Monsters Can be Created but Never Tamed

Blockchains and Walking Dead

Abstract

Technological innovations are often perceived as something alien, terrifying, and
monstrous. Blockchain technology that creates shared “blocks” of information,
which are interconnected and verified by the network comes as no exception. Two
main features of blockchain (1) the absence of a gatekeeper organisation controlling
the data, and (2) the fact that the information is rather hard to corrupt and hack,
makes the technology very attractive and versatile. It is also what makes it appear
frightening, especially for the traditionally centralised and hierarchical disciplines
like law. As there is no one to control the data and the access to it, blockchains
open a whole world of new possibilities with cryptocurrencies being one of the
most popular examples.
Approaching blockchain technologies in the context of J. J. Cohen’s monster
theory demonstrates that they can be perceived as modern monsters. Our inability
to understand the technology and the way it works makes this particular monster
both fearful and desired (thesis 6), and law reacts to the fears that circulate in the
society. Thus, blockchain technologies are often banned by law in a similar way
as in medieval narratives dragons were banished by saints and heroes. Building
on Cohen’s thesis 7, which argues that monsters show how we (mis)interpret our
surroundings, this article will employ the historical perspective upon the fear of
the monstrous to create a better understanding of the legal policies surrounding
blockchains. By comparing current legal decisions concerning blockchain
technology with the strategies of dealing with monsters, offered by medieval
chronicles and collections of wonders (including William of Malmesbury and
William of Newburgh), we will analyse the modern way of controlling monsters –
or controlling the fear of them.