Because places that won't accept visa prepaid because it's not traceable enough will accept bitcoin? Are you sure you've actually thought that through?
Markets will adapt to allow fungible and private currencies to be used elsewhere. In this case it is unlikely that merchants who refuse prepaid cards and physical cash will accept bitcoin, But those wanting privacy will be able to buy those same products elsewhere with services like Purse.io and if state governments start targeting these services there are always decentralized marketplaces like https://openbazaar.org/
This isn't just hypothetical, but already in use right now . I can buy everything on Amazon for 20-30% off with bitcoin and I make on average 1 purchase a week. Physical cash being discontinued will not be able to prevent me from buying amazon goods with bitcoin either. Bitcoin fulfills the need for regulatory and efficiency arbitrage.
I don't know any transsexual hookers who take bitcoin.
Transsexual prostitutes are lining up to accept Bitcoin. In fact, many where forced by the state to learn about and use bitcoin when the government shutdown payment processing for Backpage with operation chokepoint. Bitcoin is primarily serving the under-served in the economy right now so even though you can save 20-30% off amazon with services like purse.io it really shines to buy your drugs , hookers, and gamble online. Bitcoin in many ways just isn't a protocol, payment rail, currency but a Blackmarket/Greymarket index fund as it controls so much of this online. The dark web is almost exclusively bitcoin only now for payments .
So all in all, cash is pretty anonymous. Bitcoin is not.
While technically bitcoin is pseudonymous , one can make it as anonymous as physical cash simply by hoping between blockchains , not reusing addressees, and using technologies like stealth addresses, coin join, joinmarket, and CT. Bitcoin Core developers are highly motivated to add fungibility to bitcoin, even more so than increasing capacity, so ultimately Bitcoin allows users to choose between radical transparency and being anonymous.
Seriously? They'll just jack up the premiums on the cards, or stop accepting them as payment.
This is true and the reason why Bitcoin or other crypto-currencies have a bright future serving the needs of the under-served in the economy .
Whether it is for scams , drugs, prostitutes, or gambling, both cash and bitcoin fill an important role in a very large economy. Or serving unpopular organizations, political dissidents , journalists , or citizens trying to protect their savings from the theft of inflation, bail ins, asset forfeiture or the many other means states steal from their citizens. Physical cash and bitcoin are crucial.
You know, actually anonymous instead of pseudo-not-really anonymous.
Design suggestions?
Pointers to existing "bitcoin 2.0 the actually anonymous version" projects?
Bitcoin core developers are highly motivated to introduce better fungibility or privacy features to the blockchain. Right now a user can use Bitcoin in a mostly anonymous manner (Absolute anonymity doesn't exist) but must be careful and take several steps where these new features will further automate privacy. Some wallets already have some of these features built in like eliminating address reuse (unique addresses for every tx ) and coinjoin mixing services built in but we really want it done at the protocol layer where privacy is by default and one has to choose if they want to be transparent. Confidential Transactions looks promising , but we may go with something on a 2nd layer to add privacy like the lightning network if CT cannot be made more efficient .
You are correct that we shouldn't conflate the two. Fiat money is a currency established by state decree and insured by the social contract imposed without agreement upon unborn taxpayers. Bitcoin isn't insured by the unborn tax payers within a geographic region but an international currency insured by the user base who voluntarily adopt it and can choose to leave or fork the currency into their own at any given moment. The two are radically different.
Well, I agree that obeying the traffic laws , having a properly maintained vehicle, avoiding driving a really old car or a really expensive new car with certain characteristics like aftermarket rims. Additionally , it doesn't help to be racially profiled either, which is not an option for many. These are techniques to simply reduce the probability of having your money stolen through asset-forfeiture by not getting caught in the first place with large amounts of cash. This does nothing to remove the possibility that you will be treated like a terrorist or drug dealer if they do find large amounts of cash on you however. It would be interesting to study the data and see when they typically steal the money and what variables play into their decision.
When I whip out the greenbacks I'm not, as far as I know, treated as a terrorist. Everyone gladly accepts them as payment for the goods or services I am purchasing. Nor have I ever been stopped in or outside the store by anyone from the government questioning why I'm using cash.
You will be treated like a terrorist, money laundering criminal or drug dealer if you are seen with as little as a couple thousand in greenbacks. Not only will you be unfairly profiled, but you will become guilty without trial while your cash is stolen from you until you can hire a lawyer to potentially reclaim it.
