Safer in the Dark

Money is a smarter form of barter. It partially solves a coordination problem, but it is not the best we can do. If you have wheat and you want milk, you can sell the wheat for money and buy milk rather than finding someone with milk who wants wheat. There is still a chain of dependency. If one person had money, and ninety-nine had both something to offer and something they wanted, a purely money-based economy would need that money to slowly make its way around. Smarter Barter would be very aware of the complex market and would be able to pair and co-ordinate people without money. Half the problem is mapping. We walk around in bubbles unable to clearly articulate what we want, and unable to see what we could offer with the appropriate training. Unclear destinations. Unclear paths. We try sneakily figuring out offerings and finding customers without alerting competitors. In a world with perfect transparency, zero transaction costs, and the ability to copy instantly, the worry would be that there would be no friction to act as a container to reward effort. We live in the dark as a way of protecting ourselves. Real meritocracy would hardly reward anyone. No one isn’t replaceable in the world of money.