Here’s a normalized, conversation-style LinkedIn / Nostr cross-post—grounded, readable, not unhinged, but still sharp:
---
I’ve been thinking about something uncomfortable lately, and I want to sanity-check it out loud.
In a fiat system, the only jobs that feel structurally honest are the ones tied to enforcement.
Police. Military. Border control. Courts. Prisons.
Not because violence is “good” — but because those roles are aligned with what fiat is actually backed by.
Everything else is several layers removed.
Most jobs rely on contracts, compliance, incentives, KPIs, and “trust in the system”… but if you keep peeling layers back, enforcement is always sitting underneath. Somewhere, someone has the authority to make non-compliance hurt.
That’s why so many fiat jobs feel vaguely fake or draining.
They’re paid as if they create value, but the system itself is upheld by coercion, not truth or verification.
The enforcement roles don’t pretend otherwise.
They’re honest about what keeps the lights on.
This isn’t a moral argument for violence.
It’s an observation about incentives.
It also explains why systems based on verification instead of enforcement — cryptography, deterministic proofs, Bitcoin-style settlement, testable behavior — feel so different. They don’t need threats. They just converge on truth.
Maybe that’s why they’re so disruptive.
They don’t replace workers — they replace coercion.
Curious if others feel this dissonance, or if I’m overthinking it.
---
#fiat #incentives #verification #bitcoin #systems #economics #truth #work #technology
---
I’ve been thinking about something uncomfortable lately, and I want to sanity-check it out loud.
In a fiat system, the only jobs that feel structurally honest are the ones tied to enforcement.
Police. Military. Border control. Courts. Prisons.
Not because violence is “good” — but because those roles are aligned with what fiat is actually backed by.
Everything else is several layers removed.
Most jobs rely on contracts, compliance, incentives, KPIs, and “trust in the system”… but if you keep peeling layers back, enforcement is always sitting underneath. Somewhere, someone has the authority to make non-compliance hurt.
That’s why so many fiat jobs feel vaguely fake or draining.
They’re paid as if they create value, but the system itself is upheld by coercion, not truth or verification.
The enforcement roles don’t pretend otherwise.
They’re honest about what keeps the lights on.
This isn’t a moral argument for violence.
It’s an observation about incentives.
It also explains why systems based on verification instead of enforcement — cryptography, deterministic proofs, Bitcoin-style settlement, testable behavior — feel so different. They don’t need threats. They just converge on truth.
Maybe that’s why they’re so disruptive.
They don’t replace workers — they replace coercion.
Curious if others feel this dissonance, or if I’m overthinking it.
---
#fiat #incentives #verification #bitcoin #systems #economics #truth #work #technology