Illegal Content and the Blockchain
March 17, 2021 8:12 AM Subscribe
Apparently anyone can put anything in the Bitcoin blockchain, including illegal material, and it can't be removed without forking the chain and thus diminishing the coin value. This could be the downfall that stops the immense waste of energy maintaining the blockchain. Maybe start by adding in pictures of Winnie the Pooh?
If someone does this, I hope they do so with somehow-illegal photos of sabots.
posted by NotMyselfRightNow at 8:24 AM on March 17, 2021 [44 favorites]
posted by NotMyselfRightNow at 8:24 AM on March 17, 2021 [44 favorites]
Unless the bitcoin blockchain becomes a communication medium I doubt it is going to have any effect.
posted by asra at 8:43 AM on March 17, 2021
posted by asra at 8:43 AM on March 17, 2021
Since Schneier brings it up, it's worth pointing out that the societal and environmental clusterfuck that is cryptocurrency is yet more evidence that Barlow was wrong. Code is not more trustworthy than institutions - in fact, as we see over and over with biases built into algorithms, code is simply another way for institutions to put forth their own beliefs and ideologies. It turns out that trust is intrinsic to having an efficient market - as we've seen over and over with the inefficiency and risk of black markets through history. And yet the tech community seems bound and determined to rediscover all this personally.
posted by NoxAeternum at 8:45 AM on March 17, 2021 [85 favorites]
posted by NoxAeternum at 8:45 AM on March 17, 2021 [85 favorites]
Playing the China angle seems the most effective; I'm somewhat surprised dissident/psyops people haven't been doing that already. I mean, if you want to disseminate Falun Gong material, this is a handy way to do it.
posted by aramaic at 8:45 AM on March 17, 2021 [6 favorites]
posted by aramaic at 8:45 AM on March 17, 2021 [6 favorites]
So you can doodle on a $5 blockchain bill and then it becomes a sacrosanct part of the money supply forever?
posted by clawsoon at 9:01 AM on March 17, 2021 [10 favorites]
posted by clawsoon at 9:01 AM on March 17, 2021 [10 favorites]
I mean, if you want to disseminate Falun Gong material, this is a handy way to do it.
Shen Yun posters are already everywhere in physical space, so why not the blockchain, too?
posted by May Kasahara at 9:09 AM on March 17, 2021 [19 favorites]
Shen Yun posters are already everywhere in physical space, so why not the blockchain, too?
posted by May Kasahara at 9:09 AM on March 17, 2021 [19 favorites]
Transaction permanence and transparency is a design feature.
I kinda think this is just "nothing is ever removed from the internet" but with more math.
posted by butterstick at 9:14 AM on March 17, 2021 [5 favorites]
I kinda think this is just "nothing is ever removed from the internet" but with more math.
posted by butterstick at 9:14 AM on March 17, 2021 [5 favorites]
It's mindboggling to me that this hasn't happened already. Upon googling around it looks like all sorts or crap has been inserted already but nothing bad enough to trigger a big response. Curious to see where this goes.
posted by Wretch729 at 9:32 AM on March 17, 2021 [2 favorites]
posted by Wretch729 at 9:32 AM on March 17, 2021 [2 favorites]
The continuing erosion of faith in institutions is part of why cryptocurrencies do have such appeal: if people thought they had fair access to the financial system, to banking, to digital commerce, bitcoin would have no appeal. If they thought they could fairly resolve contract disputes with giant corporations, smart contracts would have no appeal. If they thought they had fair access to art markets, NFTs would have no appeal.
So obviously crypto-things largely fail at their objectives and instead reproduce existing hierarchies but with orders of magnitude more environmental impact. But at the same time I think there is something admirable about the enthusiasm, about the willingness to experiment and to make things.
And I think the crypto-mania is also fueled by there being a lot of underused tech talent floating around: people who got into tech because they enjoy building things and then got pushed out into an economy where the major use of tech is advertising and equally meaningless endeavors. It would be enormously beneficial if we could find some way to direct this energy at useful problems rather than telling tech people that the only road to progress is to put away their keyboards and vote.
posted by Pyry at 9:35 AM on March 17, 2021 [17 favorites]
So obviously crypto-things largely fail at their objectives and instead reproduce existing hierarchies but with orders of magnitude more environmental impact. But at the same time I think there is something admirable about the enthusiasm, about the willingness to experiment and to make things.
And I think the crypto-mania is also fueled by there being a lot of underused tech talent floating around: people who got into tech because they enjoy building things and then got pushed out into an economy where the major use of tech is advertising and equally meaningless endeavors. It would be enormously beneficial if we could find some way to direct this energy at useful problems rather than telling tech people that the only road to progress is to put away their keyboards and vote.
posted by Pyry at 9:35 AM on March 17, 2021 [17 favorites]
>put away their keyboards and vote
10X better than voting is getting 10 new compatible voters to cast their votes.
posted by Heywood Mogroot III at 9:44 AM on March 17, 2021 [3 favorites]
10X better than voting is getting 10 new compatible voters to cast their votes.
posted by Heywood Mogroot III at 9:44 AM on March 17, 2021 [3 favorites]
I think Bitcoin nodes can/do just prune their local copy of the blockchain and discard the extraneous data, yeah? There's no way to retrieve this data via the network, so no requirement to store it after you validate that part of the blockchain.
In theory you could run a C&C server with embedded blockchain data, but I think scary internet bad guys prefer to use their tried-and-true botnets of zombie Windows machines.
posted by RobotVoodooPower at 9:44 AM on March 17, 2021
In theory you could run a C&C server with embedded blockchain data, but I think scary internet bad guys prefer to use their tried-and-true botnets of zombie Windows machines.
posted by RobotVoodooPower at 9:44 AM on March 17, 2021
I don't pretend to understand this, but the 52-week range in trading bitcoin has swung from 5069 to 61684. That looks like Ponzi on steriods, to me.
posted by dances_with_sneetches at 9:52 AM on March 17, 2021 [2 favorites]
posted by dances_with_sneetches at 9:52 AM on March 17, 2021 [2 favorites]
I hate bitcoin and I'm not especially sympathetic to anarchists or libertarians.
But something is messed up on many levels about the idea of using this to stop bitcoin by: committing a crime (or "crime"), that the antigovernment types will be responsible for, that will then trigger the force of an authoritarian state against activities we don't like.
posted by mark k at 9:53 AM on March 17, 2021 [11 favorites]
But something is messed up on many levels about the idea of using this to stop bitcoin by: committing a crime (or "crime"), that the antigovernment types will be responsible for, that will then trigger the force of an authoritarian state against activities we don't like.
posted by mark k at 9:53 AM on March 17, 2021 [11 favorites]
This issue has been in hot topic in the crypto-sphere since long before most people have heard of the concept of cryptocurrencies. Bruce even links twice to Accenture data sheets from back in 2013 written about this kinda of stuff.
Child porn and classified documents have been in the ledger for almost a decade. I'm not sure Disney has any juice the FBI and DoD do not.
posted by sideshow at 10:08 AM on March 17, 2021 [5 favorites]
Child porn and classified documents have been in the ledger for almost a decade. I'm not sure Disney has any juice the FBI and DoD do not.
posted by sideshow at 10:08 AM on March 17, 2021 [5 favorites]
That looks like Ponzi on steriods, to me.
There is still space at the bottom of the pyramid for suckers to put in hard currency.
posted by They sucked his brains out! at 10:11 AM on March 17, 2021 [7 favorites]
There is still space at the bottom of the pyramid for suckers to put in hard currency.
posted by They sucked his brains out! at 10:11 AM on March 17, 2021 [7 favorites]
So, the idea here is that Chinese authorities will become upset that the thousandth of a percent of bitcoin users who both notice something weird in the blockchain and then decode it may become Falun Gong devotees? There's no way the arrests wouldn't draw more attention than the material itself ever would.
I'd guess that in places where you can legally run a tor exit node, there are solid legal arguments that would tank any such attempt to prosecute users. And in places where you can't, it's too small to matter. (At least until someone makes a user-friendly blockchain bin decoder ap. Your move, NFT.)
