Designing Ethical Decentralized Platforms: The Morality of Public Blockchain Technology
This article focuses on the ethical implications of blockchain technology. It is helpful to first understand how blockchain technology works, which you can read about here.
Intro
Since the arrival of Bitcoin and blockchain technology as-we-know-it after the recession in 2009, decentralized currencies and platforms have become increasingly popular at an exponential rate (Wales, Justin S). While at the beginning, many thought that decentralized economies were nothing more than a playground for the rich, a scam, or a passing fad, the use of decentralized currencies has begun to populate the mainstream and has proven that it is here to stay. There have been many ethical questions surrounding the use of blockchain: Does the use of decentralized currency cater only to users of higher economic class? Does it facilitate crime and create easier ways for individuals to participate in illegal activity without getting caught? Can it provide power, privacy, and agency to world citizens living under rigid regimes? Can it free artists, musicians, and writers from the confines of censorship or societal norms? What are the long term implications of having an immutable network of objects available online?
The answers to most of these questions are multifaceted and complex as blockchain has proven to have many incredible as well as detrimental effects on society (De Filippi). It has, in fact, helped impoverished communities and those struggling under authoritarian leadership (Blockchain Payments: Project i2i Case Study) (Chinese Activists Are Using Blockchain to Document #MeToo Stories). However, it has also brought up new issues including the distribution of immutable, illegal content, a less traceable exchange of money for drugs/weapons, and a liability issue among those on the network who verify others’ illegal exchanges- whether or not they know what they are verifying (Putnins, Talis).
I feel that blockchain and the technological decentralization of currency as well as power among people is a very progressive wave of computing. It is because I believe in the power of this technology that I believe it must be analyzed ethically as we go forward. Yes, it is an innovation with the power to hugely affect and benefit all of our lives over the next 10–20 years and beyond, but does this mean that we should be using it? Are there ways to decentralize currency/power tangibly, offline? How do we even enforce ethical standards on a decentralized network- and who is responsible for enforcing standards? Although it is claimed that “Blockchain is the most efficient, transparent and secure way” to make payments (Shumsky, Paul), do these networks actually need to implement more transparency among users to ensure — using social policing — that exchanges are ethically sound?
Among the cases that we explored in my data ethics class this past semester, companies were not compliant with ethical standards, even though they were working in very public, centralized organizations under governmental watch (i.e. Facebook). Further, they were largely not held responsible for their actions. If people struggle to work ethically in computing today, under a more simple, monitored system, I cannot imagine the challenges that we will all face moving toward a decentralized future. If we take steps today to build an ethically sound infrastructure for decentralized networks, we can ensure a safer and more ethically sound environment for world citizens to work in and tangibly work for the greater good in society as outlined by the IEEE and the guidelines of ethical decision making (IEEE) (University, Santa Clara).
Ethical Issues
I would like to propose a new infrastructure for public blockchains to impose an ethical structure on the system itself. The system inherently poses new ethical challenges, because with its decentralized framework comes a dilution of responsibility and liability for ethical violations. The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers currently only has four papers out on the ethical standards of blockchain usage, all available to members only. When we take a look, however, at the IEEE and ACM general standards of computing technology (which are applied across borders), we can see that blockchain technology is in violation. According to the ACM code of ethics, it is the job of leaders in computing technology to “avoid harm,” and to “monitor the level of integration of their systems into the infrastructure of society. [because] As the level of adoption changes, the ethical responsibilities of the organization or group are likely to change as well.” Blockchain is becoming integrated into our global society, and there are not enough technologists overseeing the growing ethical concerns and harms of the system that have effects on all world citizens.
Stakeholders
There are five main stakeholders in this computational technology: banks, investors, technologists, miners, and the general public. We will look at the effects of the growth of decentralized currencies on each stakeholder from both a lens of ““micro-ethics” (concerned with individuals and the internal relations of the engineering profession) and “macro-ethics” (concerned with the collective, social responsibility of the engineering profession and societal decisions about technology)” (Herkert, Joseph).
Microethical Implications
On a micro-ethical level, the widespread use of decentralized currencies on public blockchain technology will hurt banks. The technology itself exists as an alternative option to banking and stands to be in competition with central banks in the future. Rightly so, I will add, as decentralized technologies have proven to offer greater security, more frictionless transactions, and the gift of anonymity to users, which central banks simply cannot offer (Casey, Michael). Moreover, investors, technologists, and miners have a tremendous amount of money to gain as the current system stands, and pretty much nothing to lose for violating general ethics principles as there are no enforceable repercussions for ethically nefarious actions (Lucey, Seamus).
