Pennings, A.J. (2026, May 26) The ICT4SD and World Order Assignment. apennings.com https://apennings.com/technologies-of-meaning/the-ict4sd-and-world-order-assignment/

Note: This is an introduction to a collection of student articles for a pdf book tentatively called ICT4D and the Future of Global Sustainability.

Introduction

A foundational course like EST 230 – Information and Communication Technologies for Sustainable Development (ICT4SD), and increasingly project initiatives such as AI for Good (AI4Good), cannot operate in an ecological, economic, or political vacuum. True mastery of international development assistance requires a grounding in the realities of global power and the organization of the world order. Specifically, understanding the politics of the US dollar global infrastructure (USD), energy (oil and its alternatives), and technological competition is crucial to the unfolding of sustainable abundance and development.

To understand these dynamics, students in the ICT4D specialization of our BS in Technological Systems Management benefit from analyzing different perspectives. They were asked to compare and contrast two highly influential, yet philosophically opposed thinkers: Jeffrey Sachs, a university professor and institutionalist champion of global cooperation, and Peter Zeihan, a geopolitical analyst and structural determinist focused on demographic and geographic realities. Both are very popular keynote speakers and YouTube guests. Both are accomplished writers on geopolitical issues and tensions.

Biographies & Views

Jeffrey D. Sachs is a world-renowned American economist, academic, and public policy analyst. Born in 1954, he earned his BA, MA, and PhD from Harvard University, rising from a first-year student to a tenured full professor in 11 years.[1] In 2002, he moved to the faculty of Columbia University, where he served as the Director of The Earth Institute.[2] He currently serves as the President of the UN Sustainable Development Solutions Network.

Early in his career, Sachs became famous for advising governments in Latin America (such as Bolivia), and later Eastern Europe (Poland), and the former Soviet Union. In the wake of the “Third World Debt Crisis,” these countries experienced severe hyperinflation and economic collapse. The oil crises of the 1970s drove many countries into excessive borrowing from the global Eurodollar markets. The subsequent interest rate hike by Paul Volcker’s Federal Reserve sent interest rates skyrocketing in the 1980s making repayment difficult. Sachs aided macroeconomic stabilization in Latin America and the transitions from Communism to market economies with government cuts and austerity programs that came to be known as “shock therapy.”[1,2] The most dramatic transition was the end of the USSR in 1991 as oil prices collapsed and debt repayments ended. Sachs absorbed many bitter lessons.

Over the past two decades, his focus shifted fundamentally toward poverty alleviation and sustainable development. Sachs became a Special Advisor to United Nations Secretaries-General Kofi Annan on the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) and Ban Ki-moon on the transition to the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).[2] He was one of their primary architects and their most prominent global champion. His work spans from the early conceptual transition out of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) to his leadership in tracking, financing, and modernizing the 17 SDG goals using digital and data-driven solutions.

We use Sachs’s “ICT & SDGs Final Report: How Information and Communications Technology can Accelerate Action on the Sustainable Development Goals” book in our course.[9] It was written with support from Swedish telecommunications company Ericsson and views broadband and ICT integration with the SDGs enabling solutions such as mobile money, digital health clinics, and localized energy grids as crucial tools to bypass traditional, slow “Business-as-Usual” steps. The goal is to use ICT to allow impoverished nations to leapfrog into sustainable economic and energy systems.

Sachs provides a crucial framework for sustainability, ICT4D, and AI4Good because he argues that global poverty and environmental degradation are solvable through deliberate institutional investment and targeted technology transfer.[3,2] Sustainability, ICT4D, and AI initiatives are highly capital-intensive. They rely heavily on investments through the architecture of the global financial system, which is fundamentally underpinned by the USD (US dollar plus Eurodollars) but suffers from persistent shortages and capital flight.

Sachs argues that the current international financial architecture fails the Global South. He argues that developing nations are trapped in structural disadvantages because they have been largely excluded from USD liquidity due to excessively high interest rates compared to wealthy nations, preventing them from financing their own green transitions or digital infrastructure.[4] He has advocated for reforming the IMF and World Bank to unlock concessionary capital that would be vital for any realistic execution of global ICT4SD and AI4Good initiatives.