But, it's an interesting thought experiment.
posted by eotvos at 10:11 AM on March 17, 2021 [3 favorites]
I'd guess that in places where you can legally run a tor exit node, there are solid legal arguments that would tank any such attempt to prosecute users. And in places where you can't, it's too small to matter. (At least until someone makes a user-friendly blockchain bin decoder ap. Your move, NFT.)
But, it's an interesting thought experiment.
posted by eotvos at 10:11 AM on March 17, 2021 [3 favorites]
if people thought they had fair access to the financial system, to banking, to digital commerce, bitcoin would have no appeal
This may partially be true, but IME however much people who are super-into bitcoin may think these things, they do seem to be largely the people with the most access to the financial system, banking, and digital commerce. As in, most of the people I know aren't white middle-aged or older men who own property, but everyone I know who talks about their crypto investments is.
Frankly I wish they'd just go back to speculating on gold.
posted by aspersioncast at 10:24 AM on March 17, 2021 [32 favorites]
This may partially be true, but IME however much people who are super-into bitcoin may think these things, they do seem to be largely the people with the most access to the financial system, banking, and digital commerce. As in, most of the people I know aren't white middle-aged or older men who own property, but everyone I know who talks about their crypto investments is.
Frankly I wish they'd just go back to speculating on gold.
posted by aspersioncast at 10:24 AM on March 17, 2021 [32 favorites]
Why not just put a few Disney and Scientology properties in there and let the invisible hand sort it out?
posted by cmfletcher at 10:28 AM on March 17, 2021 [6 favorites]
posted by cmfletcher at 10:28 AM on March 17, 2021 [6 favorites]
So, the idea here is that Chinese authorities will become upset that the thousandth of a percent of bitcoin users who both notice something weird in the blockchain and then decode it may become Falun Gong devotees?
[ . . .]
But, it's an interesting thought experiment.
I think you underestimate the willingness of the Chinese authorities to react forcefully.
But it's not actually the idea. Falun Gong was one example. You could also, as Schneier says in the first paragraph, embed bot instructions in it so the bot network gets distributed control instead of having a handful of command nodes that can be easily removed.
I mean, you can embed anything, so if one thing isn't provocative or illegal or actively harmful you can do something else.
Why not just put a few Disney and Scientology properties in there and let the invisible hand sort it out?
State enforcement of copyright or IP is not the "invisible hand," even when the state is supporting private actors.
posted by mark k at 10:30 AM on March 17, 2021
[ . . .]
But, it's an interesting thought experiment.
I think you underestimate the willingness of the Chinese authorities to react forcefully.
But it's not actually the idea. Falun Gong was one example. You could also, as Schneier says in the first paragraph, embed bot instructions in it so the bot network gets distributed control instead of having a handful of command nodes that can be easily removed.
I mean, you can embed anything, so if one thing isn't provocative or illegal or actively harmful you can do something else.
Why not just put a few Disney and Scientology properties in there and let the invisible hand sort it out?
State enforcement of copyright or IP is not the "invisible hand," even when the state is supporting private actors.
posted by mark k at 10:30 AM on March 17, 2021
That looks like Ponzi on steriods, to me.
I thought this for the longest time. I think my belief has changed a bit, simply because other than the people "holding" bitcoin, no one is technically running this ponzi scheme. There's no one driving this boat. Sure, there are people TRYING to, folks who shill hard for bitcoin in the hopes it increases in value have been around for the last decade. To me it seems more like a ponzi bubble. Everyone is buying in at the slight benefit to themselves and the massive benefit to those who already own bitcoin, and other people see the slight benefit for people on the ground and go "heck, why not" and buy in themselves, thus increasing the value further. I honestly have no idea what's going to pop this ponzi bubble, or even if it can be popped.
posted by Philipschall at 10:32 AM on March 17, 2021 [4 favorites]
I thought this for the longest time. I think my belief has changed a bit, simply because other than the people "holding" bitcoin, no one is technically running this ponzi scheme. There's no one driving this boat. Sure, there are people TRYING to, folks who shill hard for bitcoin in the hopes it increases in value have been around for the last decade. To me it seems more like a ponzi bubble. Everyone is buying in at the slight benefit to themselves and the massive benefit to those who already own bitcoin, and other people see the slight benefit for people on the ground and go "heck, why not" and buy in themselves, thus increasing the value further. I honestly have no idea what's going to pop this ponzi bubble, or even if it can be popped.
posted by Philipschall at 10:32 AM on March 17, 2021 [4 favorites]
It would be enormously beneficial if we could find some way to direct this energy at useful problems rather than telling tech people that the only road to progress is to put away their keyboards and vote.
I had the thought yesterday that someone should make an eco-coin whose proof-of-work is carbon capture or emissions reduction or something. Would be good for speculative fiction at least.
posted by little onion at 10:40 AM on March 17, 2021 [14 favorites]
I had the thought yesterday that someone should make an eco-coin whose proof-of-work is carbon capture or emissions reduction or something. Would be good for speculative fiction at least.
posted by little onion at 10:40 AM on March 17, 2021 [14 favorites]
So, wooden nickels?
posted by Riki tiki at 10:46 AM on March 17, 2021 [16 favorites]
posted by Riki tiki at 10:46 AM on March 17, 2021 [16 favorites]
I had the thought yesterday that someone should make an eco-coin whose proof-of-work is carbon capture or emissions reduction or something. Would be good for speculative fiction at least.
ecocoin.com is a thing. It’s been around a few years. I have no reason to believe it’s gained any ground or does anything useful for the planet and I would advise against signing up to it.
posted by edd at 10:57 AM on March 17, 2021 [5 favorites]
ecocoin.com is a thing. It’s been around a few years. I have no reason to believe it’s gained any ground or does anything useful for the planet and I would advise against signing up to it.
posted by edd at 10:57 AM on March 17, 2021 [5 favorites]
There's no one driving this boat
You need to put this into blockchain speak: "the boat is an autonomous enterprise being driven by an autonomous agent based on absolutely logically and fully auditable rules". It's not out of control, it's a whole new kind of control! WHEEEEEEEEE
posted by Lentrohamsanin at 10:57 AM on March 17, 2021 [1 favorite]
You need to put this into blockchain speak: "the boat is an autonomous enterprise being driven by an autonomous agent based on absolutely logically and fully auditable rules". It's not out of control, it's a whole new kind of control! WHEEEEEEEEE
posted by Lentrohamsanin at 10:57 AM on March 17, 2021 [1 favorite]
More context for the Winnie the Pooh thing.
Massive Bitcoin mining is obviously happening in China with the endorsement, if not participation, of the government. They aren't going to care if political satire is snuck into the blockchain, mostly because there's going to be a vanishingly small percentage of miners who are going to actually bother looking at relevant chunks of the blockchain, and at that will only have incentive to do it if they'd already been tipped off that there's anything there to look at.
If China eventually bans participation in Bitcoin, it will be because they're in the process of a national launch of the digital yuan and want to reassert control of money flow within the country.
posted by at by at 10:58 AM on March 17, 2021 [6 favorites]
Massive Bitcoin mining is obviously happening in China with the endorsement, if not participation, of the government. They aren't going to care if political satire is snuck into the blockchain, mostly because there's going to be a vanishingly small percentage of miners who are going to actually bother looking at relevant chunks of the blockchain, and at that will only have incentive to do it if they'd already been tipped off that there's anything there to look at.
If China eventually bans participation in Bitcoin, it will be because they're in the process of a national launch of the digital yuan and want to reassert control of money flow within the country.
posted by at by at 10:58 AM on March 17, 2021 [6 favorites]
Re: Falun Gong/Pooh scenarios, doesn't China already have well more than the 51% mining pool capacity needed to fork the ledger, to make their own cryptokens? They'd probably want to wait a little longer for more non-Chinese suckers to buy in before a managed sell-off, but given the state-level power grid requirements underpinning cryptokens, they could more or less get the computational side of this under government control and do this sort of thing pretty much at their convenience, no?
posted by They sucked his brains out! at 11:01 AM on March 17, 2021 [1 favorite]
posted by They sucked his brains out! at 11:01 AM on March 17, 2021 [1 favorite]
I had the thought yesterday that someone should make an eco-coin whose proof-of-work is carbon capture or emissions reduction or something. Would be good for speculative fiction at least.