Cash is great, and the USD still has certain advantages over bitcoin(stability as a unit of account), but I would be much more comfortable carring around encrypted private keys to my bitcoins at a traffic stop or across state line than greenbacks
Miners play a singular role among others in controlling the network. While mining centralization is a somewhat valid concern there is good evidence this trend will reverse itself and the fears are often overblown because Full nodes, exchanges, developers, and merchants all share responsibilities and power over the miners. Bitcoin represents the longest Valid proof of work chain where only economic full nodes determine what is valid and what isn't thus the users running full nodes hold the ultimate power and the miners are serving them.
I am very careful with my credit cards and have been a victim of credit card fraud twice before and never had any issues with losing bitcoins. If my cell phone gets stolen they cannot spend my bitcoins because of a 6 digit pin, If there is a buffer overflow , or I lose/damage my cell phone I can easily recover my bitcoins with just 12 words. With bitcoin "reversability" is trivial to program in and used with either multisig escrow, or ricardian contracts... I use these all the time. There are multiple ways Bitcoin is more secure against credit cards:
1) CC are fundamentally broken by design because you need to give over all your personal information in order to make a payment that gets handed off to multiple insecure third parties and stored where hackers/unscrupulous employees can steal at a later date.
2) Because Bitcoin has no built in KYC , users personal details aren't necessarily included in a tx reducing the risk of identity theft
3) CC merchants can "accidentally" make unauthorized future charges , where with bitcoin this is impossible.
4) States can more easily freeze your account, or steal your wealth through inflation, bail ins with credit cards and fiat stored in local banks. Collecting and enforcing taxes(theft) to fund the murder and torture of humans is also easier with credit cards
5) With bitcoin their are clever ways of dramatically increasing security with hardware wallets, mutisi or Shamir's secret sharing, or using CLTV to secure assets. Nonprofits/Corps could set up an account where is impossible for fraud or embezzlement to happen without the board voting and approving on any tx's
6) With bitcoin there are clever ways of dramatically increasing security with hardware wallets, mutisi or Shamir's secret sharing, or using CLTV to secure assets. Nonprofits/Corps could set up an account where is impossible for fraud or embezzlement to happen without the board voting and approving on any tx's
7) Legal Businesses can be destroyed by state pressure shutting down their account and cards. Research into Operation Choke-point.
I understand that you believe that all you have to do is ask for a chargeback or pay the 50 dollar deductible to cover fraud with credit cards but this is false. Theft and fraud with credit cards is pervasive(far more than with bitcoin) and all users pay for it indirectly with merchant processing fees, and other fees.
they stop buying things. They want to wait until the last possible minute, until they absolutely need an item, to buy it because the longer they wait (the longer they hold onto their bitcoins), the less it will cost.
I understand this is what your intuition tells you, but the data reflects the exact opposite. During periods of rapid deflation (appreciation due to adoption) in bitcoin charitable donations and spending on good and services actually spikes up from the data coming from btc payment processors. They speculate this is because of the "wealth effect" where people are more comfortable spending and donating because they feel wealthier(as they are).
If someone can come up with a cryptocurrency which is independent of central control, yet its supply increases at roughly the same rate the economy expands, that is the boat you want to get on. It just won't be as lucrative for early adopters as bitcoin because it won't be a ponzi scheme.
Those alt crypto tokens you propose already exist and "compete" with bitcoin. Bitcoins dis-inflationary model thus far is superior.... time will tell I suppose. Please look up the definition of a ponzi scheme also as it doesn't apply to Bitcoin.
It now costs more energy to mine a coin than a coin is worth.
This is absurd, mining difficulty is self adjusting, and the miners definitely are making small profits otherwise they wouldn't be doing it. Sure mining is professional these days so you must be very competitive to be profitable and thus the average user is better off just buying some bitcoins instead.
Paying and tipping online with Bitcoin is far quicker, more secure , and easier than using credit cards. To make a payment with a credit card You have to type a 16 digit account number, exp date , CVV number, name , full address and than you get the wonderful experience of opening yourself up to either identity theft or future credit card fraud. With bitcoin I scan a QR code, click send , enter in 6 digit pin(optional) and done... or click on payment link, click send , and enter in password for wallet on computer. Tipping is even easier as you can simply write some shortcode and tip anyone on any social media platform , I.E>> "+ChangeTip, send $2!" and they don't even have to know about bitcoin to receive it.