Technologists and miners, all of whom have access to very powerful computing technology to create blockchain networks, mine coins, and verify transactions on the blockchain, are incentivized only to verify transactions “the fastest” and “with the greatest computing power” in order to get monetarily rewarded for verifying. Their main (if not sole) incentive is to profit. Why should a miner or prominent technologist of blockchain technology waste their time checking where the complicated, embedded links in each transaction that is made on the blockchain lead in order to make sure that they are ethically sound? Right now, taking a step back to make sure that unethical transactions do not get verified results only in personal loss of compensation and in another miner verifying that same transaction as fast as they can. This problem of unbalanced incentives puts the general public in danger, as they have a lot at stake as well.
The general public, even those who are not knowledgeable about blockchain technology, can end up having their personal photographs or information leaked on a public chain. Then, even if there end up being legal repercussions for individuals who post other’s private information on public blockchains in the future, their data will be immutably existent on the blockchain for all to see, forever. Individuals in the general public have their right to privacy, to control over their own data, and to their own dignity and safety in danger. The existence of immutable objects on the blockchain that could harm individuals lives and, if shared maliciously, could cost them jobs, community relations, or their right to pursue their personal desires is a huge micro-ethical issue. We have already seen the effects of this on individuals’ lives through the presence of child pornography, revenge pornography, and child abuse images embedded in digital currency transactions on the blockchain.
Macroethical Implications
Zooming out, we can link all of these micro-ethical issues to represent the larger, societal, macro-ethical issues with blockchain. In The Truth Machine: The Blockchain and the Future of Everything, Michael J. Casey and Paul Vigna discuss a “deliberate move from what we call the centralized trust model to one of decentralized trust” (40). They suggest that we accomplish this move by increasing how much “internet users can start to directly trust each other, so as to avoid having to pour so much information into the centralized hubs that currently sit in the middle of their online relationships” (40). I agree that we must move towards a framework of ‘decentralized trust’ should blockchain prevail going forward, however, I do not think that mutual trust and a framework based upon the honors system alone will ever work.
As I described earlier, the only incentives present for the individuals who create public blockchain networks and verify blockchain payments is a positive monetary reinforcement for fast, smooth creation and verification. This causes a macro-ethical issue of product liability and human justice sustainability in the future of blockchain. Who is responsible for ethically challenging issues going forward? How is justice served to those who are wronged or put in danger via this platform?
Proposed Solutions
In maintaining a decentralized approach to public blockchain technology, I argue that the ethical issues that arise should not be up for debate by human councils as they are in centralized computing technologies. Rather, I believe that it is the duty of the technologist to design an ethical infrastructure for their decentralized blockchain, to be liable for those who are wronged using their technology, and to create incentives for a standard of ethics to be followed on their platform.
Ethical standards of use can be built into the framework for public platforms in many ways. For example, an AI built into the infrastructure of a public blockchain could screen content embedded in transactions for nudity and stop inappropriate content from reaching the chain before they reach that eternal, public location. Or, an AI can screen and pause flagged transactions until all identified parties in the embedded content consent to it being uploaded. Along with building these ethical codes into the infrastructure of their network, technologists could incentivize miners by having an AI that reviews transactions and takes away any digital currency earned by miners who verify ethically nefarious transactions. This practice would effectively implement a new incentive for miners to be the fastest to ethically and mindfully verify transactions.
Furthermore, it is the macro-ethical job of all technologists to stay up-to-date on the new ethical challenges that we all face, and to check the ethical implementations made on public blockchains in the future. In fact, public documentation that could be easily understandable by individuals in the general public should be dispersed so that, in a true decentralized/democratized way, all participants and observers of the blockchain — not just technologists — can get a say in the ethical standards implemented on our public decentralized systems.
Conclusion
Public blockchains do, in fact, have a myriad of new ethical issues that cannot be solved by old ethical frameworks that operate on centralized systems. However, this does not mean that we cannot pivot our system of ethical standards and implementation to match the technologies that are overtaking our world.
“Philosophers and ethicists suggest that the ethical action is the one that best protects and respects the moral rights of those affected. This approach starts from the belief that humans have a dignity based on their human nature per se or on their ability to choose freely what they do with their lives. On the basis of such dignity, they have a right to be treated as ends and not merely as means to other ends” (University, Santa Clara).