This is part of the plot of Kim Stanley Robinson's The Ministry for the Future.
posted by Omon Ra at 11:07 AM on March 17, 2021 [6 favorites]
This is part of the plot of Kim Stanley Robinson's The Ministry for the Future.
posted by Omon Ra at 11:07 AM on March 17, 2021 [6 favorites]
Please note that this has nothing to do with the current NFT fad, as NFTs aren't anything other than a pointer to a specific URL or a pointer to a distributed XML file that points to a URL.
posted by Mr.Encyclopedia at 11:14 AM on March 17, 2021 [2 favorites]
posted by Mr.Encyclopedia at 11:14 AM on March 17, 2021 [2 favorites]
And then there's the fact that Bitcoin is not ideologically neutral, but is biased towards a cluster of ideologies ranging from libertarian to far-right via 8chan griefer shitlord. As such, a non-negligible proportion of Bitcoin advocates would hold the belief that it is a moral imperative to make child pornography, Nazi propaganda, snuff films and worse available, because freedumb. And/or because it triggers the sorts of normie chumps who care about things.
posted by acb at 12:08 PM on March 17, 2021 [3 favorites]
posted by acb at 12:08 PM on March 17, 2021 [3 favorites]
no one is technically running this ponzi scheme. There's no one driving this boat
Maybe no one is driving the boat but it is tethered to the end of the dock.
posted by bdc34 at 12:11 PM on March 17, 2021 [3 favorites]
Maybe no one is driving the boat but it is tethered to the end of the dock.
posted by bdc34 at 12:11 PM on March 17, 2021 [3 favorites]
The continuing erosion of faith in institutions is part of why cryptocurrencies do have such appeal
Given the sort of people who actually engage with cryptocurrency, I doubt that's the appeal. Rather it comes from the idea that they don't want to be ruled. In a way, this is erosion of faith in institutions - it's just that the people involved are the ones doing the eroding.
posted by NoxAeternum at 12:13 PM on March 17, 2021 [3 favorites]
Given the sort of people who actually engage with cryptocurrency, I doubt that's the appeal. Rather it comes from the idea that they don't want to be ruled. In a way, this is erosion of faith in institutions - it's just that the people involved are the ones doing the eroding.
posted by NoxAeternum at 12:13 PM on March 17, 2021 [3 favorites]
The continuing erosion of faith in institutions is part of why cryptocurrencies do have such appeal: if people thought they had fair access to the financial system, to banking, to digital commerce, bitcoin would have no appeal. If they thought they could fairly resolve contract disputes with giant corporations, smart contracts would have no appeal. If they thought they had fair access to art markets, NFTs would have no appeal.
No. The creators and early adopters of Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies/assets are exactly the libertarian assholes who have been working to erode faith in institutions. It's like saying Grover Norquist would happily pay his taxes if he had faith in institutions when the whole point is he and they just don't want institutions because existing institutions obviously hold back their GENIUS while reward the LEECHES. This has nothing at all to do with helping anyone but themselves.
posted by star gentle uterus at 12:14 PM on March 17, 2021 [18 favorites]
No. The creators and early adopters of Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies/assets are exactly the libertarian assholes who have been working to erode faith in institutions. It's like saying Grover Norquist would happily pay his taxes if he had faith in institutions when the whole point is he and they just don't want institutions because existing institutions obviously hold back their GENIUS while reward the LEECHES. This has nothing at all to do with helping anyone but themselves.
posted by star gentle uterus at 12:14 PM on March 17, 2021 [18 favorites]
Interesting to see how you all stereotype people who "engage with cryptocurrency."
posted by WalkerWestridge at 12:27 PM on March 17, 2021 [2 favorites]
posted by WalkerWestridge at 12:27 PM on March 17, 2021 [2 favorites]
I don't think anybody can claim to speak in general for all people who engage with cryptocurrency, fwiw, but I can speak to the people I see visibly talking about and boostering it and that is overwhelmingly obnoxious techie white bros with Fuck You I Got Mine vibes. They're certainly functionally the ambassadors to the whole thing at this point, with Elon Musk one of the current godheads of the crowd.
I was saying the other day that I'm sympathetic to people who are genuinely interested in the NFT art movement as a concept in a vacuum because right now "NFT art" means, well, all this tech bro Ethereum reinventing the toxic art market horseshit. I'm similarly sympathetic to anyone who is interested in just cryptocurrency as an academic possibility divorced of and in rejection of these many years of accelerating wasteful PoW bullshit and Randian cheerleading. But that's the actual thing people are generally experiencing when coming into contact with crypto and its vocal fans.
posted by cortex at 12:39 PM on March 17, 2021 [17 favorites]
I was saying the other day that I'm sympathetic to people who are genuinely interested in the NFT art movement as a concept in a vacuum because right now "NFT art" means, well, all this tech bro Ethereum reinventing the toxic art market horseshit. I'm similarly sympathetic to anyone who is interested in just cryptocurrency as an academic possibility divorced of and in rejection of these many years of accelerating wasteful PoW bullshit and Randian cheerleading. But that's the actual thing people are generally experiencing when coming into contact with crypto and its vocal fans.
posted by cortex at 12:39 PM on March 17, 2021 [17 favorites]
> Code is not more trustworthy than institutions
Code, especially something like Bitcoin that is based on a strict protocol that is locked in place na d unchangeable, is capable of being far, far worse than institutions.
Institutions, as bad as they can be, at least have the potential to change and adapt to future circumstances.
With something like Bitcoin, you'd better hope that those original designers thought through and planned for every possible future eventuality.
Unintended consequences can be just as bad as intended consequences, or even worse.
If you have no way to address the unintended consequences, then you're screwed.
FWIW the real-world energy usage of cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin is a pretty perfect example of this. People who were dreaming of creating cryptocurrencies back in the day surely weren't thinking, "Aha, here is our fiendish plan to cause all sorts of global warming and destroy the Earth!" They were literally thinking "really hard math problem" and Barlow, freedom, break the shackles of corporate/government control, not at all that really hard math problems can be solved via bazillions of megawatts of real-world energy.
posted by flug at 12:54 PM on March 17, 2021 [14 favorites]
Code, especially something like Bitcoin that is based on a strict protocol that is locked in place na d unchangeable, is capable of being far, far worse than institutions.
Institutions, as bad as they can be, at least have the potential to change and adapt to future circumstances.
With something like Bitcoin, you'd better hope that those original designers thought through and planned for every possible future eventuality.
Unintended consequences can be just as bad as intended consequences, or even worse.
If you have no way to address the unintended consequences, then you're screwed.
FWIW the real-world energy usage of cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin is a pretty perfect example of this. People who were dreaming of creating cryptocurrencies back in the day surely weren't thinking, "Aha, here is our fiendish plan to cause all sorts of global warming and destroy the Earth!" They were literally thinking "really hard math problem" and Barlow, freedom, break the shackles of corporate/government control, not at all that really hard math problems can be solved via bazillions of megawatts of real-world energy.
posted by flug at 12:54 PM on March 17, 2021 [14 favorites]
I don't know much about this topic, certainly less than some posting to this thread.. I have a nephew in up to his neck and I hear about it weekly, so I've started to try to pay attention.. last night I could not sleep, so I listened to this Radiolab feature, The Ceremony, and it's interesting.
I don't know what to make of it. Part of me thinks this is as toxic as it gets, like, the biggest dirtiest con going.. But part of me loves my nephew and man I'd hate to think he's into something super shitty. I can tell you, it does not work to lecture a young dude.. I try to listen, let him describe what this is about and how he is involved, and occasionally lose my shit and just rant for 2 minutes. Any suggestions?
posted by elkevelvet at 1:12 PM on March 17, 2021 [3 favorites]
I don't know what to make of it. Part of me thinks this is as toxic as it gets, like, the biggest dirtiest con going.. But part of me loves my nephew and man I'd hate to think he's into something super shitty. I can tell you, it does not work to lecture a young dude.. I try to listen, let him describe what this is about and how he is involved, and occasionally lose my shit and just rant for 2 minutes. Any suggestions?
posted by elkevelvet at 1:12 PM on March 17, 2021 [3 favorites]
Any suggestions?‘It’s a kind of money lots of people have strong opinions about, it’s money with some really notable characteristics, but in the end it’s still just money, and it’s never been good—‘never’ in terms of human philosophy over millennia—to be someone for whom money is the source of personal ethics and worldview.