Peter Zeihan is a contemporary American geopolitical strategist, author, and speaker. Born in 1973, Zeihan took a non-traditional academic route to global prominence, unlike career academics. He earned his master’s degree from the Patterson School of Diplomacy and International Commerce at the University of Kentucky and has a post-graduate diploma in Asia Studies from the University of Otago in New Zealand. He spent over a decade (from 2000 to 2012) at Stratfor (Strategic Forecasting, Inc.), a premier private intelligence and geopolitical analysis firm in Austin, Texas. He eventually rose to the position of Vice President of Analysis before starting his own consultancy.[5] Stratfor, which was started by George Frieden (Geopolitical Futures) and other professors from LSU, is now owned by the RANE Network.[6]

In 2012, he founded his own independent firm, Zeihan on Geopolitics, where he advises corporate executives, military leaders, and government organizations. He has authored several bestselling books, including The Accidental Superpower (2014) and The End of the World Is Just the Beginning: Mapping the Collapse of Globalization (2022), which accurately predicted major shifts in global supply chain disruptions and energy security that appeared after the COVID-19 pandemic and the Russian invasion of Ukraine.[5,7]

Zeihan offers a stark, cold, and highly pragmatic counterweight to institutional optimism. His structural determinism focuses on geography, demographics, and physical security, presenting hard truths that tech developers must consider.[5,7] His core thesis is that the global free-trade order (the Bretton Woods system) was a historical anomaly guaranteed solely by the US Navy to fight the Cold War.[5] As the US pulls back from policing global sea lanes, international trade will fragment.

For an ICT4D/AI curriculum, these are indispensable lessons. If global supply chains break down or transportation becomes threatened, the localized utilization of semiconductors, digital devices, fiber-optic cables, and green-energy hardware will stop or become prohibitively expensive for most nations.

Zeihan emphasizes that we still live in a world in which things must be physically moved from where they are produced to where they are consumed. He tracks how nations with rapidly aging populations face terminal economic contraction, and how localized geography dictates whether a country can survive an energy crisis.[7]

Populations economically provide consumption, investment, and labor. His perspective forces AI and sustainability students to confront demographic and physical limitations. You cannot implement an “AI solution” in a country that lacks a creative and energetic workforce needed to maintain a high-tech economy. It includes avid customers, investors, and intelligent know-how. Also, you cannot adequately develop without the naval capability or protection to secure energy imports or commodity exports.

The Tension

For Sachs, a multipolar world is an opportunity to build a fairer global system. He points out that the rise of China, the expansion of the BRICS bloc, and the economic dynamism of East Asia mean that technological and financial capacity is no longer consolidated in the West.

Sachs believes that if nations move past the quest for dominance, this new multipolar landscape can leverage global cooperation to deploy AI, digital public infrastructure, and clean energy to address systemic issues such as climate change and poverty. He strongly advocates shifting international governance within the UN to a super-majority voting system, removing unilateral vetoes, and opening multilateral finance to the Global South.

Zeihan treats Sachs’s vision of peaceful multipolar cooperation as a dangerous fantasy. He asserts that without the US Navy policing the high seas, global trade lanes will fragment, and maritime piracy or state-sponsored resource hoarding will return. Zeihan warns that true deglobalization will lead to localized “de-industrialization, de-urbanization, and depopulation.”

He points out that countries with terrible demographics (like rapidly aging populations in China, Russia, and parts of Europe) and those structurally dependent on long-range imports for food and energy face systemic collapse. In Zeihan’s multipolar world, only a few geographically secure, demographically stable, resource-abundant nations (principally the United States, alongside localized and preffered partners) will maintain advanced industrial capabilities. In contrast, the rest of the world faces severe resource scarcity.

Why This Matters for Sustainability, ICT4D, and AI4Good

This clash highlights the exact friction points students in international development must anticipate. If Sachs is right, the primary barrier to AI4Good and global sustainability is political will and institutional design. Developers should focus on global policy frameworks, open-source technology transfers, and lobbying multilateral banks to fund clean energy and digital infrastructure in the Global South.

If Zeihan is right, the primary barrier is physical vulnerability. An AI system or localized tech intervention is useless if the server farms lack electricity due to regional oil blockades or a lack of solar panels and windmills. ICT will not present sufficient solutions if the country cannot import the physical semiconductors and routing technologies required to maintain its data centers and wireless broadband networks. Advanced AI infrastructure requires specialized hardware such as GPUs manufactured via highly consolidated, multi-country supply chains (such as TSMC in Taiwan using ASML lithography from the Netherlands). These transactions are settled predominantly in USD. A country’s access to “AI for Good” models is gated by its balance of payments and macroeconomic stability.

