It is so clear to me that Object Orientation design approach to abstract social systems structures is far superior to the Functional Orientation design approach. Not just superior but absolutely the only design approach for the integration of Form and Function. Function driven design where functions act on Objects to produce results are weak and inefficient systems. Critically unstable when the function driven design in the high level initial approach to the Problem Domain.
I am convinced that most people are primarily function oriented. They manage not only abstract things but real things through their direct control of acting on the function of the thing as any given higher order level from inverse bottom to top actions or top to bottom.
Money is a function oriented abstract social system. Its focus is on what money does and a system was designed around what money does. What it does is the prime purpose of the system. The design trap is that to make it do what it does the designers focused on the action of money. The transaction exchange. With focus on the action then the object involved in the action is in a passive role not a driving dominant role. The object medium of exchange could be be anything. That anything is a declared value. Fiat money in our current monetary system. Let it be therefore it is brought into existence as an element used in a Function driven design. It is not an object that dictates function which is the nature of the natural world system design of Objects and their Functions.
Blockchain is fundamentally and most importantly an object management oriented system design. As a functional objective it does something. The perception of what it really is can be easily wrongly interpreted by predisposition to look at any complex structure and understand it first and foremost by what it does. Not a bad way to look at it. What a thing is and what it does go hand in hand. One does not exist without the other and an object receiver the action deriving from what a thing is and what it does. What that outcome is becomes the primary function user user view at the end of the process.
I am convinced that most of those that somehow are related to the Blockchain concept, which will be everyone because it is a monumental change will view it in terms of what it does. That is the prevailing "natural" process of human perception. The action first to infer or deduce meaning. Putting the object focus first and managing object relationships first is higher order perception to produce resulting actions.
It is so simple but this extended tortuous explanation makes it seem so complex. Why? It is not complex to me it is a fact. Perhaps the complexity is that it can't be easily explained to those who perceive the world from the controlling standpoint frame of reference being what a thing does. They simply do not look at the world that way. The object view is superior and by far not the majority view. This minority view however puts them in control of any system design that is Object Oriented at high levels but looks Function Oriented at low levels.
The systemic "Gotcha" arrives when those having a function oriented and even highly function oriented frame of reference to design and operation of the system advance to a high level of the operating system and manage it and its objects from a Function based perspective. Self interest manipulates objects by controlling their functions to twist system operation to their own purpose objectives.
People can get direct action "hands on the action" control of functional design oriented systems so much easier than an object oriented system where the "hands on" is indirect through the control of the attributes and methods that an object owns to do something the designer wants done. However, it takes more resources and greater complexity to accomplish direct control of functions than objects. That is true because functions are actions and actions are subject to great rates of change than the object initiating and receiving functional actions.
Blockchain in an object. First and foremost. Most will view in as a function. That is a good thing. Supremely good when those that perceive primarily in the frame of what does are at a high management control level of the legacy Function oriented money system. They will not see the forest coming until the object flattens them.
This is funny: Big Tech comes into Big Bank head office ans says: Look at what we can do for you. It is the old "What we can do for you" sales and marketing approach. Never: Look at what (thing) we have for you. Does not work. What can the thing do? Just tell me what it can do! Yes of course but what you don't see when you look at what it can functionally do for you it is going to do something for me, the designer and seller of the the end app function. What it is going to do for me by virtue of what I designed it to be and incorporated the power of the system to deliver that benefit to me by virtue of focus on the objects properties of the things in the system that drive its function.
The object oriented system designer manipulates the user by focus on the action. Object orientation always dominates its lower level function. All the way up to the top Object model structure.
Blockchain does something. What it does is a function of what it is. What it is: The monetization of a function process called medium of exchange by turning the process into a controlling object. In Block chain the transaction becomes the money that as its most important object attribute never goes out of existence as it does in the legacy debt money functional oriented design system. Banks will want to retain that functional design supremacy by fencing the Blockchain system to function oriented private ledgers.
The soul of blockchain is not what it does but what it is and that is universal. Not subject to privatization of its function. It is open source, open ledger. Business enterprise will seek to privitize it. They will claim that they cannot have other businesses knowing all about their business on an open public ledger. Kind of like us not wanting all of our business known to Big Business.
Clearing is an example of dominant function oriented design creating direct controlling function processes. This is an example in which the clearing process went from a dominant functional design approach to a better functional design oriented approach. Control the function. It will fail to function and an object oriented approach will dominate it.
Example: http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2016/02/central-counterparties-the-new-locus-of-systemic-risk.html
Oh, how I pray that all the banksters and their function oriented system design jump on that new locus. When it fails then the Trojan Horse of Object Oriented design opens up its secret door and there is no alternative TINA. The cat skins itself. TINA than to bow down to a better system design. Object Oriented design focus on the nature of conceptual things driving what those things do for us.
BlockChain is a beautiful and elegant thing. A knife that a cat will seize to skin itself. Blockchain is a system that can be applied to a vast number of apps. Money is only one. In the case of money a transaction in the blockchain is money. Transactions are the currency. The amount related to a transaction that puts money related to it in a person's wallet is like the denomination on an associated unique "piece" of currency which is a transaction receipt held in the wallet and in the blockchain waiting for the holder to spend that transaction and its associated amount and perpetuate it in the blockchain. It documents all past and all future transactions and related amounts. Blockchain of currency should never end.
Is this another example of the dominant Function Oriented system design that is failing because it focused on direct manipulation of function rather than designing from an Object Oriented approach?
Looks like it to me. If so what Object Oriented approach would solve this? Not one that bankers would seek because it would change their business model. They will not voluntarily do that. It must be done to them by functional force design of government controls or Object force of technology Object Oriented operating system design and application function programs operating on that design system.
http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2016/02/money-and-banking-how-the-fed-controlled-interest-rates-before-and-after-the-crisis.html
Is the following a subtle example on diversion of attention from the management of things to control actions to the less effective control of the action itself? The "flow".
http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2016/02/third-way-misleads-hard-in-a-weak-effort-to-discredit-social-security-expansion.html
What high level objects does Bernie seek to invest controlling attributes and methods of action as well as messages for delivery in an Object Oriented design structure?
People want action. That is the way most people are. They are not focused on what takes to produce that action at high level system object design. They can be mislead by manipulators that establish a frame of attack that focuses on the action rather than the higher level object design that achieves it.
I think that Bernie is an Object Oriented politician. The best kind when the aggregate ObjectClass:People comes first and its granular singular entity Child of the ObjectClass:People:CitizenPerson is a foundation of the System.
Third Way strategy is a sleight of hand trick focused on a gullible action oriented public to put an Object Oriented plan in the frame of not functionally working because it is not functionally oriented.