What else are you doing with your life? Seen good movies lately?’
posted by Fiasco da Gama at 1:30 PM on March 17, 2021 [6 favorites]
the thousandth of a percent of bitcoin users who both notice something weird in the blockchain
No, the idea is that the Chinese government will go ballistic (a large chunk of Bitcoin miners and users are Chinese, because it's been a good way for them to get their money out of China) and do something rash like split the chain, attack large exchanges, etc. etc., thereby crippling the value of Bitcoin globally.
If you think Bitcoin needs to get stepped on, the Chinese have large boots and are historically willing to use them regardless of the consequences, because they can ignore most consequences with relatively little pain. Put Falun Gong and Winnie-the-Pooh stuff in there, publicize it as widely as you can (ideally with some flavor of "hahaha they can't do anything to stop me, silly stooges!"), and wait for them to get sufficiently irritated to "prove" that they're not stooges.
posted by aramaic at 1:56 PM on March 17, 2021 [4 favorites]
No, the idea is that the Chinese government will go ballistic (a large chunk of Bitcoin miners and users are Chinese, because it's been a good way for them to get their money out of China) and do something rash like split the chain, attack large exchanges, etc. etc., thereby crippling the value of Bitcoin globally.
If you think Bitcoin needs to get stepped on, the Chinese have large boots and are historically willing to use them regardless of the consequences, because they can ignore most consequences with relatively little pain. Put Falun Gong and Winnie-the-Pooh stuff in there, publicize it as widely as you can (ideally with some flavor of "hahaha they can't do anything to stop me, silly stooges!"), and wait for them to get sufficiently irritated to "prove" that they're not stooges.
posted by aramaic at 1:56 PM on March 17, 2021 [4 favorites]
I was saying the other day that I'm sympathetic to people who are genuinely interested in the NFT art movement as a concept in a vacuum because right now "NFT art" means, well, all this tech bro Ethereum reinventing the toxic art market horseshit.
So I am such a person interested in NFT's to make money off of the things me and those of my ilk have been putting out for free on social media and what have you.
I've been trying to be very honest about my personal motives for why NFT's have piqued my interest, and it's definitely seeing those in my line of work make insane quantities of cash at the snap of a finger. But, I have been looking at as many sides of this whole thing as possible, while surveying my fellow art buddies for their thoughts and opinions. To me, there are 4 major camps.
1A) the ones who dove in headfirst, with whatever rationale they've told themselves, but in actuality are unabashedly going after the cash. I can't judge; I had the very same impulse. But to them, the environmental issues aren't that big of a deal in the grand scheme of all of life, even if they acknowledge that PoW is unscalable; their hope is in "We'll fix it tomorrow so hop in today while the gettin's good."
1B) those who holds the position of "PoW is terrible, and I cannot morally justify minting anything yet until ETH rolls out PoS because of energy consumption. That, or we just experiment on much more volatile platforms with way less traffic that are already using PoS. But if we're really honest we don't wanna do this because there's no money on those empty and quiet platforms, and if we're honest we're just hoping and waiting for either a mass exodus on moral grounds to another chain/ platform, or for ETH 2.0 to roll out. PLEASE, PLEASE HURRY, ONE OR THE OTHER, BECAUSE THE MONEY MIGHT DRY UP AND WE MAY HAVE MISSED THE BOAT."
2A) those who say, "I think this is all a scam, and artificial scarcity is bullshit, and I just do not believe in crypto, and y'all are willing to compromise everything to make a buck at the expense of our collective future. Y'all disgust me."
2B) those who say "Let's investigate the whole thing before we take any hard stance and make any conclusions."
So IMHO, 1A and 1B are clearly in it for the money. 1A folks are a bit overzealous and pseudo religious in their rationale. They point to ideals such as creators taking back power from agencies and clients, and no longer being under the oppressive thumb of such a soul-sucking system, and that NFT's and crypto have opened up the possibility of finally living out their dreams of being a paid artist who doesn't have to suffer/ starve. But at the end of the day, it all points to opportunism, aka, getting as much ETH as possible while the money is flooding in. I say this because had money never materialized, many (not all!) in 1A wouldn't be making the art they're doing. Whatever they're doing now is very much so to appeal to the crypto riche, and to become known in this space, all so they can make bank while the hype is at fever pitch. 1B secretly hopes they can still cash in and out, and that the hype lasts.
2A finds the oldschool art market icky. And to couple that with artificial scarcity and environmental whatever just makes the whole thing abhorrent to them. They think it's basically taking the current ills of the physical art world and transposing it into the cryptosphere, and that the same type of person will rise.
2B is poking their heads around, doing armchair investigative journalism, and finding that much of the people in the entire cryptoverse seem to not give two shits about art, and are purely in it for money, power, and whatever fantasy reality they hope to create in rebellion to the current nation states and governmental structures. So the whole thing is starting to smell quite fishy. I'm now in this camp, of not believing in crypto as a thing (although I do think those passionate about the tech will eventually find uses for it that will become widely adopted to the point that people like me will not even realize we're using such foundational tech – is what I've gathered in my researching).
I've also talked to two buddies who are not artists but have bought a few NFT's. They asked me my "professional" opinion about what they bought. I think 40% is skillfully made, though somewhat vapid/ superficial (which I absolutely do not hate on – much of my own work is of this variety so I feel cool calling it as such and own it proudly). But the 60% is just utter turd. They're buying because it's hyped, and maybe they can flip it for profit.
All that is to say that the money pouring into NFT's is not at all about art appreciation. It's very much about the crypto riche in this space flexing their wealth and status, and playing into FOMO/ envy culture. And from the artists doing well, there are about maybe 30% I genuinely respect in regards to skill, hustle, and whatever art they put out there. There's some I even said, "I wanna buy that!" But after cooling off, I just right-clicked the GIFs into a personal folder. All that is to say, it's not all trash. BUT. I definitely see artists becoming influencers, immediately and overnight. And it's incredibly disheartening and off-putting. And the art is catered to the crypto crowd, and it wouldn't be the case had money not flooded this scene.
I also think Beeple, Justin Sun, Metakovan, even Jack Dorsey's NFT tweet all happened too closely to one another to be mere coincidence, and it seems like big name crypto players are engineering a lot of this, are acting like a money faucet, so artists and their success stories legitimize crypto to a suspicious public. That's my conspiracy theory take. I think if you join this scene, you're either gonna play into the influencer hype culture, or your genuinely good art will get completely overlooked by a target audience that cannot see what good art is, by and large, and you'll get discouraged that lesser skilled artists with higher profiles will take the lions' share. Maybe not, though! Still quite early! Would be fantastic if it was opposite of all my current conclusions.
posted by room9 at 2:04 PM on March 17, 2021 [11 favorites]
So I am such a person interested in NFT's to make money off of the things me and those of my ilk have been putting out for free on social media and what have you.
I've been trying to be very honest about my personal motives for why NFT's have piqued my interest, and it's definitely seeing those in my line of work make insane quantities of cash at the snap of a finger. But, I have been looking at as many sides of this whole thing as possible, while surveying my fellow art buddies for their thoughts and opinions. To me, there are 4 major camps.
1A) the ones who dove in headfirst, with whatever rationale they've told themselves, but in actuality are unabashedly going after the cash. I can't judge; I had the very same impulse. But to them, the environmental issues aren't that big of a deal in the grand scheme of all of life, even if they acknowledge that PoW is unscalable; their hope is in "We'll fix it tomorrow so hop in today while the gettin's good."
1B) those who holds the position of "PoW is terrible, and I cannot morally justify minting anything yet until ETH rolls out PoS because of energy consumption. That, or we just experiment on much more volatile platforms with way less traffic that are already using PoS. But if we're really honest we don't wanna do this because there's no money on those empty and quiet platforms, and if we're honest we're just hoping and waiting for either a mass exodus on moral grounds to another chain/ platform, or for ETH 2.0 to roll out. PLEASE, PLEASE HURRY, ONE OR THE OTHER, BECAUSE THE MONEY MIGHT DRY UP AND WE MAY HAVE MISSED THE BOAT."