AI and ICT4D are deeply anchored in the physical world and bound by energy and financial constraints. Sachs argues that advanced software architectures for health, education, and public administration must be treated as “Global Public Goods,” because software can be replicated at nearly zero marginal cost.[8] To make his tech-enhanced world a reality, he advocates for a radical shift in UN voting and multilateral funding (via the World Bank, IMF, and international private capital) to grant low-interest loans directly targeted at expanding digital hardware, 5G towers, and compute capabilities across the Global South.

Either Sachs’s vision of global institutional redesign is achieved or developers must design “low-infrastructure, hyper-localized, and decoupled” systems that can survive the structural breakdown of global trade.

References

Berg, A. (2024). Jeffrey D. Sachs (1954–). The Palgrave Companion to Harvard Economics, 999-1021. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-52053-2_40
Farhat–Holzman, Laina (2017) “Peter Zeihan, The Accidental Superpower: The Next Generation of American Preeminence and the Coming Global Disorder. Twelve, Hachette Book Group, 2014.,” Comparative Civilizations Review: Vol. 76: No. 76, Article 24.
https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/ccr/vol76/iss76/24
Galjak, M. (2023). Peter Zeihan – The End of the World is Just the Beginning: Mapping the Collapse of Globalization. Demografija, (20), 115-118.
Kahn, M. E. (2015). A Review of The Age of Sustainable Development by Jeffrey Sachs. Journal of Economic Literature, 53(3), 654-666. https://doi.org/10.1257/jel.53.3.654
Sachs, J. D. (n.d.). ICT & SDGs Final Report: How Information and Communications Technology can Accelerate Action on the Sustainable Development Goals in our course.
https://www.oneworld.net/sites/default/files/resources/2016-06/ict-sdg.pdf
Snowdon, B. (2005). A Global Compact to End Poverty: Jeffrey Sachs interviewed by Brian Snowdon. World Economics, 6(4), 11-58.

Notes

[1] Berg, A. (2024). Jeffrey D. Sachs (1954–). A Global Compact to End Poverty: Jeffrey Sachs interviewed by Brian Snowdon. World Economics, 6(4), 11-58.
[3]Kahn, M. E. (2015). A Review of The Age of Sustainable Development by Jeffrey Sachs. Journal of Economic Literature, 53(3), 654-666. https://doi.org/10.1257/jel.53.3.654
[4] Pennings, A.J. (2026, Apr 12) USD Liquidity: A Tiered Hierarchy Model and Implications for AI4Good and ICT4D. apennings.com https://apennings.com/characteristics-of-digital-media/usd-liquidity-a-tiered-liquidity-hierarchy-model-and-implications-for-ai4good-and-ict4d/
[5] Farhat–Holzman, Laina (2017) “Peter Zeihan, The Accidental Superpower: The Next Generation of American Preeminence and the Coming Global Disorder. Twelve, Hachette Book Group, 2014.,” Comparative Civilizations Review: Vol. 76: No. 76, Article 24.
https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/ccr/vol76/iss76/24
[6] Kullik, Jakob. “George Friedman: The Next 100 Years. A Forecast for the 21st Century. Anchor Books/Random House: New York 2010, 253 Seiten” SIRIUS – Zeitschrift für Strategische Analysen, vol. 8, no. 2, 2024, pp. 244-246. https://doi.org/10.1515/sirius-2024-2015
[7] Galjak, M. (2023). Peter Zeihan – The End of the World is Just the Beginning: Mapping the Collapse of Globalization. Demografija, (20), 115-118.[5,7]
[8] This study was commissioned by the Development
Financing 2000 project within the Swedish Ministry for
Foreign Affairs https://eba.se/app/uploads/2021/04/2001.2-Financing-and-Providing-Global-Public-Goods-Expectations-and-Prospects.pdf
Prompt(s)
[9] Sachs, J. D. (2015). ICT & SDGs Final Report: How Information and Communications Technology can Accelerate Action on the Sustainable Development Goals in our course.

© ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

Not to be considered financial advice. AI is often used, and results are thoroughly interrogated. Links are used for some citations.

---

Anthony J. Pennings, PhD is a Professor at the Department of Technology and Society, State University of New York, Korea and a Research Professor for Stony Brook University. He teaches AI and broadband policy. From 2002-2012 he taught digital economics and information systems management at New York University. He also taught in the Digital Media MBA at St. Edwards University in Austin, Texas, where he lives when not in Korea.

