I realized what bothers me about @vitalik.eth d/acc essay. Even though it is optimistic, it shares with the pessimist side a presumption that technology, as an evolutionary process, *can* be governed according to some notion of human intent.

“Tech can/cannot be governed” is a bigger divide than optimism/pessimism

Blogger at ribbonfarm.com, running summerofprotocols.com, host of /gloom ☀️

I actually think the even higher-level divide is whether markets are the right mechanism to govern technology. By saying that tech is ungovernable, we are actually ceding it to the invisible force that governs the direction of progress in a capitalistic world, which is markets. 1/

investing & writing about consumer tech since 2016. FID #30. hosting /web2web3 

https://www.lisnewsletter.com/

That means the market-driven results don't always reflect other human values that are not captured by the market (e.g. carbon emissions). /end

I sense the divide between e/acc vs. d/acc (or others) is whether one believes that markets are the best force for governing all forms of innovation. Without other forms of governance, technology progresses in accordance with market forces. 2/