3 Giga-Brained Ideas From Consensus Day 2

Join the most important conversation in crypto and web3! Secure your seat today

One of the major selling points of crypto is that the industry is brimming with new ideas. For one reason or another, crypto tends to attract heterodox thinkers or would-be revolutionaries, much in the same way a loose-hanging community formed around the internet in the 1990s. Part of this stems from the nature of the tech itself, which offers radically new ways to build code-based systems. Another is Web3’s infamous barrier to entry, meaning the people that end up here tend to be committed – and, frankly, smart enough not to get blown out while self-custodying valuable assets.

This article is excerpted from The Node newsletter, which will send two editions daily during the Consensus 2023 conference running down the biggest news from the event. You can subscribe to get the full newsletter here or register to attend or livestream Consensus 2023 here.

At the same time, after covering the industry for nearly four years, I often feel as if I’m repeatedly hearing the same ideas. Crypto markets, perhaps more than any other, hang on what insider’s call “narratives.” These are the stories people tell themselves and others about what blockchain technology is good for (or could be good for).

Read full coverage of Consensus 2023 here.

Still, once in a while, a person or a theory comes along that could truly shake things up (or at the very least are fun to entertain). Here are a few of the giga-brained ideas I heard while roaming around Consensus today.

The future of banking is in the past

Ethan Buchman, the founder of Informal Systems, wants to wage a revolution. Central banks have mishandled the economies they’re meant to support, the “petro-dollar” has caused untold suffering and there are layers of corruption at every level of the monetary system. Of course, blockchain presents a solution. But before he explains how, Buchman wants us to consider the past.

Imagine yourself as a Genoese banker in the 16th century, shortly after double-entry bookkeeping was discovered. At the time, Buchman said the banking industry was composed of a few family-run institutions that sprouted to supply a modernizing and globalizing economy with credit (perhaps for the first time in history). There were no central banks, no depository institutions and few, if any, bank notes.

Instead, what bankers offered at the time was “trade credit,” entries in a ledger that allowed for someone in Antwerp to transact with someone in Medina. Occasionally, because the environment was high-trust, the banking families would meet up to balance their books. To do this, they used an old term-of-art called the “payments graph.”