Pruned or SPV wallets don't require the user to store the entire block-chain and are much more secure than a bitcoin bank. Additionally, Fraud proofs are coming out soon for SPV clients that will make them almost as secure as a full node with the introduction of segwit being softforked.(Its currently in the testnet ) Thus your comment is completely fallacious.
Yes, you are quite correct in my ideological motivations being a principle motivation for using bitcoin. You are also correct in the fact that I prefer to illicitly avoid paying for the murder and torture of millions of innocent people and prefer to avoid assisting banks steal from their clients. I am not ashamed of these idealogical motivations and plan on continue using bitcoin for regulatory arbitrage... and it lets me buy anything off of amazon for 20-30% cheaper.
There are already decentralized payment channels(LN) and tree chain proposals that allow bitcoin to scale to Visa TX levels without the need of a central authority. Bitcoin will be wildly successful if it simply facilitates 1% of blackmarket trade so it isn't going anywhere.
my ideas will involve you paying taxes you don't want and your ideas will mean removing some protections and services I want.
I am perfectly fine you choosing to opt in with a social contract under state control and with taxes and coercion as a means of paying for your protections and services. I do not want to remove your choice or services, but merely have those that want to live under such system continue to do so.
The idea that individual communities live under different laws is going to have problems. Companies will want to move their polluting industries to communities with lax pollution laws, or someone who breaks the law in my community is going to go to yours, where that act is illegal. There's problems with differences in state laws (not to mention the differences in Federal laws in different circuits), and on a community level that's going to break down hard.
There are solutions for your concerns but it involves a long conversation outside this thread. I am under no allusion that the change is easy or will happen quickly. I am under no allusion that such a scenario social structures are perfect either . There are a lot of assumptions people have with the way things can work that you begin to realize never were true once you actually live under such communities.
Yes , there is no disagreement. Cities with high population densities would need to be designed radically different (without perverse and unethical incentive structures). I am under no allusion this will happen quickly and probably not within my lifetime.
Thanks for your kind words and yes, I understand that many people aren't exactly happy with the status quo . Unfortunately, voting will not change much of anything. A larger problem is with inflationary monetary policy where the world ends up paying for the military industrial complex because the USD is a reserve currency. This is why many of us are agorists and try to use tools like bitcoin and bartering to starve the beast. Like Noam Chomsky discusses, we are all responsible for the crimes of the state to one degree or another so I am not attempting to chastise you directly. We must be cognizant of these realities and take active steps to reduce this corruption. There is no end Utopian end game to our struggle either, this is something we always must work upon.
I am not describing Utopian hypotheticals, but real communities I currently live in or have visited in the past. Your statement is largely true for anarcho-communist communities , but not so for many others. You would be surprised how important social ostracism is within small communities. For Example - I have about 8 examples of communities of 10 to 150 homes where participation rate for voluntary road fees is between 67-100% and the remaining who don't pay usually do some manual labor to assist. There will always be those that are selfish and not contribute , but there penalty comes from lack of solidarity with the rest of the community. You have to consider the efficiency differences between the overhead of a coercive system vs a voluntary one that has a few non contributors. Additionally, there are ethical advantages to such a society, if that matters to you.
You bring up a fair concern but there really isn't good evidence to support this because we cannot compare old tribal societies to modern ones and we would need to compare localized communities to larger cities under more controlled scenarios (the chaos the ensues after a failed state is not a fair representation of an opt in intentional anarchist community. This would be a very important study to have for mankind, unfortunately most states make it difficult for these communities to safely arise but times are changing slowly.
Without getting into specifics of the breakup of the Ottoman Empire, as I am sure you are asking the question in a more general sense. The best way to insure security among different communities or small city states is for all of them to become codependent economically upon each other and have heavy trade. Additionally, travel should be encouraged between communities for greater cultural empathy between communities. Since Dunbar's number is around ~150 heavy trade would naturally be necessary and most individuals would likely date and marry outside their community.
Slashdot Mirror
noun
1.
anything that is visible or tangible and is relatively stable in form.
2.
a thing, person, or matter to which thought or action is directed:
Because places that won't accept visa prepaid because it's not traceable enough will accept bitcoin? Are you sure you've actually thought that through?
