Search for: All records

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 “uniqueness” 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. 

Key messages Grounding practices within the materiality of geography is an important technique for studying the complexity of digital phenomena.The DIGO (Discourses, Infrastructures, Groupings, and Outcomes) framework uses these categories to guide data selection for locating digital phenomenon in material geographies.This article applies the DIGO framework to blockchain (using data about tweets, miners, firms, and ICOs) to show how this digital practice connects to and across material geographies. 

This paper elaborates on the interactions between digital technologies and financial practices and how they contribute to the ongoing process of financialization. We focus on the circumstances of blockchain-based token offerings and their contribution to reshaping existing systems of investment in startups. We show how future clients become investors via the initial coin offering (ICO) process. The paper is based on interviews with blockchain and industry practitioners during 2018 and 2019 and focuses on an in-depth case study of a specific ICO in early 2018. We suggest a framework consisting of catalysts, cracks and voids to analyze the financialization process and to inform theories of how financialization advances through the new spaces afforded by socially constructed technologies upon which entrepreneurs capitalize. With this framework we provide a better understanding of the mechanics behind financialization, particularly the ways in which business processes, and larger social relations such as the role of investors and clients, are reimagined and reworked.