2A) those who say, "I think this is all a scam, and artificial scarcity is bullshit, and I just do not believe in crypto, and y'all are willing to compromise everything to make a buck at the expense of our collective future. Y'all disgust me."
2B) those who say "Let's investigate the whole thing before we take any hard stance and make any conclusions."
So IMHO, 1A and 1B are clearly in it for the money. 1A folks are a bit overzealous and pseudo religious in their rationale. They point to ideals such as creators taking back power from agencies and clients, and no longer being under the oppressive thumb of such a soul-sucking system, and that NFT's and crypto have opened up the possibility of finally living out their dreams of being a paid artist who doesn't have to suffer/ starve. But at the end of the day, it all points to opportunism, aka, getting as much ETH as possible while the money is flooding in. I say this because had money never materialized, many (not all!) in 1A wouldn't be making the art they're doing. Whatever they're doing now is very much so to appeal to the crypto riche, and to become known in this space, all so they can make bank while the hype is at fever pitch. 1B secretly hopes they can still cash in and out, and that the hype lasts.
2A finds the oldschool art market icky. And to couple that with artificial scarcity and environmental whatever just makes the whole thing abhorrent to them. They think it's basically taking the current ills of the physical art world and transposing it into the cryptosphere, and that the same type of person will rise.
2B is poking their heads around, doing armchair investigative journalism, and finding that much of the people in the entire cryptoverse seem to not give two shits about art, and are purely in it for money, power, and whatever fantasy reality they hope to create in rebellion to the current nation states and governmental structures. So the whole thing is starting to smell quite fishy. I'm now in this camp, of not believing in crypto as a thing (although I do think those passionate about the tech will eventually find uses for it that will become widely adopted to the point that people like me will not even realize we're using such foundational tech – is what I've gathered in my researching).
I've also talked to two buddies who are not artists but have bought a few NFT's. They asked me my "professional" opinion about what they bought. I think 40% is skillfully made, though somewhat vapid/ superficial (which I absolutely do not hate on – much of my own work is of this variety so I feel cool calling it as such and own it proudly). But the 60% is just utter turd. They're buying because it's hyped, and maybe they can flip it for profit.
All that is to say that the money pouring into NFT's is not at all about art appreciation. It's very much about the crypto riche in this space flexing their wealth and status, and playing into FOMO/ envy culture. And from the artists doing well, there are about maybe 30% I genuinely respect in regards to skill, hustle, and whatever art they put out there. There's some I even said, "I wanna buy that!" But after cooling off, I just right-clicked the GIFs into a personal folder. All that is to say, it's not all trash. BUT. I definitely see artists becoming influencers, immediately and overnight. And it's incredibly disheartening and off-putting. And the art is catered to the crypto crowd, and it wouldn't be the case had money not flooded this scene.
I also think Beeple, Justin Sun, Metakovan, even Jack Dorsey's NFT tweet all happened too closely to one another to be mere coincidence, and it seems like big name crypto players are engineering a lot of this, are acting like a money faucet, so artists and their success stories legitimize crypto to a suspicious public. That's my conspiracy theory take. I think if you join this scene, you're either gonna play into the influencer hype culture, or your genuinely good art will get completely overlooked by a target audience that cannot see what good art is, by and large, and you'll get discouraged that lesser skilled artists with higher profiles will take the lions' share. Maybe not, though! Still quite early! Would be fantastic if it was opposite of all my current conclusions.
posted by room9 at 2:04 PM on March 17, 2021 [11 favorites]
if BTC didn't have the energy usage of a medium-sized country I'd have a little less problem with it (being a conduit of crime is problematical regardless).
posted by Heywood Mogroot III at 2:11 PM on March 17, 2021 [8 favorites]
posted by Heywood Mogroot III at 2:11 PM on March 17, 2021 [8 favorites]
As an accountant - the distributed ledger blockchain is the part that leaves me unconvinced.
My understanding was that part of the bitcoin generation was that it contained the iteration of every prior transaction to generate its current "value". There is an equivalent physical process and historically that would be the Lloyd's Register - there was the ledger page showing ownership, which would be torn to generate the ownership certificate and if the torn page was returned along with a new transaction - the new transaction would be entered or if it was a transfer of ownership a new ledger page created.
Any current certificate allowed the recreation of the trail of transactions and if the ownership page was lost - it could be recreated from the past transactions.
A similar process occurs in accounting - your ledger shows your balance sheet, and the transactions show how you got there - you can move up and down the chain. If you want to consider it a matrix of points and vectors - you can move FROM any and every point TO any and every point, so no data or point is ever lost, ie. redundancy ensures integrity. But with Bitcoin - you can "lose" Bitcoin if you lose the physical storage device and the vectors only go in one direction - back not forward - so you can't recreate the Bitcoin.
So not very robust.
posted by Barbara Spitzer at 2:15 PM on March 17, 2021 [7 favorites]
My understanding was that part of the bitcoin generation was that it contained the iteration of every prior transaction to generate its current "value". There is an equivalent physical process and historically that would be the Lloyd's Register - there was the ledger page showing ownership, which would be torn to generate the ownership certificate and if the torn page was returned along with a new transaction - the new transaction would be entered or if it was a transfer of ownership a new ledger page created.
Any current certificate allowed the recreation of the trail of transactions and if the ownership page was lost - it could be recreated from the past transactions.
A similar process occurs in accounting - your ledger shows your balance sheet, and the transactions show how you got there - you can move up and down the chain. If you want to consider it a matrix of points and vectors - you can move FROM any and every point TO any and every point, so no data or point is ever lost, ie. redundancy ensures integrity. But with Bitcoin - you can "lose" Bitcoin if you lose the physical storage device and the vectors only go in one direction - back not forward - so you can't recreate the Bitcoin.
So not very robust.
posted by Barbara Spitzer at 2:15 PM on March 17, 2021 [7 favorites]
Anything that throws a spanner in the works of this energy wasting techbro wank fantasy is fine by me.
posted by GallonOfAlan at 2:41 PM on March 17, 2021 [14 favorites]
posted by GallonOfAlan at 2:41 PM on March 17, 2021 [14 favorites]
I could’ve sworn that there were prior discussions about CP already being in the blockchain.
posted by Selena777 at 3:28 PM on March 17, 2021
posted by Selena777 at 3:28 PM on March 17, 2021
Code, especially something like Bitcoin that is based on a strict protocol that is locked in place and unchangeable, is capable of being far, far worse than institutions.
Star Trek did it
posted by achrise at 3:57 PM on March 17, 2021
Star Trek did it
posted by achrise at 3:57 PM on March 17, 2021
Well, having finally a sound money where users of the money set the monetary policy comes with a cost. One cost-bearer here are the corrupt politicians that can't screw us any more by breaking contracts related to fiat money.
The big difference that many seem to be missing is that $ or € are controlled by central banks while BTC is controlled by those who use the money. They can change the rules if 51% of users agree. This is big difference to situation where rules can be changed when head of central bank agrees with head of central bank.
Those concerned with energy consumption should first demand stopping of gold mining, its impact on environment is measured using still bigger units.
Those concerned with energy consumption should first demand moving all payment transaction processing away from banks and companies like visa, amex etc. whose old-dated payment balance-settlement systems consume energy an order of magnitude more than what BTC does. The lightning network where most of "normal" payment processing with bitcoin happens is actually fairly energy-efficient.
posted by costello at 4:24 AM on March 18, 2021 [1 favorite]
The big difference that many seem to be missing is that $ or € are controlled by central banks while BTC is controlled by those who use the money. They can change the rules if 51% of users agree. This is big difference to situation where rules can be changed when head of central bank agrees with head of central bank.
Those concerned with energy consumption should first demand stopping of gold mining, its impact on environment is measured using still bigger units.