Markets will adapt to allow fungible and private currencies to be used elsewhere. In this case it is unlikely that merchants who refuse prepaid cards and physical cash will accept bitcoin, But those wanting privacy will be able to buy those same products elsewhere with services like Purse.io and if state governments start targeting these services there are always decentralized marketplaces like https://openbazaar.org/
This isn't just hypothetical, but already in use right now . I can buy everything on Amazon for 20-30% off with bitcoin and I make on average 1 purchase a week. Physical cash being discontinued will not be able to prevent me from buying amazon goods with bitcoin either. Bitcoin fulfills the need for regulatory and efficiency arbitrage.
I don't know any transsexual hookers who take bitcoin.
Transsexual prostitutes are lining up to accept Bitcoin. In fact, many where forced by the state to learn about and use bitcoin when the government shutdown payment processing for Backpage with operation chokepoint. Bitcoin is primarily serving the under-served in the economy right now so even though you can save 20-30% off amazon with services like purse.io it really shines to buy your drugs , hookers, and gamble online. Bitcoin in many ways just isn't a protocol, payment rail, currency but a Blackmarket/Greymarket index fund as it controls so much of this online. The dark web is almost exclusively bitcoin only now for payments .
So all in all, cash is pretty anonymous. Bitcoin is not.
While technically bitcoin is pseudonymous , one can make it as anonymous as physical cash simply by hoping between blockchains , not reusing addressees, and using technologies like stealth addresses, coin join, joinmarket, and CT. Bitcoin Core developers are highly motivated to add fungibility to bitcoin, even more so than increasing capacity, so ultimately Bitcoin allows users to choose between radical transparency and being anonymous.
Seriously? They'll just jack up the premiums on the cards, or stop accepting them as payment.
This is true and the reason why Bitcoin or other crypto-currencies have a bright future serving the needs of the under-served in the economy . Whether it is for scams , drugs, prostitutes, or gambling, both cash and bitcoin fill an important role in a very large economy. Or serving unpopular organizations, political dissidents , journalists , or citizens trying to protect their savings from the theft of inflation, bail ins, asset forfeiture or the many other means states steal from their citizens. Physical cash and bitcoin are crucial.
You know, actually anonymous instead of pseudo-not-really anonymous.
Design suggestions?
Pointers to existing "bitcoin 2.0 the actually anonymous version" projects?
Bitcoin core developers are highly motivated to introduce better fungibility or privacy features to the blockchain. Right now a user can use Bitcoin in a mostly anonymous manner (Absolute anonymity doesn't exist) but must be careful and take several steps where these new features will further automate privacy. Some wallets already have some of these features built in like eliminating address reuse (unique addresses for every tx ) and coinjoin mixing services built in but we really want it done at the protocol layer where privacy is by default and one has to choose if they want to be transparent. Confidential Transactions looks promising , but we may go with something on a 2nd layer to add privacy like the lightning network if CT cannot be made more efficient .
https://elementsproject.org/elements/confidential-transactions/
You are correct that we shouldn't conflate the two. Fiat money is a currency established by state decree and insured by the social contract imposed without agreement upon unborn taxpayers. Bitcoin isn't insured by the unborn tax payers within a geographic region but an international currency insured by the user base who voluntarily adopt it and can choose to leave or fork the currency into their own at any given moment. The two are radically different.
Well, I agree that obeying the traffic laws , having a properly maintained vehicle, avoiding driving a really old car or a really expensive new car with certain characteristics like aftermarket rims. Additionally , it doesn't help to be racially profiled either, which is not an option for many. These are techniques to simply reduce the probability of having your money stolen through asset-forfeiture by not getting caught in the first place with large amounts of cash. This does nothing to remove the possibility that you will be treated like a terrorist or drug dealer if they do find large amounts of cash on you however. It would be interesting to study the data and see when they typically steal the money and what variables play into their decision.
When I whip out the greenbacks I'm not, as far as I know, treated as a terrorist. Everyone gladly accepts them as payment for the goods or services I am purchasing. Nor have I ever been stopped in or outside the store by anyone from the government questioning why I'm using cash.
