Runaway train? Decentralised finance and the myth of the private platform economy
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
According to one view, the decentralisation of finance [‘DeFi’] is the next phase in the constitutionalisation of money, while others highlight the actual asymmetry between those who can benefit from the evolving technology and those who find themselves further descending into cycles of debt and self-exploitation. DeFi’s protagonists maintain that a non-hierarchical, access-controlled system of financial transaction, housed in technology rather than in institutions, will lead to universal inclusivity and transparency. Skeptics question DeFi’s alleged autonomy and point to the public nature of money and the financial system – while acknowledging its shortcomings for its most vulnerable users. Contextualising DeFi’s democratisation promise of platform money within broader contemporary contestations of democratic practices and the role of law in them, the paper critically interrogates DeFi’s ability to provide a framework not only for individual financial inclusion but for collective pursuit of transformative, democratic governance of economic and financial transaction.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it