Category: artificial intelligence, books and films, creative industries, cryptocurrencies, democratic political economies, enabling frameworks, public administration, science and technology studies, smart new deal, spreadsheet logic, sustainable development, technologies of meaning
Tags: AI4Good > ICT4SD > public goods

Epistemological and Philosophical Implications of Spreadsheet Logic

Posted on | May 25, 2026 | No Comments

Citation APA (7th Edition)

Pennings, A.J. (2026, May 25) Epistemological and Philosophical Implications of Spreadsheet Logic. apennings.com https://apennings.com/digital-geography/epistemological-and-philosophical-implications-of-spreadsheet-logic/

Introduction

Epistemological and Philosophical Implications of Spreadsheet Logic

This post explores the thinking of Alex Edmans and Anthony Giddens and applies them to the implications of digital spreadsheets and what I call “spreadsheet logic,” the layers of SACT (Substitution – Abstraction – Symbolic Computing – Telecommunications Synchronization) SACT (Substitution – Abstraction – Symbolic Computation – Telecommunications Synchronization).

Spreadsheet logic is more than a tool; it is a distinctive epistemological and philosophical regime. By filtering corporate strategy, investment allocation, public policy, and even personal career planning through rows and columns of assumptions, cash-flow forecasts, discount rates, net present value (NPV), internal rate of return (IRR), and sensitivity tables, it imposes a specific way of knowing and valuing the world. This regime privileges calculative rationality, reduces complexity to financial variables, and reconfigures our relationship to time, space, value, and judgment.

Drawing on Alex Edmans’ critique of quantification and Anthony Giddens’ theory of time-space distanciation (and the related concept of time-space power), we can see how spreadsheets do not neutrally represent reality. Spreadsheet logic actively reshapes it, often with profound consequences.

Hard Metrics, Soft Losses, and the Illusion of Precision

At its core, spreadsheet logic enacts an epistemology of quantification. Knowledge is deemed valid only insofar as it can be rendered numerical, projected forward, and discounted back to the present. This creates a systematic bias toward “hard” information—verifiable numbers, contractible targets, and modelable forecasts—while sidelining “soft” information such as contextual judgment, tacit knowledge, organizational culture, or serendipitous innovation.

Alex Edmans argues that most important outcomes cannot be quantified. His analysis of sustainability metrics, ESG ratings, and incentive systems shows that over-reliance on hard data produces an imbalance. Metrics increase total information but distort its balance, leading managers and decision-makers to optimize for what shows up in the spreadsheet rather than what truly creates value. The result is “hitting the target but missing the point”—a form of epistemic distortion in which the unmodeled is treated as nonexistent.[2]

Philosophically, this echoes a deeper reductionism. Spreadsheet epistemology assumes the world is (or can be made) sufficiently stable and predictable for reliable forecasting. Yet complex systems are rife with Knightian uncertainty, not mere risk.[1] Small changes in discount rates, growth assumptions, or correlation matrices can swing NPV from positive to negative. The apparent precision of a formatted table and Monte Carlo simulation masks profound epistemic fragility. Most complex financial models contain errors, and the very act of modeling can create self-fulfilling prophecies through herding. What counts as “knowledge” becomes whatever survives the sensitivity table, crowding out narrative understanding, historical context, or ethical intuition.

Temporality, Ontology, and the Colonization of Value

Spreadsheet logic enacts a distinctive philosophy of time. Discounted cash flow techniques rest on the “time value of money.” This idea is the assumption that a dollar today is worth more than a dollar tomorrow. The issue is not merely technical; it philosophically privileges the present and heavily discounts the distant future. Long-horizon investments (basic research, infrastructure, cultural capital) rarely survive the spreadsheet test unless their near-term cash flows justify them. The future is not an open horizon of possibility but a contingent stream to be colonized and brought back to today’s required rate of return. This phenomenon yields what critics call pathological short-termism. Quarterly capitalism prevails in which the spreadsheet becomes a temporal disciplining device.

Ontologically, spreadsheet logic flattens reality into financial flows. Value is redefined monistically: an asset, project, policy, or career choice exists meaningfully only insofar as it generates positive NPV or meets IRR thresholds. Non-financial dimensions such as social cohesion, environmental resilience, intrinsic purpose, or human flourishing are either ignored or awkwardly proxied into variables that the model can digest. This process is not neutral accounting; it is an ontological commitment that what cannot be cash-flowed is less real.

