FredX ⛏️

Yesterday someone who's opinion and voice has been substantial in the sovereign SoV renaissance that seems to be taking place currently within the current market cycle asked a very simple yet respectable question. "Why is $ORE needed?" As someone who is a staunch advocate of both ORE and the grid mining primitive, I don't necessarily see this question as a slap in the face. To give a respectable benefit of the doubt, I genuinely think the question comes from an individual's curiosity and a desire to understand why many of us have gravitated so heavily towards the mechanism that is ORE within its first two years of existence. Likewise, I think that questions like the one posed are actually needed and we as advocates of the project need to be ready with our own respectable answers. It allows a broader participation to be measured, challenged, and ultimately improved. And this is ultimately needed in this space. With that stated, I want to say that I can only speak for myself in attempting to answer the question of why ORE does indeed matter, at least for me personally. What follows is my own personal case for such. These reasonings reflect what I, personally, value in an open monetary system. 1/ Because Permission To Own Is Only Half The Promise A monetary system becomes more compelling when people can participate in its distribution as well as purchase its supply. ORE makes the question of who gets to mine worth asking again. 2/ Because Scarcity Should Not Require An Industrial Empire I firmly believe there is room for scarce digital money whose long-term(and this is the key time frame)pursuit does not depend on warehouses of specialized machines. ORE explores whether the machinery can become a shared interface rather than what has become a privately owned barrier. 3/ Because Hardware Manufacturers Should Not Determine The Boundaries Of Participation When mining(or the creation of money) depends on specialized equipment, access begins long before someone chooses to attempt to join a network. ORE offers a different starting point where the actual participation organized around a protocol rather than a monopolized equipment supply chain(currently 96% of BTC mining rigs are produced by two companies) 4/ Because Geography Should Have Less Power Than Opportunity Currently 3 countries(the United States, Russia, China) account for 67% of BTC hash rate. This is not by happenstance. Traditional mining economics favor particular combinations of electricity prices, infrastructure, and regulations. ORE's importance lies in exploring a model where those geographic advantages carry less weight. 5/ Because Capital Can Coordinate People Without Purchasing More Machinery I firmly believe that economic commitment can take forms beyond consuming electricity or acquiring equipment that needs constant updating. I truly believe ORE provides a live experiment in what happens when allocation itself becomes the organizing primitive. 6/ Because The Future Needs Alternatives That Actually Operate. Criticism can expose the limits of existing systems however working alternatives let people actually make a choice. ORE turns an argument about mining into something people can enter, inspect and help shape. And perhaps that is one of the defining reason why ORE is needed. Because working alternatives, in their own right, are not only needed but they make ideas accountable. BTC proved that money could initially exist without a "central issuer". Alternatives such as ORE matter because that former achievement gave us a foundation from which we should be able to explore other ways of distributing value rather than assuming one method is the only route to organized participation. -fin-

Mining was supposed to mean something. With $ORE it does again.