it is significant to know these ethical questions as these are not only issues, which alter the way systems actually work, but also influence those values and principles, according to which our digital future will form.