Ethically and existentially, the regime subordinates judgment to formula. Leaders no longer ask “Is this the right thing?” but “Does this pass the model?” Purpose and intrinsic motivation are crowded out by instrumental compliance. Edmans’ warning applies directly. When everything must be quantified in a spreadsheet for incentives or evaluation, genuine stewardship gives way to box-ticking and greenwashing. Spreadsheet logic thus erodes the space for moral reasoning, replacing it with algorithmic governance.

Giddens and Spreadsheet Logic as Time-Space Distanciation and Time-Space Power

Anthony Giddens’ framework illuminates the structural power at work. In modernity, social relations are increasingly “stretched” across time and space through “time-space distanciation“, the disembedding of interactions from local contexts of co-presence and their reconfiguration across indefinite distances and horizons. Mechanisms such as money, standardized time, expert systems, and information technologies make this possible. Giddens explicitly links both ancient (lists, tables, writing, zero) and advanced information technologies to the achievement of time-space power. This capacity of social systems (and those who control them) draws on the ability to store, coordinate, and exert influence over distant times and places without physical presence.[3]

Spreadsheets are a quintessential disembedding technology. They substitute and abstract local operations—factories, communities, ecosystems—into global cash-flow models that can be manipulated from distant headquarters or investment funds. A private-equity firm in New York can model the future cash flows of a manufacturing plant in Indonesia, apply a discount rate reflecting global capital costs, and decide to restructure or divest—exerting time-space power over workers, suppliers, and environments it never physically encounters. Decisions are lifted out of immediate context and stretched across global space and multi-year time horizons. The spreadsheet becomes the expert system that coordinates absent actors, much as money or clocks did in earlier phases of modernity.

This produces Giddensian consequences, such as heightened reflexivity (constant remodeling of futures), the globalization of capital allocation, and new forms of systemic risk (correlated models amplifying bubbles or crashes). Yet it also creates a paradox Edmans would recognize. While time-space power grants financial elites immense coordination capacity, it systematically erodes the soft, local, and contextual knowledge required for sustainable value creation. The very mechanism that stretches power across time and space blinds it to the qualitative realities that cannot be adequately represented in spreadsheet cells.

Broader Ramifications and the Need for Re-Embedding Judgment

The epistemological and philosophical implications converge in a subtle but powerful ideology. Spreadsheet logic naturalizes a world in which only the modelable matters, the future is discounted, and power flows to those who master the formulas. Personal career choices become exercises in self-financialization (“What is the NPV of this degree?”). Public policy is reduced to cost-benefit spreadsheets that undervalue the unmeasurable. Societies underinvest in the very sources of long-term flourishing—culture, trust, resilience, breakthrough innovation—because they resist clean projection.

Giddens’ analysis suggests that such distanciation is not inevitable; it can be countered by re-embedding mechanisms that restore local context and qualitative judgment. Edmans offers a practical path. He suggests supplementing metrics with assessment, narrative, and principles-based decision-making rather than mechanical quantification. The challenge is not to abandon spreadsheets; they remain powerful for discipline and scale, but to recognize them as a limited lens, not the final arbiter of truth or value.

In the end, spreadsheet logic reveals a deeper tension in late modernity: the extraordinary expansion of time-space power through calculative technologies has come at the cost of epistemic humility and philosophical depth. Reclaiming judgment, purpose, and the unquantifiable is not anti-rigorous; it is the necessary corrective if we wish to build economies and societies that actually grow the pie rather than merely optimizing what fits in the cells.

References

Edmans, A. Grow the Pie: How Great Companies Deliver Both Purpose and Profit. Cambridge University Press, 2020.
Edmans, A. May Contain Lies: How Stories, Statistics, and Studies Exploit Our Biases—And What We Can Do about It. University of California Press, 2024 (or Penguin UK edition, 2024).
Edmans, A. “The Dangers of Sustainability Metrics”. VoxEU, 11 February 2021.
Edmans, A. “No Stakeholder Left Behind: The Dangers of ESG Metrics”. Medium, 21 November 2021.
Giddens, A. The Consequences of Modernity. Polity Press (Cambridge, UK) / Stanford University Press, 1990.
Giddens, A. The Constitution of Society: Outline of the Theory of Structuration. University of California Press / Polity Press, 1984.