Those concerned with energy consumption should first demand moving all payment transaction processing away from banks and companies like visa, amex etc. whose old-dated payment balance-settlement systems consume energy an order of magnitude more than what BTC does. The lightning network where most of "normal" payment processing with bitcoin happens is actually fairly energy-efficient.
posted by costello at 4:24 AM on March 18, 2021 [1 favorite]
I don't think anybody can claim to speak in general for all people who engage with cryptocurrency, fwiw, but I can speak to the people I see visibly talking about and boostering it and that is overwhelmingly obnoxious techie white bros with Fuck You I Got Mine vibes. They're certainly functionally the ambassadors to the whole thing at this point, with Elon Musk one of the current godheads of the crowd.
This. Exactly.
posted by drstrangelove at 5:43 AM on March 18, 2021 [4 favorites]
This. Exactly.
posted by drstrangelove at 5:43 AM on March 18, 2021 [4 favorites]
whose old-dated payment balance-settlement systems consume energy an order of magnitude more than what BTC does
Isn't that because it handles several orders of magnitude more transactions?
posted by drstrangelove at 5:49 AM on March 18, 2021 [4 favorites]
Isn't that because it handles several orders of magnitude more transactions?
posted by drstrangelove at 5:49 AM on March 18, 2021 [4 favorites]
Those concerned with energy consumption should first demand stopping of gold mining, its impact on environment is measured using still bigger units.
Put those fucking goalposts back.
posted by wenestvedt at 6:02 AM on March 18, 2021 [14 favorites]
Put those fucking goalposts back.
posted by wenestvedt at 6:02 AM on March 18, 2021 [14 favorites]
> Isn't that because it handles several orders of magnitude more transactions?
https://www.statista.com/statistics/881541/bitcoin-energy-consumption-transaction-comparison-visa/ tells that visa uses 149 kWh for 100000 transactions. In same picture the left column is about BTC on-chain transactions, not lightning network.
Energy consumption of LN is difficult to measure due to its distributed nature but: in LN network a transaction has a fee. It is common to have 1 satoshi (0.00000001 BTC, currently about $0.0005) and LN node operators operate their nodes for (small) financial gain. If 100 000 satoshis (or $50) is used to purchase electricity, it gives me around 330kWh. This $50 is used to cover all costs like hardware, data transmission, manual labour etc. Some amount goes to electricity but I have no breakdown chart. So I'd say we're not talking about "order of magnitude" better energy efficiency. If talking about electricity consumption only there maybe is not very much difference, at least not ten-fold difference or something.
For fair comparison it needs to be noted that in order to have LN and BTC running we need to have functional crypto algorithm and energy for running that.
In order to have USD running, we need to have one military-industrial complex pointing guns at fraudsters and heads of states offering competeting fiat currencies. That is pretty expensive thing to have.
And visa has significantly higher transaction fee. Like one cent for each dollar purchased. For sure a significant fraction of this cent goes into activities causing more energy consumption, like buying gasoline into cars of visa shareholders.
posted by costello at 6:47 AM on March 18, 2021 [2 favorites]
https://www.statista.com/statistics/881541/bitcoin-energy-consumption-transaction-comparison-visa/ tells that visa uses 149 kWh for 100000 transactions. In same picture the left column is about BTC on-chain transactions, not lightning network.
Energy consumption of LN is difficult to measure due to its distributed nature but: in LN network a transaction has a fee. It is common to have 1 satoshi (0.00000001 BTC, currently about $0.0005) and LN node operators operate their nodes for (small) financial gain. If 100 000 satoshis (or $50) is used to purchase electricity, it gives me around 330kWh. This $50 is used to cover all costs like hardware, data transmission, manual labour etc. Some amount goes to electricity but I have no breakdown chart. So I'd say we're not talking about "order of magnitude" better energy efficiency. If talking about electricity consumption only there maybe is not very much difference, at least not ten-fold difference or something.
For fair comparison it needs to be noted that in order to have LN and BTC running we need to have functional crypto algorithm and energy for running that.
In order to have USD running, we need to have one military-industrial complex pointing guns at fraudsters and heads of states offering competeting fiat currencies. That is pretty expensive thing to have.
And visa has significantly higher transaction fee. Like one cent for each dollar purchased. For sure a significant fraction of this cent goes into activities causing more energy consumption, like buying gasoline into cars of visa shareholders.
posted by costello at 6:47 AM on March 18, 2021 [2 favorites]
Actually comparing the transaction fee might be useful. Currently transaction fee of Visa is ~20 times higher than what lightning network has. Having no breakdown chart of usage of this money, I'd say that some % of that goes into energy-related expenses.
Almost anything humans do involves energy. One cent given as salary to visa employee buying potatoes actually goes into buying gasoline to tractor of potato farmer and powering up the fertilizer plant distilling nitrogen-fertilizer out of thin air. Having cool office with air conditioning means burning more coal.
If energy-related costs of visa transaction processing, including all related expenses is anything more than 5% of total amount collected, then we would burn less coal by scrapping transaction processing systems of credit card companies and taking LN as a replacement. I think visa is actually one of the cheapest transaction processors, other burn even more coal and oil, scrapping my atmosphere.
posted by costello at 7:33 AM on March 18, 2021 [1 favorite]
Almost anything humans do involves energy. One cent given as salary to visa employee buying potatoes actually goes into buying gasoline to tractor of potato farmer and powering up the fertilizer plant distilling nitrogen-fertilizer out of thin air. Having cool office with air conditioning means burning more coal.
If energy-related costs of visa transaction processing, including all related expenses is anything more than 5% of total amount collected, then we would burn less coal by scrapping transaction processing systems of credit card companies and taking LN as a replacement. I think visa is actually one of the cheapest transaction processors, other burn even more coal and oil, scrapping my atmosphere.
posted by costello at 7:33 AM on March 18, 2021 [1 favorite]
costello: the argument against Bitcoin (which is an entire derail of the attack vector that Schneier is dicussing) is about the extra energy used by the CLIENT computers burning extra energy running extra GPUs rather than the TRANSACTION system. If you are not using a straw man argument, or arguing from bad faith, can you please explain your stance better?
Literally 1/3 of your 9 total comments since you joined 6 years ago are in this thread. I would be surprised if I am the only one who is hesitant to trust your words without more info.
posted by a non mouse, a cow herd at 9:55 AM on March 18, 2021 [5 favorites]
Literally 1/3 of your 9 total comments since you joined 6 years ago are in this thread. I would be surprised if I am the only one who is hesitant to trust your words without more info.
posted by a non mouse, a cow herd at 9:55 AM on March 18, 2021 [5 favorites]
the corrupt politicians that can't screw us any more by breaking contracts related to fiat money
Why not? Contracts are made and enforced in the real world, where the state has reach and can do things like invalidate or criminalize certain types of contracts, and/or the goods and services related to them.
posted by mark k at 10:16 AM on March 18, 2021 [1 favorite]
Why not? Contracts are made and enforced in the real world, where the state has reach and can do things like invalidate or criminalize certain types of contracts, and/or the goods and services related to them.
posted by mark k at 10:16 AM on March 18, 2021 [1 favorite]
The big difference that many seem to be missing is that $ or € are controlled by central banks while BTC is controlled by those who use the money. They can change the rules if 51% of users agree.
Bitcoin is not a currency, but calling this commodity decentralized isn't really a true statement, either. Somewhere around 65% of the Bitcoin computing work is performed currently in China, a surveillance state that has controlled Bitcoin transactions in the past. Even leaving aside energy consumption issues, the computational work of trading of more than 51% of this commodity is guided by decisions made by an authoritarian nation-state.
posted by They sucked his brains out! at 10:23 AM on March 18, 2021 [2 favorites]
Bitcoin is not a currency, but calling this commodity decentralized isn't really a true statement, either. Somewhere around 65% of the Bitcoin computing work is performed currently in China, a surveillance state that has controlled Bitcoin transactions in the past. Even leaving aside energy consumption issues, the computational work of trading of more than 51% of this commodity is guided by decisions made by an authoritarian nation-state.
posted by They sucked his brains out! at 10:23 AM on March 18, 2021 [2 favorites]
Almost anything humans do involves energy. One cent given as salary to visa employee buying potatoes actually goes into buying gasoline to tractor of potato farmer and powering up the fertilizer plant distilling nitrogen-fertilizer out of thin air. Having cool office with air conditioning means burning more coal.
