Non-fungible Tokens (NFTs) are emblematic of unique digital assets that offer a distinct proprietorship and value creation, whilst Self-sovereign Identity (SSI) imbues individuals with the capacity to govern their personal data and identifying information. The conceptualization of an NFT-based Self-sovereign Identity is still under contemplation within the scholarly community. Despite initial assertions by researchers concerning the potential advantages of integrating NFTs with Self-sovereign identity, the manifestation of systems based on this amalgamation has yet to materialize in pragmatic circumstances. This research paper explores the prospective benefits and impediments associated with the synthesis of Non-Fungible Tokens (NFTs) and Self-Sovereign Identity (SSI). It further unveils a generalized operation flow of an NFT-based SSI, the various iterations of NFTs that can be deployed in the realm of SSI, and an array of refined and expanded SSI principles specific to NFT-based SSI. The paper delves into the technical, legal, standardization, and governance challenges that might ensue from this amalgamation. This research paper accentuates the significance of tackling these obstacles to harness their potential for industry transformation and individual empowerment. Moreover, the paper examines prospective research and developmental trajectories, including technological progressions, potential reverberations on industries and societal structures, as well as the emergence of new business models and revenue streams. It also reiterates the importance of addressing these challenges to actualize the full potential of these emerging technologies. This research endeavor is a pioneering exploration in the realm of NFT-based Self-sovereign Identity.
India is presently experiencing a moment of profound transformation that encompasses revisions to its constitution and legal principles. In this era of remarkable transformation, it would be imprudent to overlook the technological innovations and digital advancements that have permeated the legal domain. One particularly vital aspect in this context is the field of Contract Law. Presently, electronic contracts in India are primarily governed by The Indian Contract Act, in conjunction with the Information Technology Act and the Indian Evidence Act, unless stated otherwise. These legal frameworks provide the foundation for legally enforceable electronic contracts in the country. This research paper emphasizes the urgent requirement for a legal adaptation in the field of Contract Law to align with the ever-evolving technological landscape. It also delves into the legal intricacies associated with blockchain-based Smart Contracts, elucidating how these contracts function within the current judicial landscape. Finally, it concludes by emphasizing the necessity for a pioneering effort to regulate this dynamic domain.
Amber Seira, Jeffrey S. Allen, Cy Watsky, Richard Alley
A permissionless blockchain network is a system of physically distributed computers running a copy of a shared ledger and using the same software rules that enable all network participants to âread, submit, and validate transactionsâ (Beck, MĂźller-Bloch, and King, 2018, p. 1022). A permissionless systemâs accessibility stands in contrast to that of permissioned systems, in which a central authority pre-selects validators and potentially restricts viewing and submission rights (Krause, Natarajan, and Gradstein, 2017; Beck, MĂźller-Bloch, and King, 2018).
Blockchain-powered smart contracts are automating contract execution, completely changing the way business transactions are conducted. In the era of automation, this article examines the legal ramifications of smart contracts, contrasting them with conventional contracts and examining the advantages and disadvantages they offer. The essay explores regulatory considerations for incorporating smart contracts into current legal frameworks while protecting the interests of contractual parties and consumers by drawing on the nexus between law and technology. Stakeholders can efficiently manage the intricacies of smart contracts and promote innovation and legal compliance in commercial transactions by identifying best practices and recommendations.