Notes

[1] Knightian uncertainty is a concept that establishes a clear theoretical divide between the predictable and the unpredictable. Understanding this difference is critical for analyzing market volatility, entrepreneurial decision-making, and regulatory policies.
[2] Edmans’ works focus on the practical distortions of quantification in business and policy. Edmans, A. Grow the Pie: How Great Companies Deliver Both Purpose and Profit. Cambridge University Press, 2020.
This is the core book developing the argument that most important outcomes cannot be quantified and that purpose-driven companies ultimately deliver superior long-term value. It was coined by economist Frank Knight in 1921, who stressed quantifiable risk by acknowledging the unmeasurable, and the unknown variables where statistical probabilities cannot be assigned.
[3] Giddens provides the broader sociological framework for understanding how calculative technologies like spreadsheets exercise power by disembedding decisions from local contexts and stretching them across time and space. Giddens, A. The Consequences of Modernity. Polity Press (Cambridge, UK) / Stanford University Press, 1990.
This is the primary source for the concepts of time-space distanciation, the “stretching” of social relations across time and space, and the role of expert systems and abstract mechanisms in enabling time-space power in late modernity. Giddens, A. (1983) The Nation-State and Violence. (Berkeley, CA: University of California Press) is also very important for its integration of technologies.

Share

Tweet

© ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

Not to be considered financial advice. AI is often used, and results are thoroughly interrogated. Links are used for some citations.

---

Anthony J. Pennings, PhD is a Professor at the Department of Technology and Society, State University of New York, Korea and a Research Professor for Stony Brook University. He teaches AI and broadband policy. From 2002-2012 he taught digital economics and information systems management at New York University. He also taught in the Digital Media MBA at St. Edwards University in Austin, Texas, where he lives when not in Korea.

Category: artificial intelligence, books and films, cryptocurrencies, data analytics and meaning, democratic political economies, digital geography, enabling frameworks, science and technology studies, smart new deal, spreadsheet logic, sustainable development
Tags: Alex Edmans > Anthony Giddens > SACT (Substitution - Abstraction - Symbolic Computing - Telecommunications Synchronization) > time-space distanciation > time-space power

The Global Spreadsheet Goes Distributed: Blockchain, USD Liquidity, and Time-Space Power

Posted on | May 23, 2026 | No Comments

Citation APA (7th Edition)

Pennings, A.J. (2026, May 23) The Global Spreadsheet Goes Distributed: Blockchain, USD Liquidity, and Time-Space Power. apennings.com https://apennings.com/global-e-commerce/the-global-spreadsheet-goes-distributed-blockchain-usd-liquidity-and-time-space-power/

Introduction

Anthony Giddens‘s concept of time-space distanciation provides a powerful framework for understanding how blockchain extends the telecom synchronization layer of spreadsheet capitalism into a new regime of global coordination and power. Giddens was one of my favorite authors in graduate school because he theorized how technologies like lists, tables, and double-entry bookkeeping are tied to time-space power and its ability to control the trajectory of societies.[1]

In Giddens’s sociology, modernity transforms social relations by lifting interactions out of local contexts and reorganizing them across vast distances through abstract systems such as money, bureaucracy, and telecommunications. Blockchain intensifies this process by creating a globally synchronized computational ledger capable of coordinating value, ownership, contracts, and trust across time and space without requiring continuous physical co-presence or centralized institutional mediation.(Giddens, 1990). In effect, blockchain has the potential to transform the spreadsheet from a centralized institutional artifact into a multinational monetary coordination machine.

The contemporary global monetary system is increasingly organized not merely through states or banks, but through computational infrastructures that synchronize value across global networks. The rise of blockchain technologies, Treasury-backed stablecoins, artificial intelligence, and distributed ledgers marks a profound transformation in the architecture of global finance.

Earlier phases of capitalism coordinated economic activity through industrial production and territorial institutions. Later phases relied on computerized accounting, digital spreadsheets, financial terminals, and telecommunications systems. Today, blockchain extends this logic into a globally distributed synchronization layer that continuously coordinates liquidity, contracts, ownership, and settlement across time and space.

Within my SACT framework (Substitution, Abstraction, Computation, and Telecom synchronization), blockchain represents the next transitional stage of spreadsheet capitalism. It extends the telecom synchronization layer of financial capitalism into a new regime of recursive coordination and programmable monetary governance.

