Given that I spent a lot of the 90s obsessed with digital money, it's not surprising that folks who knew me back then have asked for my take on Bitcoin (http://www.bitcoin.org/).
It's been a long time, though, since I've stuck my nose into payment system mechanics, and I have both a very demanding job and a family. So I'm pretty late to the Bitcoin party.
I've hemmed and hawed long enough; here's my $0.02:
(1) From a technical point of view, there's nothing to suggest that the Bitcoin protocol, as such, is flawed.
(2) Bitcoins are, however, vulnerable to the same sort of criminal endpoint attacks as other forms of digital commerce, but these attacks are somewhat more effective on Bitcoins because transactions are effectively irreversible. Of course, that's practically the case as well for sophisticated digital bank fraud, see any of the dozens of cases Brian Krebs has reported on, e.g.: http://krebsonsecurity.com/2011/06/fbi-investigating-cyber-theft-of-139000-from-pittsford-ny/
(3) Bitcoins are also vulnerable to the same sort of governmental endpoint attacks as other forms of digital commerce; I predict at least one Bitcoin dealer will be indicted by the end of the year, along the lines of what happened with eGold exchangers: http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2009/06/e-gold/
(4) Bitcoin is not a scam, as such. I haven't seen any sign that it is, for instance, a pump-and-dump. If it is, the perpetrators are very patient. People are actually using it, albeit largely for activities where they would prefer to remain anonymous. It has the attractive property of not being inflatable. At the same time, it is extremely risky -- something better could come along, people could get sick of dealing with the endpoint risk or government harassment could shut it down. If that happens, someone is going to be left holding the bag. "Very risky" however, is not the same thing as "scam".
(5) Anonymity and irreversibility are not usually good things from a buyer's perspective, which will limit its adoption. In fact, I have not once looked at my Amex bill and thought, "gosh, I wish these transactions were anonymous and irreversible." I once charged an entire totaled rental car to my Amex in Guatemala and never had to pay a cent. While these kinds of properties can be unbundled and contracted for, that ecosystem will take a while to evolve and it is unlikely to be as breathtakingly straightforward as whipping out the good ol' Amex card, which comes seamlessly bundled with a cloud of protections.
(6) The quality of (most) criticism of Bitcoin is so mind-bogglingly awful that it (almost) makes me want to be a booster.
It's been a long time, though, since I've stuck my nose into payment system mechanics, and I have both a very demanding job and a family. So I'm pretty late to the Bitcoin party.
I've hemmed and hawed long enough; here's my $0.02:
(1) From a technical point of view, there's nothing to suggest that the Bitcoin protocol, as such, is flawed.
(2) Bitcoins are, however, vulnerable to the same sort of criminal endpoint attacks as other forms of digital commerce, but these attacks are somewhat more effective on Bitcoins because transactions are effectively irreversible. Of course, that's practically the case as well for sophisticated digital bank fraud, see any of the dozens of cases Brian Krebs has reported on, e.g.: http://krebsonsecurity.com/2011/06/fbi-investigating-cyber-theft-of-139000-from-pittsford-ny/
(3) Bitcoins are also vulnerable to the same sort of governmental endpoint attacks as other forms of digital commerce; I predict at least one Bitcoin dealer will be indicted by the end of the year, along the lines of what happened with eGold exchangers: http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2009/06/e-gold/
(4) Bitcoin is not a scam, as such. I haven't seen any sign that it is, for instance, a pump-and-dump. If it is, the perpetrators are very patient. People are actually using it, albeit largely for activities where they would prefer to remain anonymous. It has the attractive property of not being inflatable. At the same time, it is extremely risky -- something better could come along, people could get sick of dealing with the endpoint risk or government harassment could shut it down. If that happens, someone is going to be left holding the bag. "Very risky" however, is not the same thing as "scam".
(5) Anonymity and irreversibility are not usually good things from a buyer's perspective, which will limit its adoption. In fact, I have not once looked at my Amex bill and thought, "gosh, I wish these transactions were anonymous and irreversible." I once charged an entire totaled rental car to my Amex in Guatemala and never had to pay a cent. While these kinds of properties can be unbundled and contracted for, that ecosystem will take a while to evolve and it is unlikely to be as breathtakingly straightforward as whipping out the good ol' Amex card, which comes seamlessly bundled with a cloud of protections.
(6) The quality of (most) criticism of Bitcoin is so mind-bogglingly awful that it (almost) makes me want to be a booster.
49 comments
View 43 previous comments
- +Douglas Barnes Thank you. I don't see how saying that a system has an advantageous weakness could be ascribing too much power to it. The endpoint risk a dictator has is a good thing - and bitcoin does not undermine that - and that is my point. Reputation is a type of consensus, so this is part of my point also. What do you disagree with?
+Perry Metzger Collective action is how dictators are ousted. Secret police, torture, and all the things that dictators do to maintain power are evidence that the do in fact fear collective action.
For the record, I am not a US citizen nor do I live there.
You can be scared of the 'tyranny of that majority' if you wish. Like the founders of the US government, I fear more the tyranny of a minority, and out of lack of any better option I put my faith in humanity and democracy, recognising the practicality that we must be on our guard, encourage the protection of minorities and human rights and through education and, dare I say it, love, do our best to enlighten that majority.
Bitcoin does not make it easy for 'people like me' to rob you. It does not make it any easier than the prevalent financial systems. It does make it possible for a majority to rob a minority - or rather, it does not prevent that from happening - which is certainly better than guaranteeing the ability of any minority to rob the majority.Jul 25, 2011 - I think there are two important points you're missing Perry.
The ability to defend yourself is the ability to attack someone else. This is true while you have the choice of deciding what you are - and what you are dependent on. This is why both sides of a war can think they are in the right - because they both can believe that it is essential to their survival to win. It would be simple to determine that, aggression being wrong, one side is correct, if this weren't the case. If someone simply builds a wall around themselves, then all you need do is decide that you need those bricks to defend yourself against some other attack, and suddenly your appropriation of those bricks is an act of self defence.
The second point is a real counter to the one I'm trying to make: the majority of hashing power does not necessarily belong to a majority of constituents in the bitcoin system. This point does depend on a certain appreciation of democracy so given your previous arguments I'm not sure you can argue this one cogently. But my counter to it is just hopeful: this is a problem with inequality of wealth and power distribution in society and not a problem with bitcoin, which would work fine in an 'ideal world'. It's true this isn't an ideal world - and so whether the world is 'ready' for bitcoin, or will ever be, is a matter of the amount of faith you're willing to place in humanity. That's up to you of course.Jul 25, 2011 - "I think there are two important points you're missing Perry." -- you think a great many things, I'm sure.Jul 25, 2011
- On a completely different note, an elected member does not replace the need for mining, because an elected member can be corrupted. If the bitcoin system is not broken, then it is mathematics we are trusting instead when we mine.Jul 25, 2011
- Missing a point is something humans do Perry, and helping you avoid it is in the interests of having a thorough argument. I haven't called you a fool, small minded, delusional, insignificant, or any of the other things you have called me. Having a bad day is also something human's do - so I hope you have a better day tomorrow.Jul 26, 2011
- Okay, so this thread has come to the end of its useful life. I'm switching off comments.Jul 26, 2011
Commenting is disabled for this post.