Inspired by Sir Mark Walportâs Beyond Blockchain report in 2016 Lord Chris Holmes of Richmond spearheaded a follow up report DLT for Public Good in 2017. Since then, a body of evidence has accumulated â EP DLT sandbox for example â including projects Lord Holmes has been directly involved with such as the Reducing Friction in International Trade (RFIT) programme, a pilot led by HMRC and the FSA exploring cross border compliance with Australian wine imports using DLT and analysed by the FSA and the OECD. Lord Holmes is now working with departments and academic advisers to consider government applications, pilots, potential use cases and ultimately provide an extra layer of challenge and ideas on the future of DLT for public good. He kindly invited me to join a roundtable discussion that will take place tomorrow, Thursday 7th March 2024 in the House of Lords. As in-person participation was impossible for me this time, I was allowed to contribute with some notes in written form, that I am happy to share here. My key recommendations are: (1) Use public procurement to ensure public-good-informed DLTs are adopted. Outsourcing to private commercial providers would be a high risk. (2) When public development of DLTs cannot be achieved, the Government should make sure that (a) the system is customized keeping in mind the specific risks and needs of public services; (b) the T&Cs are negotiated to make sure that data stays in the UK and is not used to benefit private interest and in ways that do not benefit citizens. (3) Avoid technological determinism and only adopt a DLT solution where there is robust evidence of clear benefits for citizens. The risks for fundamental rights are high and unintended consequences have occurred and will continue to do so. (4) Work closely with the Information Commissionerâs Office, the Digital Regulation Cooperation Forum, academics and civil society in order to address the issues related to illegal content present on the DLT, privacy concerns, and any other fundamental rights concerns.
This chapter investigates "data-opolies" within Web3 and Artificial Intelligence (AI), highlighting their implications for democracy and their impact on business and society. Data-opolies are defined as dominant entities, usually large tech corporations, that control vast amounts of data, affecting market competition and transparency. The chapter discusses how the monopolization of data by these entities creates power imbalances, challenging democratic values. It explores how AI, when controlled by data-opolies, amplifies their influence, raising concerns about privacy, ethical AI use, and equitable access to technology. The concentration of data and AI capabilities in the hands of a few exacerbates socioeconomic divides and threatens democracy by potentially manipulating public opinion and information flow. The chapter examines Web3 innovations as a decentralized, transparent, and user-empowering alternative to traditional data control models. These technologies are presented as tools for democratizing data ownership, enhancing individual autonomy, and fostering an inclusive digital economy. However, the chapter also questions these assumptions, especially in the context of crypto-libertarian maneuvers around the "Network State" paradigm. In conclusion, the chapter emphasizes the need for a balanced approach to leveraging AI and Web3 to mitigate democracy's erosion by data-opolies. It calls for collaborative efforts and a multistakeholder approach to developing regulatory frameworks and ethical guidelines that align with democratic values, ensuring the responsible use of AI and data in society.
The gig economy, which is defined as transient and adaptable work arrangements facilitated by digital platforms, has experienced unprecedented growth in recent years, profoundly altering labor market dynamics. This profound transformation has introduced a multitude of repercussions for workers, simultaneously offering both opportunities and challenges. In one aspect, it entails providing individuals with heightened autonomy, the opportunity to cultivate multiple income streams, and an improved balance between work and personal life, thereby enabling them to autonomously shape their career paths. Conversely, increasing concerns on job security, workersâ rights and protection, and employment benefits arouse discussions of economic welfare of gig workers. For businesses, the gig economy represents a transformative force, promoting cost-effective, on-demand labor while necessitating responsive strategies to manage a decentralized and flexible workforce. As a signal of a new era in labour market dynamics, gig economy has significant impacts on the broader labour force and traditional employment patterns. Grappling with of crucial task, policymakers are in urgent need of finding a balance that preserves the rights and finance security of the labour force without mitigating enthusiasm of development and economic prosperity. Comprehending the multifaceted influences of the gig economy is paramount in formulating policies, thereby building a labor market that embraces opportunities and challenges arising from this transformative change and ultimately facilitating a future work of greater equity and adaptability.
DAOs, decentralised autonomous organisations, you have the power, right? Well, like most other matters now-a-days, it depends. Oftentimes, the relationship between NFTs and DAOs is intertwined as a DAO may be set up with the purpose of creating NFTs or else, one may buy an NFT to become a DAO member. Both DAOs and NFTs make use of smart contracts on a blockchain. Thepurpose of this paper is to answer the following questions:How decentralised is a DAO? What is the role of NFTs within a DAO?How can NFTs enhance the workings of a truly decentralised autonomous organisation? The author believes that decentralisation should stop being used as a hype word in the blockchain sphere and discussesaboutcertain problems regardingcentralised and decentralised points in a DAO, whether theyrealised or not. Both the Maltese Innovative Technology Arrangement and Services Act and the Wyoming Decentralized Autonomous Organizations Supplement will serve as focus as theselaws directly regulate DAOs and in turn serve as a means to protect the member and the client of the DAO, and their NFTs.