While the kinks still need to be worked out, a decentralized format of society certainly recognizes the individuals making up our social network as “ends” and not merely “means to other ends.” Therefore, I believe that a decentralized economy based on public blockchain systems is an ethical framework for society going forward. I believe that the public blockchains that we see today are merely the first variation of much more complex, refined blockchains going forward, and that we can find ways to increase the ethical standards and implementations of blockchain technology. A good place to start would be increased transparency, ethically designed infrastructure, and implemented incentives for technologists and miners to work towards the maintenance of justice and sustainability.
Bibliography
Barrdear, John, and Michael Kumhof.
“Http://www.bankofengland.co.uk/research/Documents/workingpapers/2016/swp605.pdf." The Macroeconomics of Central Bank Issued Digital Currencies(2017): n. pag. 18 July 2016. Web. Dec. 2017. <https://www.bankofengland.co.uk/working-paper/2016/the-macroeconomics-of-central-bank-issued-digital-currencies>.
“Blockchain Payments: Project i2i Case Study.” ConsenSys,
consensys.net/blockchain-use-cases/finance/project-i2i/.
Brandom, Russell. “Coinbase Ordered to Report 14,355 Users to the IRS.” The Verge. The
Verge, 29 Nov. 2017. Web. Dec. 2017. <https://www.theverge.com/2017/11/29/16717416/us-coinbase-irs-records>.
“Chinese Activists Are Using Blockchain to Document #MeToo Stories.” Harvard Business
Review, 21 Aug. 2019, hbr.org/2018/10/chinese-activists-are-using-blockchain-to-document-metoo-stories.
De Filippi, Primavera, and Aaron Wright. Blockchain and the Law: The Rule of Code. Harvard
University Press, 2018. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctv2867sp. Accessed 17 Mar. 2021.
Herkert, Joseph, “Microethics, Macroethics, and Professional Engineering Societies.” National
Academy of Engineering. 2004. Emerging Technologies and Ethical Issues in Engineering: Papers from a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/11083.
Miranda, Pedro. “Central Bank Digital Currency: A Sunset Solution for the Next Crisis.”
Https://Www.pedrocmiranda.com/, May 2019, www.pedrocmiranda.com/.
OpenLaw, www.openlaw.io/.
“One Frictionless Experience To Send Money Globally.” Ripple. Ripple, n.d. Web. Dec. 2017.
<https://ripple.com/>.
“The Blockchain Analysis Company.” Chainalysis, 11 Dec. 2020, www.chainalysis.com/.
Thelao.io, www.thelao.io/.
Putnins, Talis. “Sex, Drugs, and Bitcoin: How Much Illegal Activity Is Financed through
Cryptocurrencies?” Free Policy Briefs, Jan. 2019, freepolicybriefs.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/freepolicybrief_jan212019.pdf.
Rapaport, Brian. “3LAU Sells Record-Breaking $3.6 Million NFT in First-Ever Tokenized
Album Sale.” EDM.com — The Latest Electronic Dance Music News, Reviews & Artists, EDM.com — The Latest Electronic Dance Music News, Reviews & Artists, 28 Feb. 2021, edm.com/gear-tech/3lau-record-breaking-nft-sale.
Shumsky, Paul. “How Blockchain Is Going To Change The Remittance In 2020.” Finextra
Research, Finextra, 24 Jan. 2020, www.finextra.com/blogposting/18367/how-blockchain-is-going-to-change-the-remittance-in-2020#:~:text=Blockchain%20is%20the%20most%20efficient,distributed%20ledger%20technology%20(DLT).&text=Blockchain%20removes%20multiple%20intermediaries%20that,traditional%20cross%2Dborder%20money%20transfers.
“The World’s Largest Technical Professional Organization Dedicated to Advancing Technology
for the Benefit of Humanity.” IEEE, www.ieee.org/.
University, Santa Clara. “A Framework for Ethical Decision Making.” Markkula Center for
Applied Ethics, www.scu.edu/ethics/ethics-resources/ethical-decision-making/a-framework-for-ethical-decision-making/.
Wales, Justin S. “Exponential Growth: What Research Into Blockchain and Cryptocurrencies
Tells Us About Law Practice Disruption.” Legaltech News, 25 Aug. 2020, www.law.com/legaltechnews/2020/08/25/exponential-growth-what-research-into-blockchain-and-cryptocurrencies-tells-us-about-law-practice-disruption/?slreturn=20210217135442.