The lessons from ancient civilizations can help us with modern projects like creating a decentralized internet using satellite networks in space. The Romans built a system of roads and central governance with local management. These roads were controlled by state-appointed authorities with the help of local folks. And they succeeded in building a multi-tiered approach that kept their infrastructure operational for centuries despite political upheaval. Roman Senate, which seemed to represent the people was actually controlled by few people with special skills and resources. Even current unicorns and big companies teach us a lot of lessons that could be applied to space infrastructure. Uber decentralized ride-hailing by connecting both parties through a peer-to-peer network. However, it had to figure out unique ways to deal with safety and security issues, especially around driver-passenger accountability and compliance issues across different countries and accommodating to different requirements. Airbnb did something similar and reinvented ways to go into different countries with different laws and adapted.
Let’s take India’s cooperative banks, which have been operational for quite some time, although not without issues, but still there’s some lessons to be learned from them like. Saraswat Bank and Cosmos Bank are the ones that are still thriving based on customer focus and decentralized decision-making. They have a democratically-elected board that makes sure they provide needed services with oversight. However, they are not without their own issues like Punjab and Maharashtra Cooperative Bank. The failures teach us that decentralized governance will still need accountability, mostly for infrastructure that is critical.
Think about a hospital emergency. Someone comes in needing urgent care. Doctors can’t wait for everyone to vote; they have to act fast. Space is the same way; there’s a lot at stake in terms of lives and money.
A space project called OrbitDAO paid $1.2 million for a launch. But when they found a problem, they had a vote to decide what to do. The vote took too long, and they missed their launch, losing all their money [1].
Another project, StarLink, had a broken satellite. They argued about fixing it instead of acting. By the time they decided, it was too late, and they lost millions [2].
These stories show that space, like a hospital emergency, needs quick action. Voting takes too long when things are urgent.
Sometimes it’s also possible that decentralized systems end up creating new trust issues that are less visible even though they want to avoid creating trust issues. Users must trust that the network leaders will act in the best interest of the network during emergencies. For e.g., The Andromeda Network had 8,000 token holders but was run by just seven engineers who managed three satellites. When they faced a critical navigation decision, they bypassed the formal governance process and used an unofficial “emergency protocol.” [3] This shows how technical needs can take precedence over the commitment to decentralization.
Issues related to geographical laws cannot be solved by blockchain, like one satellite in space can cover the entire globe but has it’s ground stations fixed. If the countries don’t have healthy relationships then such kind of networks will have gaps, this will eventually come with its own sets of problems and fixes like privacy and connectivity.
The proposal in question is essentially a hybrid between these two approaches: Wouldn’t it be nice if you could pass legislation that allows some decisions to be made with the approval of the Senate (e.g. war) while making others, like the appointment of a Cabinet member, determined by an appointed official (in some kind of cabinet)? The most promising space projects today take a similar approach: some decisions (e.g., collision avoidance) require immediate action by an expert, while others don’t; these can wait. Others are hoping to use a fraction of every transaction fee for maintenance and eventual satellite replacement. Considerations over geography in design; such that stations are spread across allied but distinct jurisdictions so that there aren’t single points of regulatory failures. This means that they are forming special technical councils with explicit rules and a clear code of conduct to add expertise to frameworks.
Conclusion
Building a decentralized internet in space sounds great but to be honest it’s not going to be easy in fact it’s going to be hard. But we must carefully weigh the pros and cons of different approaches and in the end, it would be a huge win for humanity. We can learn a lot from what we’ve done on earth in thousands of years and use those learnings, although no system is perfect and it would come with its own set of challenges and we may even need to compromise on strict ideals to find practical solutions that work in the tough environment of space. But we should still keep our vision of the future in mind and put our best foot forward.
References
[1] SpaceNews. “OrbitDAO loses $1.2 million deposit after governance delay,” 2022. [2] IEEE Spectrum. “StarLink satellite failure highlights decentralized governance limits,” 2023. [3] Buterin, V. “Decentralized Governance Pitfalls,” Ethereum Foundation blog, 2021.