Blockchains have inspired imaginaries of a new iteration of the internet, hailed as Web3, where the power of centralized platform companies would be limited and the ownership of personal data and content could be retained by their individual owners and creators. Web3 is expected to facilitate the emergence of novel protocols and platforms that enable decentralized coordination of data and digital assets. This article examines critically the experiences and imaginaries of creators working on two blockchain-based video-sharing platforms: Theta.tv and Odysee. Building on the studies of creator culture and institutionalist blockchain economics and based on open-ended interviews with the early adopters of these platforms, the paper investigates how the creators experience these decentralized social media applications in terms of their processes of governance, community creation, and career development. We show how the affordances of blockchains and creator expectations can result in further convergence of community management and career-building functions potentially benefiting creators. We also show that the new wave of decentralization, against optimistic blockchain visions, has not yet led to the distributed âownershipâ of social media networks. Rather, while blockchains seem to have increased creator autonomy and added career opportunities, novel forms of platform governance and power have also introduced new perceptions of precarity among creators.
This article examines non-fungible token (NFT) applications and their users through a qualitative textual analysis of NFT-based video game Axie Infinityâs Discord server. It considers NFT applicationsâ dual purposes as entertainment media and financial instruments and posits that the interests of capital inform usersâ engagement. In an environment defined by distrust and uncertainty, predominantly Filipino digital laborersâ (âScholarsâ) experiences and interactions with the gameâs ownership class (âManagersâ) reflect pre-existing patterns of exploitation made inexpensive by differences in currency valuations, accessible by access to digital devices, available by global financial uncertainty, possible by a lack of user protection and governance, and permissible by light government regulation. To navigate an interplay of designed systems and human behavior, users share gameplay and marketplace knowledge. The blurring of gaming, gambling, and finance discussed here risks fostering an increasingly gamified approach to work and finance and facilitates exploitation of global, stratified labor.
Abstract Distributed Ledger Technology (DLT) faces increasing environmental scrutiny, particularly concerning the energy consumption of the Proof of Work (PoW) consensus mechanism and broader Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) issues. However, existing systematic literature reviews of DLT rely on limited analyses of citations, abstracts, and keywords, failing to fully capture the fieldâs complexity and ESG concerns. We address these challenges by analyzing the full text of 24,539 publications using Natural Language Processing (NLP) with our manually labeled Named Entity Recognition (NER) data set of 39,427 entities for DLT. This methodology identified 505 key publications at the DLT/ESG intersection, enabling comprehensive domain analysis. Our combined NLP and temporal graph analysis reveals critical trends in DLT evolution and ESG impacts, including cryptography and peer-to-peer networks researchâs foundational influence, Bitcoinâs persistent impact on research and environmental concerns (a âLindy effectâ), Ethereumâs catalytic role on Proof of Stake (PoS) and smart contract adoption, and the industryâs progressive shift toward energy-efficient consensus mechanisms. Our contributions include the first DLT-specific NER data set addressing the scarcity of high-quality labeled NLP data in blockchain research, a methodology integrating NLP and temporal graph analysis for large-scale interdisciplinary literature reviews, and the first NLP-driven literature review focusing on DLTâs ESG aspects.
Is blockchain the technological blueprint of a utopian decentralized future or a dystopian centralized one? In search of an answer to this question, this article juxtaposes blockchain governance and the stateâs utilization of blockchain to govern citizens. This juxtaposition reveals that whilst being a disruptive general-purpose technology emerging from mistrust of centralized institutions, blockchain could also be the vehicle delivering centralized state surveillance and behavioral control. This juxtaposition further reveals that in contrast to the expectations of blockchain enthusiasts, statesâ approach to blockchain does not appear to be entirely antagonistic but it consists of a tripartite strategy of appropriation, regulation and rejection depending on which satisfies the state interests in a given context. As most constructs of governance via blockchain are still at an embryonic stage, it is difficult to reach definitive conclusions about what the future holds for blockchainâs impact on citizenship. Nevertheless, this article argues that it is necessary to follow blockchain-based governance critically to identify whether there will be a further divergence between the two worlds of blockchain.