You will be treated like a terrorist, money laundering criminal or drug dealer if you are seen with as little as a couple thousand in greenbacks. Not only will you be unfairly profiled, but you will become guilty without trial while your cash is stolen from you until you can hire a lawyer to potentially reclaim it.
http://ij.org/report/policing-for-profit/
http://dailycaller.com/2015/01/30/the-7-most-egregious-examples-of-civil-asset-forfeiture/
Cash is great, and the USD still has certain advantages over bitcoin(stability as a unit of account), but I would be much more comfortable carring around encrypted private keys to my bitcoins at a traffic stop or across state line than greenbacks
Miners play a singular role among others in controlling the network. While mining centralization is a somewhat valid concern there is good evidence this trend will reverse itself and the fears are often overblown because Full nodes, exchanges, developers, and merchants all share responsibilities and power over the miners. Bitcoin represents the longest Valid proof of work chain where only economic full nodes determine what is valid and what isn't thus the users running full nodes hold the ultimate power and the miners are serving them.
Where exactly is security?
I am very careful with my credit cards and have been a victim of credit card fraud twice before and never had any issues with losing bitcoins. If my cell phone gets stolen they cannot spend my bitcoins because of a 6 digit pin, If there is a buffer overflow , or I lose/damage my cell phone I can easily recover my bitcoins with just 12 words. With bitcoin "reversability" is trivial to program in and used with either multisig escrow, or ricardian contracts... I use these all the time. There are multiple ways Bitcoin is more secure against credit cards:
1) CC are fundamentally broken by design because you need to give over all your personal information in order to make a payment that gets handed off to multiple insecure third parties and stored where hackers/unscrupulous employees can steal at a later date.
2) Because Bitcoin has no built in KYC , users personal details aren't necessarily included in a tx reducing the risk of identity theft
3) CC merchants can "accidentally" make unauthorized future charges , where with bitcoin this is impossible.
4) States can more easily freeze your account, or steal your wealth through inflation, bail ins with credit cards and fiat stored in local banks. Collecting and enforcing taxes(theft) to fund the murder and torture of humans is also easier with credit cards
5) With bitcoin their are clever ways of dramatically increasing security with hardware wallets, mutisi or Shamir's secret sharing, or using CLTV to secure assets. Nonprofits/Corps could set up an account where is impossible for fraud or embezzlement to happen without the board voting and approving on any tx's
6) With bitcoin there are clever ways of dramatically increasing security with hardware wallets, mutisi or Shamir's secret sharing, or using CLTV to secure assets. Nonprofits/Corps could set up an account where is impossible for fraud or embezzlement to happen without the board voting and approving on any tx's
7) Legal Businesses can be destroyed by state pressure shutting down their account and cards. Research into Operation Choke-point.
I understand that you believe that all you have to do is ask for a chargeback or pay the 50 dollar deductible to cover fraud with credit cards but this is false. Theft and fraud with credit cards is pervasive(far more than with bitcoin) and all users pay for it indirectly with merchant processing fees, and other fees.
they stop buying things. They want to wait until the last possible minute, until they absolutely need an item, to buy it because the longer they wait (the longer they hold onto their bitcoins), the less it will cost.
I understand this is what your intuition tells you, but the data reflects the exact opposite. During periods of rapid deflation (appreciation due to adoption) in bitcoin charitable donations and spending on good and services actually spikes up from the data coming from btc payment processors. They speculate this is because of the "wealth effect" where people are more comfortable spending and donating because they feel wealthier(as they are).
If someone can come up with a cryptocurrency which is independent of central control, yet its supply increases at roughly the same rate the economy expands, that is the boat you want to get on. It just won't be as lucrative for early adopters as bitcoin because it won't be a ponzi scheme.
Those alt crypto tokens you propose already exist and "compete" with bitcoin. Bitcoins dis-inflationary model thus far is superior.... time will tell I suppose. Please look up the definition of a ponzi scheme also as it doesn't apply to Bitcoin.
It now costs more energy to mine a coin than a coin is worth.
This is absurd, mining difficulty is self adjusting, and the miners definitely are making small profits otherwise they wouldn't be doing it. Sure mining is professional these days so you must be very competitive to be profitable and thus the average user is better off just buying some bitcoins instead.
Paying and tipping online with Bitcoin is far quicker, more secure , and easier than using credit cards. To make a payment with a credit card You have to type a 16 digit account number, exp date , CVV number, name , full address and than you get the wonderful experience of opening yourself up to either identity theft or future credit card fraud. With bitcoin I scan a QR code, click send , enter in 6 digit pin(optional) and done... or click on payment link, click send , and enter in password for wallet on computer. Tipping is even easier as you can simply write some shortcode and tip anyone on any social media platform , I.E>> "+ChangeTip, send $2!" and they don't even have to know about bitcoin to receive it.