From Spreadsheet Capitalism to Distributed Ledgers

Spreadsheet capitalism emerged through the convergence of digital accounting, financial abstraction, and telecommunications infrastructure. During the late twentieth century, applications such as VisiCalc and Lotus 1-2-3 transformed the personal computer into a decentralized planning engine capable of modeling debt schedules, interest-rate risks, commodity prices, foreign exchange exposure, and portfolio valuation in real time.

At the institutional level, platforms such as Bloomberg L.P. and Reuters integrated spreadsheets, databases, telecommunications, and securities trading into continuously synchronized global systems. Walter Wriston famously described the post-Bretton Woods order as an “information standard,” in which information flows rather than gold reserves increasingly anchor monetary coordination (Wriston, 1992).

But the “information standard” was, more precisely, a spreadsheet-interest-rate standard. Value became recursively computable through networked balance sheets, pricing models, derivatives calculations, and synchronized terminals. Global liquidity emerged through the continuous recalculation of future expectations, especially as interest rates change.

Blockchain extends this architecture by decentralizing the spreadsheet itself. Traditional financial systems depend upon centralized databases, correspondent banks, clearinghouses, and messaging infrastructures such as SWIFT. Blockchain introduces distributed ledger systems in which synchronization occurs across multiple nodes simultaneously through cryptographic consensus mechanisms. The ledger becomes globally persistent, continuously updated, and recursively accessible. This innovation transforms the global spreadsheet into a distributed temporal infrastructure.

Blockchain and Giddens’s Time-Space Distanciation

Blockchain strengthens all four layers of the SACT framework simultaneously. Substitution is the process by which the “messy world” of physical assets, currencies, contracts, and identities is transformed into tokenized digital representations. Abstraction is when economic activity becomes reducible to ledger entries, metadata, programmable rules, and computable relationships.

Computation uses consensus mechanisms, smart contracts, AI optimization systems, and algorithmic governance to automate validation, pricing, settlement, and liquidity coordination. Blockchain enables distributed ledgers to synchronize these computations globally across telecommunications networks, cloud infrastructures, fiber-optic systems, and orbiting satellites, and increasingly with AI-enhanced routing architectures.

The result is the emergence of a globally synchronized computational-financial infrastructure that replaces static, heuristic-based network paths with dynamic, machine learning-driven systems. They continuously predict traffic, balance loads, and optimize Quality of Service (QoS) in real time by embedding localized AI inference or reinforcement learning agents at network edges, core routers, and centralized software-defined networking (SDN) controllers.[2]

Telecom synchronization distributes and reconciles compute globally across nodes and networks. Blockchains allow stablecoins to function as “programmable Eurodollars.” These tokens circulate globally on a telecom substrate that bypasses the friction and “haircuts” of traditional correspondent banking. Adaptive actors use the sub-millisecond latency of the blockchain to fine-tune liquidity access. Because telecom synchronization is near-instant, AI agents can respond to a “sustainability transition” or a “geopolitical shock” in real time, buffering Tier 5 economies before a traditional crisis can occur.

From the Eurodollar System to Treasury-Backed Stablecoins

The twentieth-century USD system operated through a combination of Federal Reserve liquidity, Treasury securities, Eurodollar banking networks, SWIFT messaging, and offshore correspondent banking systems.

The Eurodollar market allowed international banks to create offshore dollar liquidity. They went beyond direct US territorial boundaries while still relying on US Treasury collateral and Federal Reserve backstops, including emergency lending facilities and temporary monetary mechanisms designed to prevent systemic financial crises. These tools allowed banks and financial firms to swap eligible collateral for cash when funding markets experience severe stress.

Treasury-backed stablecoins may represent the next stage of this transformation. These instruments potentially merge blockchain synchronization, offshore dollar liquidity, programmable settlement, AI-managed liquidity coordination, and short-term Treasury collateral.

In effect, stablecoins may transform the Eurodollar system into a continuously synchronized blockchain-based USD network operating globally across digital infrastructures and into digital wallets.
This “retail Eurodollar” could dramatically increase USD liquidity penetration into Tier 4 and Tier 5 economies currently underserved by traditional banking systems.

At the same time, these systems deepen US monetary influence by extending Treasury-backed dollar infrastructure directly into digital payment systems worldwide through smartphones’ digital wallets. Mobile devices connected to blockchain settlement rails would provide access to dollar-denominated liquidity without requiring conventional correspondent banking relationships.

AI, SACT-AI, and Programmable Monetary Coordination

The integration of artificial intelligence into blockchain coordination systems introduces a further transformation. Under a possible SACT-AI framework, AI systems would optimize cross-border liquidity management, reserve balancing, foreign exchange routing,
collateral allocation, trade settlement, and dynamic adjustment mechanisms.