âCode is lawâ became a buzz term in Web3 and blockchain reality. Despite the term being already used much earlier by Lawrence Lessig in the year 2000 in his book titled âCode and Other Laws of Cyberspace,â when the internet and Web2 were emerging, the rise of smart contracts and complex algorithmic power made the term genuinely resonate with the (idealised) Web3 reality. The entrainment of technological solutionism in the brains of members of society gives an impression that a world governed by algorithms will be a fairer one. However, research has shown that many members of society are not standard statistical representations of the majority and whilst algorithmic governance leaves room for âstandard deviation,â individuals that fall outside this standard deviation are, in fact, very disadvantaged. There are numerous research papers as well as popular science books that address the issue of algorithmic bias and unfairness in Web 2. The proponents of blockchain and web3 technology argue that with a DAO-governed, decentralised society, problems of biased algorithmic governance are solved as power and decision-making are decentralised, and members use their governance tokens to collectively decide on the law encoded in the smart contracts that are the ultimate law enforcement apparatus. Web3 promises a shift of power from governments and corporations to people and token holders, arguing it will make a Web3-governed society fairer. This paper is based on decoding this promise and using Althusserâs model of a state apparatus to show how the power relations changed in Web2 and Web3 realities. It shows that Web3 promises of the code becoming the law were already present in the Web2 discourse and discovers a model of an ideological apparatus power struggle between states and Web2 giants. Next, the power relations in the blockchain society are researched, starting from the idealised model of decentralised, token-holder governed power, which regulates the governments and corporations, to a discussion on what the actual power relations and struggles might result from encoding the law in the smart contract. Research shows that in Web3, âcode is lawâ society. There will be power struggles and opposition on a vertical and horizontal level. The vertical struggle is the power enforcement (originally in the hands of the state in Althusserâs (1970) model between the code and individuals, governments and corporations not willing to conform with the code-enforced law or falling outside the standard deviation of statistics-based AI algorithms hence being disadvantaged by the smart contract enforced laws. The horizontal power struggle is based on what Althusser describes as the ideological apparatus. Here, the struggle is based on a fight between individuals (the society), corporations, and the state for code-modifying resources and/or leverage over the governance token holders. Overall, the paper argues and shows that blockchain-based âcode is lawâ reality does not solve the issue of unequal power relations within societies but only as any technological revolution shifts the power relations and power struggles between existing and new actors. Unlike the founder of Polkadot, Gavin Wood states that blockchain, DAOs, smart contracts, and Web3 overall do not result in the new social sphere with revolutionised power relations. Where Web3 is now is much more similar to where Web1 and Web2 were 25â30 years agoâCreating a new space for social interactions and discourse yet being stuck within the same social sphere and uneven power relations that have governed our societies for centuries.
Blockchain technologies are increasingly liveâtested in experiments aimed at improving governance in a growing range of activities. A key question often lost amongst these efforts is whether such projects redistribute wealth and power, and, if so, in which ways. Examining the case of blockchainâbased land governance, this contribution explores the tensions between ambitious visions and their actual scales of implementation around the redistributional promises of distributed ledger technologies. Bringing together the concepts of âimaginariesâ and âinfrastructuresâ, we analyse land governance blockchainization emerging in the Global South and the metaverse. Identifying a contrast between imaginaries âscaling upâ redistributive promises yet tending to materialize in âscaledâdownâ forms, we argue for more sustained attention to pluriversal perspectives that foreground local concerns and diverse voices.
Drawing on Marx's theory of history, this article argues that the competition and capital accumulation inherent in the production of Bitcoin (i.e. âminingâ) are at odds with the narrative discourses that position Bitcoin as a revolutionary technology capable of subverting traditional power structures. Through an analysis of the evolution of Bitcoin mining, the article demonstrates how the material conditions of its production have shifted over time, leading to the concentration of mining power among a few large corporate entities and a concomitant erosion of the decentralized ethos that underpinned the early Bitcoin community. The article also argues that this shift is not simply a result of the ânaturalâ evolution of the technology, but also the outcome of specific social and economic forces that encourage the accumulation of capital over Bitcoin's democratic and decentralized potentialities. Overall, the article suggests that the narrative discourses surrounding Bitcoin need to be understood in relation to the material forces that shape its production and circulation, and that a more nuanced analysis of the interplay between material and discursive factors is necessary to fully grasp the dynamics of the cryptocurrency ecosystem.