If the visa employee loses their job because crypto takes over they must get another source of income (most likely through a job) and... they still end up buying potatoes. I don't see how a net change in fossil fuel emissions occurs by switching to crypto coins.
In order to have USD running, we need to have one military-industrial complex
You're saying by replacing USD with crypto the global military-industrial complex will substantially shrink? I am very skeptical of this and I think the arguments you provided were weak. Here's an argument (also pretty weak) for why crypto would increase the size of the military-industrial complex: Those with power and who have the resources and want to keep them or expand them will just ignore what is or isn't in the blockchain to get resources since they can't get what they want with soft power any more. Why is this outcome less likely than the one you insist will occur?
posted by Green With You at 11:20 AM on March 18, 2021 [1 favorite]
If the visa employee loses their job because crypto takes over they must get another source of income (most likely through a job) and... they still end up buying potatoes. I don't see how a net change in fossil fuel emissions occurs by switching to crypto coins.
In order to have USD running, we need to have one military-industrial complex
You're saying by replacing USD with crypto the global military-industrial complex will substantially shrink? I am very skeptical of this and I think the arguments you provided were weak. Here's an argument (also pretty weak) for why crypto would increase the size of the military-industrial complex: Those with power and who have the resources and want to keep them or expand them will just ignore what is or isn't in the blockchain to get resources since they can't get what they want with soft power any more. Why is this outcome less likely than the one you insist will occur?
posted by Green With You at 11:20 AM on March 18, 2021 [1 favorite]
Somewhere around 65% of the Bitcoin computing work is performed currently in China...
And honestly who knows how much they're doing on the down-low? They could easily be manipulating things from accounts held around the world in an effort to control this market. Go upthread and read the link At By posted about the Bank of China and its coming digital yuan and then tell me not to worry about a Chinese fork in the neck.
posted by Cris E at 11:21 AM on March 18, 2021 [1 favorite]
And honestly who knows how much they're doing on the down-low? They could easily be manipulating things from accounts held around the world in an effort to control this market. Go upthread and read the link At By posted about the Bank of China and its coming digital yuan and then tell me not to worry about a Chinese fork in the neck.
posted by Cris E at 11:21 AM on March 18, 2021 [1 favorite]
first demand stopping of gold mining
Gold has actual value, however (used heavily in electronics, etc). It's not primarily used as currency (here's one breakdown I found).
Bitcoin has no value except as a currency, and it is far more energy intensive than normal "fiat" currency [most of which has no real physical representation either].
posted by thefoxgod at 3:31 PM on March 18, 2021 [3 favorites]
Gold has actual value, however (used heavily in electronics, etc). It's not primarily used as currency (here's one breakdown I found).
Bitcoin has no value except as a currency, and it is far more energy intensive than normal "fiat" currency [most of which has no real physical representation either].
posted by thefoxgod at 3:31 PM on March 18, 2021 [3 favorites]
posted by a non mouse, a cow herd: Yes, long time lurker here. Reading more than posting, now posting because I'm irked by blackmailing articles that somehow magically flood the media every time BTC price goes up. This is no co-incidence, it happens every time after price hike. Articles are usually distributed via reuters.com but there are numerous sources, all with basically same content, same given talking points.
Posting about bitcoin and LN I'm reasoning like this: bitcoin consumes energy, enormous amount of that. The energy used gives us something, it is not wasted so what is the value? I was comparing energy usage in most common action "payment transaction" because that is what folks normally do with money. It is wrong to compare Lightning Network energy usage to Visa-company transaction processing system energy usage without considering also the BTC Blockchain energy usage. Blockchain anyway is a mandatory enabler of LN. Lets have that corrected. Anyway, reasoning is that if person performs payment using LN she does not need to repeat the same payment again using visa/amex/bus ride carrying $$ so the energy spent into LN transaction can leave un-done an action that otherwise would have been performed. Energy might have been saved. When saying that "This wastes energy" it needs some kind of explanation about negative outcomes. Energy used is negative outcome yes, but otherwise paper money and BTC are fundamentally different and difficult to compare, like:
- In payment processing total energy usage decreased because same payments were not processed in less energy-efficient processing systems. Everybody except fossil fuel producers are happy with this.
- BTC has functional micropayments ; like artist could charge fraction of cent for looking at his artwork for 30 seconds or news agency could ask for fraction of cent to gain access to single news item without yearly subscription.
- In BTC-world the rich actually need to start paying their taxes. Like, if we need covid stimulus check in time of BTC, the money actually needs to come from someones pocket, it can't be "created" by printing more paper and diluting value of previosly issued paper.
- BTC Requires no underground bunkers with armed guards to protect physical money from thieves. It is difficult to steal and counterfeit.
- BTC is truly geography-agnostic, citizens of each and every country can and will participate and once happened it allows you to pay for goods and services to recipients also in other side of the globe, just like that. BTC enables governments to stop doing tricks like what president Bush did when Saddam Hussein threatened to start price-tagging his oil in euros instead of dollars: in order to protect $ status as world reserve currency he decided it is ok to have Saddam killed alongside some 4000 american troops, 30000 iraqis, destroyed cities, polluted iraqi soil with depleted uranium and displaced millions as unhappy refugees into neighboring countries. I'm not event trying to estimate how much CO2 it produces to sail warships in mediterranean shooting missiles and fly figher jets in iraqi airspace. This kind of stunts because of wrong currency selection simply need to stop. This is not only environmental issue, ask any orphan child.
These are all changes, there is more changes, for some changes for the better, for some the changes are for worse. Each needs consider the price paid and changes en environment achieved as BTC usage becomes mainstream.
I don't usually disclose too much personal information in any online thing, metafilter is no exception. I'm a 40something software engineer with 2 kids living in europe, earning my living designing systems that are used to shuffle money (the fiat for the time being) around. Software engineering produces tools, such tools that have been previously impossible and they will change the world around us just like invention of wheel or axe did. Our ways of communicating or organizing ourselves into work has already changed quite much, our methods of measuring value and doing payments will change also and this is such an important issue that decisions regarding that need to be done at grassroot-level and BTC is exactly grassroot-level thing, it is a computer program. No wonder Yellen is angry as her throne will soon became useless.
posted by costello at 4:36 AM on March 19, 2021 [1 favorite]
BTC does none of what you claim. So we all switch to another currency, and wars end and the rich finally start paying their share fair? No one steals the actual machines that mine the BTC. No one is blackmailed for their passwords. It seems like a nice fiction but will never actually happen.
posted by 922257033c4a0f3cecdbd819a46d626999d1af4a at 6:14 AM on March 19, 2021 [6 favorites]
posted by 922257033c4a0f3cecdbd819a46d626999d1af4a at 6:14 AM on March 19, 2021 [6 favorites]
922257033c4a0f3cecdbd819a46d626999d1af4a said it succinctly enough, that I really don't feel like commenting on your (costello) last comment point by point.
I will comment on this, though:
To claim that Schneier is writing a "blackmail article" is wildly off the mark enough that (software engineer or not), it's hard to take you seriously. Not only that, Schneier is discussing how a feature can also be a flaw, in a neutral manner.
Please show the part you consider blackmail.
posted by a non mouse, a cow herd at 7:52 AM on March 19, 2021 [9 favorites]
I will comment on this, though:
I'm irked by blackmailing articles that somehow magically flood the media every time BTC price goes up. This is no co-incidenceBruce Schneier is one of the most respected people in the Information Security world. He has literally written encryption algorithms that you have may well have used at some point.
To claim that Schneier is writing a "blackmail article" is wildly off the mark enough that (software engineer or not), it's hard to take you seriously. Not only that, Schneier is discussing how a feature can also be a flaw, in a neutral manner.
Please show the part you consider blackmail.
posted by a non mouse, a cow herd at 7:52 AM on March 19, 2021 [9 favorites]
- BTC has functional micropayments. . .This sounds great. Is there a working implementation?
posted by eotvos at 8:17 AM on March 19, 2021 [3 favorites]
a non mouse, a cow herd : re micropayments
LN makes no difference between micropayment and payment, at least current common payment transaction pricing model has flat fee of couple of satoshis (smallest possible bitcoin unit, 0.00000001 bitcoin, currently about $0.00058 or 0.05 cent) so asking for 10 satoshis (0.5 cent) or 1 bitcoin (around $58000 today) has the same transaction fee, 1-2 satoshis or 0.05-0.10 cent. Such a low transaction fee makes micropayments possible, or at least more economically viable. Currently many transactions in LN network are sub-cent transactions but there is no upper limit.