This coordination begins to resemble a technologically updated version of John Maynard Keynes’s proposed Bancor and International Clearing Union (ICU) architecture from Bretton Woods. Keynes envisioned a multinational clearing system that would reduce dependence on a single reserve currency while distributing adjustment burdens more symmetrically across surplus and deficit countries.

Blockchain synchronization and AI coordination potentially supply the computational infrastructure that earlier twentieth-century institutions lacked. In this scenario, blockchains provide synchronized global ledgers, AI systems optimize liquidity flows, stablecoins provide programmable settlement instruments, and multi-currency reserve baskets reduce USD dependence for coordination. The result would be an AI-enhanced multinational clearing architecture operating continuously across distributed networks but based on USD stablecoins.

Time-Space Power and Financial Sovereignty

Giddens emphasized that modernity expands administrative and surveillance capacities alongside abstraction systems. Blockchain does not eliminate institutional power; rather, it redistributes and reconfigures it. Whoever controls protocol standards, reserve assets, settlement architectures, AI coordination systems, validation layers,
as well as liquidity infrastructures exercise immense structural influence over global finance.

The industrial economy depended upon factories synchronized by clocks. Spreadsheet capitalism depended upon terminals synchronized by telecommunications. Blockchain capitalism depends upon distributed ledgers synchronized through cryptographic consensus and increasingly coordinated through AI.

The central political question of the twenty-first century may therefore concern not simply who controls money, but who controls the synchronization infrastructures through which global liquidity itself is computed. This marks the emergence of a new form of time-space power that is globally distributed, computationally recursive, continuously synchronized, and increasingly autonomous.

References

Giddens, A. (1990). The consequences of modernity. Stanford University Press.
Wriston, W. B. (1992). The twilight of sovereignty: How the information revolution is transforming our world. Scribner.
Keynes, J. M. (1980). The collected writings of John Maynard Keynes, Volume 25: Activities 1940–1944: Shaping the post-war world: The Clearing Union. Macmillan.
Simondon, G. (2017). On the mode of existence of technical objects. Univocal Publishing.
Deleuze, G., & Guattari, F. (1987). A thousand plateaus: Capitalism and schizophrenia. University of Minnesota Press.
Cetina, K., & Bruegger, U. (2002). Global microstructures: The virtual societies of financial markets. American Journal of Sociology, 107(4), 905–950.
Castells, M. (2010). The rise of the network society (2nd ed.). Wiley-Blackwell.
Nakamoto, S. (2008). Bitcoin: A peer-to-peer electronic cash system.
Bricklin, D. (2022). VisiCalc and the rise of the spreadsheet. Software History Center.
Lotus 1-2-3 Campbell-Kelly, M. (2003). From airline reservations to Sonic the Hedgehog: A history of the software industry. MIT Press.

Notes

[1] Two of the most influential texts were Giddens, A. (1983) A Contemporary Critique of Historical Materialism. (Berkeley, CA: University of California Press).
Giddens, A. (1983) The Nation-State and Violence. (Berkeley, CA: University of California Press).
[2] Most of my work has been on telecommunication policy and I teach a course about broadband technologies.
Prompt(s) How does blockchain extends the telecom synchronization layer of spreadsheet capitalism across time and space, creating time-space power. Expand the analysis of blockchain power in spreadsheet capitalism by using Anthony Giddens concept of time-space power.

Share

Tweet

© ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

Not to be considered financial advice. AI is often used, and results are thoroughly interrogated. Chat GPT and Gemini are the primary LLMs as they have been trained for the last year. Links are used for some citations. Results are for educational use only.

---

Anthony J. Pennings, PhD is a Professor at the Department of Technology and Society, State University of New York, Korea and a Research Professor for Stony Brook University. He teaches AI and broadband policy. From 2002-2012 he taught digital economics and information systems management at New York University. He also taught in the Digital Media MBA at St. Edwards University in Austin, Texas, where he lives when not in Korea.

Category: artificial intelligence, blockchain, cryptocurrencies, data analytics and meaning, democratic political economies, digital geography, digital media economics, enabling frameworks, financial news, financial technology, global e-commerce, smart new deal, spreadsheet logic, sustainable development, technologies of meaning, technology management, telecom policy and net neutrality
Tags: Anthony Giddens > blockchain

keep looking »