One of the most intriguing discussions concerning blockchain technology revolves around its potential to âdo goodâ. Consequently, numerous projects and institutions are showing interest in the capacity of blockchain to impact the social sphere positively. However, so far, very little literature has addressed the fundamental notion of âgoodâ that underlies its implementation or explores its connection to social justice theories. This article aims to analyse the narratives that surround the use of blockchain for social good and to compare them with traditional concepts that are significant in social justice theories, such as distribution and recognition. Results show that the selected informants involved in the blockchain scene tend to frame social good in rational, mathematical, and often competitive terms. This tendency contributes to the reinforcement of a neoliberal imaginary that neglects to address structural inequalities as relevant issues. Instead, it envisions social justice as an avenue for generating value, enhancing meritocracy, and ensuring technical accountability, echoing Silicon Valley's aspirations to âchange the worldâ.
Abstract This commentary explores the feasibility of blockchain technologies (and cryptocurrencies) in contesting the power of centralized, corporate platforms. While proponents of blockchain and cryptocurrencies regularly proclaim their power to decentralize and counter corporate power, I am much more constrained in my assessment and note the significant challenges facing open blockchain approaches in competing with platforms. From this, I highlight three key areas in which blockchains may complicate platform operations, albeit in indeterminate ways. These include (i) closed, state-based blockchain systems focused on making back-office processes more efficient, (ii) the use of cryptocurrencies for platform-based transactions and (iii) providing digital objects with an element of âuniquenessâ that makes them tradable in new ways. In the end, blockchain and cryptocurrencies are technologies like any others, providing affordances for some kinds of action over others but ultimately their embeddedness in practice and space shapes how they impact the organization and geography of economies, societies and regions.
Blockchain technologies are of great interest to marketers uncovering opportunities in the context of the sharing economy. The novel appeal of blockchain is that it provides an immutable audit trail of digital tokens and contracts via a peer-to-peer (P2P) network without the need for a market intermediary. It thus enables digital exchange without the need for a trusted central authority or third party, affording an infrastructure for a variety of applications. We assess how blockchain technologies facilitate sharing beyond its role as a technological protocol and how it instead operates as a social machine. We explore these implications for marketing philosophically through the lenses of assemblage and pharmakon. We identify two contradictions for marketers: (1) how marketing with blockchain technologies in the sharing economy challenges past institutional roles of marketers and seeks to eradicate them, and (2) how these technologies produce a new notion of capitalized sociality devoid of trust.
Expatriates, or migrant workers, are employees who work outside their home country and reside in a foreign country for the purpose of work. They are often subject to job fraud, employment contract violations, and poor working conditions. These calamities are mainly due to language barriers, limited legal protection, and feeling inferior in their host countries. Many reports have indicated that minimum working and living standards for expatriates are not as adequately enforced as those for domestic employees. These issues may be elevated with the presence of an employment contract framework, which would enable better enforcement and wider visibility for both workers and employers. Thus, we propose a blockchain-powered framework to represent expatriate employment contracts as digital assets managed by smart contracts. It enables employers to create contracts to which employees agree in a decentralized, tamper-proof, transparent, and traceable manner. This framework facilitates auditability, tracking, and enhanced visibility of expatriate employment contracts and job history verification for both workers and employers. We provide a prototype implementation using the Hyperledger Fabric platform and analyze the framework qualitatively from scalability, efficiency, security, and privacy perspectives.