Pruned or SPV wallets don't require the user to store the entire block-chain and are much more secure than a bitcoin bank. Additionally, Fraud proofs are coming out soon for SPV clients that will make them almost as secure as a full node with the introduction of segwit being softforked.(Its currently in the testnet ) Thus your comment is completely fallacious.
Yes, you are quite correct in my ideological motivations being a principle motivation for using bitcoin. You are also correct in the fact that I prefer to illicitly avoid paying for the murder and torture of millions of innocent people and prefer to avoid assisting banks steal from their clients. I am not ashamed of these idealogical motivations and plan on continue using bitcoin for regulatory arbitrage... and it lets me buy anything off of amazon for 20-30% cheaper.
Early adopters took tremendous risk, there is millions of hours of effort and billions of dollars of investments supporting the bitcoin ecosystem.
Bitcoin produces value from utility. Secure utility that cannot be found by any other means.
There are already decentralized payment channels(LN) and tree chain proposals that allow bitcoin to scale to Visa TX levels without the need of a central authority. Bitcoin will be wildly successful if it simply facilitates 1% of blackmarket trade so it isn't going anywhere.
my ideas will involve you paying taxes you don't want and your ideas will mean removing some protections and services I want.
I am perfectly fine you choosing to opt in with a social contract under state control and with taxes and coercion as a means of paying for your protections and services. I do not want to remove your choice or services, but merely have those that want to live under such system continue to do so.
The idea that individual communities live under different laws is going to have problems. Companies will want to move their polluting industries to communities with lax pollution laws, or someone who breaks the law in my community is going to go to yours, where that act is illegal. There's problems with differences in state laws (not to mention the differences in Federal laws in different circuits), and on a community level that's going to break down hard.
There are solutions for your concerns but it involves a long conversation outside this thread. I am under no allusion that the change is easy or will happen quickly. I am under no allusion that such a scenario social structures are perfect either . There are a lot of assumptions people have with the way things can work that you begin to realize never were true once you actually live under such communities.
Yes , there is no disagreement. Cities with high population densities would need to be designed radically different (without perverse and unethical incentive structures). I am under no allusion this will happen quickly and probably not within my lifetime.
Thanks for your kind words and yes, I understand that many people aren't exactly happy with the status quo . Unfortunately, voting will not change much of anything. A larger problem is with inflationary monetary policy where the world ends up paying for the military industrial complex because the USD is a reserve currency. This is why many of us are agorists and try to use tools like bitcoin and bartering to starve the beast. Like Noam Chomsky discusses, we are all responsible for the crimes of the state to one degree or another so I am not attempting to chastise you directly. We must be cognizant of these realities and take active steps to reduce this corruption. There is no end Utopian end game to our struggle either, this is something we always must work upon.
I am not describing Utopian hypotheticals, but real communities I currently live in or have visited in the past. Your statement is largely true for anarcho-communist communities , but not so for many others. You would be surprised how important social ostracism is within small communities. For Example - I have about 8 examples of communities of 10 to 150 homes where participation rate for voluntary road fees is between 67-100% and the remaining who don't pay usually do some manual labor to assist. There will always be those that are selfish and not contribute , but there penalty comes from lack of solidarity with the rest of the community. You have to consider the efficiency differences between the overhead of a coercive system vs a voluntary one that has a few non contributors. Additionally, there are ethical advantages to such a society, if that matters to you.
You bring up a fair concern but there really isn't good evidence to support this because we cannot compare old tribal societies to modern ones and we would need to compare localized communities to larger cities under more controlled scenarios (the chaos the ensues after a failed state is not a fair representation of an opt in intentional anarchist community. This would be a very important study to have for mankind, unfortunately most states make it difficult for these communities to safely arise but times are changing slowly.
Without getting into specifics of the breakup of the Ottoman Empire, as I am sure you are asking the question in a more general sense. The best way to insure security among different communities or small city states is for all of them to become codependent economically upon each other and have heavy trade. Additionally, travel should be encouraged between communities for greater cultural empathy between communities. Since Dunbar's number is around ~150 heavy trade would naturally be necessary and most individuals would likely date and marry outside their community.