Technological advancements are not exclusive to our era or the industrial one; however, the speed at which they now spread and the power – or dominance – with which they impact our society require a deeper understanding of how they function. Just as in the past, this technological revolution will eliminate certain jobs while creating new ones. If the digital revolution we are witnessing can make us feel worlds apart from what we were until the mid-20th century, what is approaching has the potential to revolutionize society without sufficient critical mass. This technological revolution has given rise to various branches, such as artificial intelligence, the Internet of Things (IoT), robotics, and blockchain. It is these latter technologies that bridge the work of historians and new technologies, particularly in the context of time and power.

These technologies are not merely vehicles of technological innovation; they represent a new perspective on history by providing information about the economic and, therefore, social aspects of the world to come. These changes are happening right now, and their effects spread so rapidly as to disorient even the most diligent scholars. What was once a source, then a file, or a document, image, video, in other words, a source contained in an archive useful for reconstructing history, is on the verge of becoming something else. From these sources, whether from the past or created today, we can obtain previously unimaginable information. Big data and the processing of such data through artificial intelligence blur some of the concepts we thought we knew. New religions, like Dataism, emerge where data enables the study of humanity as never before.

Contracts, once written on paper, are changing shape. They are not only being digitized but, thanks to information technology, they come to life and execute autonomously because a contract is not so different from code that a machine can execute.

Digital currency is a reality, and it has been for quite some time. It dates back to the early ’90s with the discovery of asymmetric cryptography, which gave rise to a movement known as ‘Cypherpunk.’ Those who were part of this movement had recognized how secure and private information exchange among individuals undermined the foundations of established central power. People like Julian Assange claim to have been part of the early mailing lists where the issues and possibilities of this new weapon were discussed. Governments considered cryptography a weapon, leading them to ban the export of cryptographic formulas to foreign countries they viewed as enemies. The fluidity of the Internet and the ease with which information is exchanged have made it challenging for governments to prevent the spread of these technologies and ideas. The initial skepticism of institutions toward cryptography and the free exchange of information was set aside when banks and institutions began offering online services that required secure, uninterceptable connections.

One field of study within the Cypherpunk movement and the application of cryptography was digital currency. It was clear from the beginning how it could lead to new types of societies. Features like anonymous transactions, freedom from central authority, and currency programmability contributed to this perspective. The technology of the ’90s made it possible to conceive digital currency, but to have a completely decentralized one, certain problems needed to be solved. One of these was the debated issue of double spending, how to prevent a person from selling or exchanging the same asset (i.e., the same currency) multiple times to different people in the absence of a central authority that guarantees the validity of transactions.

It is essential to understand that the process leading to the conceptualization of digital currency has been gradual, starting from the invention of currency in human history and culminating in the present with the circulation of the first prototypes. It is evident that centralization processes in politics, unification of monetary and measurement systems, and linguistic units involve the elimination of so-called “dead times,” a bureaucratic simplification that accelerates and streamlines processes and human relationships. Napoleon, for instance, initiated a process of territorial and social unification, involving various units of measurement and currency. The simplification of borders and customs was also highly significant. Until then, anyone wishing to cross those territories (e.g., Northern Italy) had to use different units of measurement, pay customs at every border, and, of course, exchange currencies, making it cumbersome. While centralization and streamlining brought about pain and suffering, they had the advantage of significantly enhancing the efficiency of transported goods.

A major revolution in the immaterial world was the invention of computers and the Internet, a network that allowed the dissemination of ideas, similar to what print did, but with greater speed and economy that surpassed all expectations. Ideas spread across the network, giving rise to new languages in just a few years: technical, procedural, sequential languages used to solve complex problems. There are some analogies between those who write ideas and those who write code: the former is read, understood, and possibly executed by people, while the latter is simply executed. In the past and present, many conflicts, battles, and terrible wars have arisen from the spread of certain ideas. We can already sense the first signs of what may become the subject of conflict and oppression in the near future. In some parts of the world, it is illegal to own, use, or contribute in any way to the cryptocurrency Bitcoin. Those who transgress these laws do so in the shadows of the Internet, not too different from those who fled the power of religious or political authorities during the religious conflicts of the 16th century.

Why this determination to curb the dissemination of ideas and knowledge, whether they are religious, ideological, or of an informatic nature? Is there perhaps a common drive behind this, driven by human fears and lust for power? How much of what happens in this second world of ideas, where the digital has entered disruptively, is opposed by the ruling class, and how much is shaped by it? There is so much confusion in this new world, which was in its infancy just a few years ago, and now it promises to be the basis for constructing the physical and material world. The two worlds are interchanging, blending even more, to the point where they become indistinguishable from each other, and everything changes shape, starting with power: the state, the law, and money.

---

Note to the Reader:

The intention of this thesis has been to provide food for thought, offering a key to subsequent studies and in-depth exploration. Examples and reflections have been presented, sometimes seemingly in contrast, to illustrate the complexity of this world. Not everything described is desirable; what was intended to explain is what is possible, that is, what technology allows.

The author believes that decentralization can lead our society towards more democratic directions, although many open questions require further study.

Series Navigation

Why digital collaboration is so important >>