Adah-Kole Emmanuel Onjewu, Nigel Walton, Ioannis Koliousis
Longstanding assumptions underlying strategic alliances, such as agency theory, are actively being revoked by dynamics in the new economy. The mechanism of inter-firm cooperation is increasingly being altered by radical developments in blockchains and artificial intelligence among other technologies. To capture and address this shift, this review takes a problematisation approach and focuses wholly on the pertinence of agency theory. First, it begins by acknowledging the established corpus in the area before, second, appraising the seven long-held assumptions in the principal-agent relationship encompassing (1) self-interest, (2) conflicting goals, (3) bounded rationality, (4) information asymmetry, (5) pre-eminence of efficiency, (6) risk aversion and (7) information as a commodity. Third, to add a fresh perspective, the review proceeds to proffer seven assumptions to advance a novel âBlockchain Agency Theoryâ that would better describe new attributes and relaxed agency behaviour in blockchain alliances. These counter assumptions are (1) common interests, (2) congruent goals, (3) unbounded rationality, (4) information symmetry, (5) smart contracts, (6) mean risk and (7) information availability. In the fourth part, the prior audience of principals and agents is appraised and this culminates into, fifth, a consideration of a new audience of blockchain agency in algocratic environments. Altogether, the seven new assumptions extend and provoke new agency thinking among scholars and blockchain practitioners alike.
The future iteration of the internet is often branded as Web3, claimed to be a decentralising phase of its evolution, a reaction to the centralisation in the Web 2.0 era. This upcoming version of the internet, afforded by distributed ledgers and blockchain technologies, is sometimes also called the "Web of Value". It highlights the expectation that as much of the content and services on the internet get âtokenisedâ, which enables their trade and related operations of âvalue creationâ. It is claimed that as the value of everything on the internet becomes more salient, conditioning new kinds of economic activities, relationships and forms of organising. In this article we discuss these expectations as imaginaries, the implications of which vary based on how they are framed or interpreted by different economic theories. More specifically, the article discusses the interpretations deriving from neoclassical economics, classical economics, heterodox economics and public value theory. We demonstrate significant differences between these interpretations and how they are offering competing imaginaries on the future internet.
Distributed Ledger Technologies (DLTs) have been widely endorsed in various areas and by numerous entities. With the promises of decentralisation, taking out the middlepersons and cost-efficiency, DLT-implementations seem desirable in various fields, from finance and copyright to health. However, all pros come with cons. DLTsâ architecture may by nature run counter to some data protection principles; this could limit or even halt innovation. Moreover, there is a tendency for (re)centralisation contesting the very nature of DLTs and risking having centralised systems serving the economic interests of the few big players, instead of the fundamental rights and freedoms of the many. Last, contemporary forms of DLTs, allowing for smart contracting, appear to challenge traditional contract laws. This contribution aims to address the above challenges. It argues that data protection laws, dynamically interpreted, could raise security thresholds and promote the development of user-friendly and decentralised DLTs, thus avoiding (re)centralisation; and that, while smart contracting appears suitable in various situations, it can be avoided where traditional legal contracts can better satisfy the individual needs and desires of the parties. Finally, the concluding section recommends that regulators wait for scientific advances in the field and carefully balance the fundamental rights and freedoms at stake before introducing DLTs in the public sphere. Keywords: Distributed Ledger Technologies | Decentralisation | Pseudonymisation | Smart Contracts
E-diasporas are networks driven by human agency, connecting digital citizens to their home countries and diasporic fellows through digital tools. In contrast, Hyperconnected Diasporas (HD) are data-driven networks engaged in extractive activities, often employed for government (para)diplomacy, heavily relying on social media extractivist data-opolies or Big Tech platforms. This article examines the impact of disruptive technologies on e-diasporas in the context of data extractivism, particularly stemming from HD. The article pursues a dual objective: (i) reviewing existing literature and comparing five disruptive technologiesâBlockchain, Decentralized Autonomous Organizations (DAOs), Data Cooperatives, Metaverse, and ChatGPTâin sustaining e-diasporas as networks driven by human agency, and (ii) scrutinizing associated opportunities and risks, including challenges to institutional trust and data privacy arising from HD. The study seeks to elucidate how these technologies may either hinder or exacerbate the impacts of HD on e-diasporas, characterized by their human-driven nature. The article begins with an introduction to HD, followed by a literature review on e-diasporas. Methodologically, it presents a comparative analysis of the five disruptive technologies concerning the research question and discusses their implications for e-diasporic communities, concluding with final remarks.