When asking "where are micropayments" I must first ask what you're going to do. For different use-cases there are different implementations, like
- If just willing to receive payments of any size but by manual invoicing then just install a LN wallet and start sending invoices. One example is explained in https://medium.com/meetbitfury/lightning-network-use-cases-micropayments-518371948183 and it is fairly easy also for non-technical users.
- If willing to pay for stuff you need to install a LN wallet and have some BTC deposited there. BTC is bought from currency exchange, select one that allows you to send your funds to LN wallet instead of regular BTC wallet. And beware, there are a lot of scammers. This is currently one big drawback of all cryptocurrencies, there is a lot of scammers and fraudsters. Many users have had their funds stolen or scammed away and this is simply bad publicity for the whole cryptocurrency clusterfuck. Just by looking at the sales brochure it is difficult to distinguish between BTC dealer who is going to deliver your BTC from BTC dealer who is going to take your USD and never be heard again. In americas folks use https://www.coinbase.com/ but are unhappy with customer service, in europe https://www.kraken.com/ and https://www.coinmotion.com/ are legit players, at least they won't steal your money on purpose, don't know about customer service.
- If designing a website or mobile app and willing to receive LN payments, you need some glue, https://github.com/ElementsProject/lightning-charge is one example that gives you a REST API for handling the payments. You need to run your own ln-daemon or make a deal with someone already running a daemon ; many are willing because they can extract small % of your payments. One live example is https://www.reddit.com/r/lntipbot/wiki/index where reddit users may send money to each others (in some subreddits only) using reddit comments as the user interface.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lightning_Network has some explanation and links to different implementations.
posted by costello at 4:10 PM on March 19, 2021 [1 favorite]
LN makes no difference between micropayment and payment, at least current common payment transaction pricing model has flat fee of couple of satoshis (smallest possible bitcoin unit, 0.00000001 bitcoin, currently about $0.00058 or 0.05 cent) so asking for 10 satoshis (0.5 cent) or 1 bitcoin (around $58000 today) has the same transaction fee, 1-2 satoshis or 0.05-0.10 cent. Such a low transaction fee makes micropayments possible, or at least more economically viable. Currently many transactions in LN network are sub-cent transactions but there is no upper limit.
When asking "where are micropayments" I must first ask what you're going to do. For different use-cases there are different implementations, like
- If just willing to receive payments of any size but by manual invoicing then just install a LN wallet and start sending invoices. One example is explained in https://medium.com/meetbitfury/lightning-network-use-cases-micropayments-518371948183 and it is fairly easy also for non-technical users.
- If willing to pay for stuff you need to install a LN wallet and have some BTC deposited there. BTC is bought from currency exchange, select one that allows you to send your funds to LN wallet instead of regular BTC wallet. And beware, there are a lot of scammers. This is currently one big drawback of all cryptocurrencies, there is a lot of scammers and fraudsters. Many users have had their funds stolen or scammed away and this is simply bad publicity for the whole cryptocurrency clusterfuck. Just by looking at the sales brochure it is difficult to distinguish between BTC dealer who is going to deliver your BTC from BTC dealer who is going to take your USD and never be heard again. In americas folks use https://www.coinbase.com/ but are unhappy with customer service, in europe https://www.kraken.com/ and https://www.coinmotion.com/ are legit players, at least they won't steal your money on purpose, don't know about customer service.
- If designing a website or mobile app and willing to receive LN payments, you need some glue, https://github.com/ElementsProject/lightning-charge is one example that gives you a REST API for handling the payments. You need to run your own ln-daemon or make a deal with someone already running a daemon ; many are willing because they can extract small % of your payments. One live example is https://www.reddit.com/r/lntipbot/wiki/index where reddit users may send money to each others (in some subreddits only) using reddit comments as the user interface.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lightning_Network has some explanation and links to different implementations.
posted by costello at 4:10 PM on March 19, 2021 [1 favorite]
922257033c4a0f3cecdbd819a46d626999d1af4a: re bruce
Yes, the article written by Schneier is neutral in sense if BTC is good or bad for someone. Bruce Schneier does deserve his reputation, I have "Applied Cryptography" in my bookshelf, highly recommended.
The article posted to metafilter in turn is not neutral in sense whether BTC is good or bad for someone. Words like "This could be the downfall that stops the immense waste of energy maintaining the blockchain. " indicate that bitcoin should somehow be stopped, maybe because it is slightly bad for someone.
With the enormous energy "wasted" BTC buys our society several really really nice things that previously have been impossible. I don't disagree very much with Bruce (we need better crypto algorithms for instance) but I strongly disagree how article from Bruce is used to deliver quite different conclusions or different favourable states of the world to be in.
posted by costello at 4:48 PM on March 19, 2021 [1 favorite]
Yes, the article written by Schneier is neutral in sense if BTC is good or bad for someone. Bruce Schneier does deserve his reputation, I have "Applied Cryptography" in my bookshelf, highly recommended.
The article posted to metafilter in turn is not neutral in sense whether BTC is good or bad for someone. Words like "This could be the downfall that stops the immense waste of energy maintaining the blockchain. " indicate that bitcoin should somehow be stopped, maybe because it is slightly bad for someone.
With the enormous energy "wasted" BTC buys our society several really really nice things that previously have been impossible. I don't disagree very much with Bruce (we need better crypto algorithms for instance) but I strongly disagree how article from Bruce is used to deliver quite different conclusions or different favourable states of the world to be in.
posted by costello at 4:48 PM on March 19, 2021 [1 favorite]
I have "Applied Cryptography" in my bookshelf, highly recommended.
Seconded.
posted by mikelieman at 6:16 PM on March 19, 2021
Seconded.
posted by mikelieman at 6:16 PM on March 19, 2021
With the enormous energy "wasted" BTC buys our society several really really nice things
there is a lot of scammers and fraudsters. Many users have had their funds stolen or scammed away and this is simply bad publicity for the whole cryptocurrency clusterfuck
Compelling, coming from someone with a vested interest in getting people to sign on (or at least look the other way against prosecuting) your pyramid scheme. You've provided a whole lot of "what about these other things which wouldn't be stopped or reduced under the glorious cryptocurrency theocracy", and not a whole lot of "this is something legitimate and legitimately useful and accessible right now".
You're compromised. Why should we trust someone with a financial interest in clouding the air?
posted by CrystalDave at 6:46 PM on March 19, 2021 [6 favorites]
there is a lot of scammers and fraudsters. Many users have had their funds stolen or scammed away and this is simply bad publicity for the whole cryptocurrency clusterfuck
Compelling, coming from someone with a vested interest in getting people to sign on (or at least look the other way against prosecuting) your pyramid scheme. You've provided a whole lot of "what about these other things which wouldn't be stopped or reduced under the glorious cryptocurrency theocracy", and not a whole lot of "this is something legitimate and legitimately useful and accessible right now".
You're compromised. Why should we trust someone with a financial interest in clouding the air?
posted by CrystalDave at 6:46 PM on March 19, 2021 [6 favorites]
bitcoin should somehow be stopped, maybe because it is slightly bad for someone
It is a technology that is bad for everyone. Melting ice caps, out-of-control forest fires, and diminishing food security are bad for everyone. These facts really shouldn't be controversial or even in dispute in 2021, or to anyone with children, for goodness sake.
posted by They sucked his brains out! at 7:26 PM on March 19, 2021 [3 favorites]
It is a technology that is bad for everyone. Melting ice caps, out-of-control forest fires, and diminishing food security are bad for everyone. These facts really shouldn't be controversial or even in dispute in 2021, or to anyone with children, for goodness sake.
posted by They sucked his brains out! at 7:26 PM on March 19, 2021 [3 favorites]
costello: I didn't bring up micropayments at all. I think you are thinking of eotvos who had a comment just below mine?
But, since you bring it up, it sounds like you're argument for the benefits of micropayments is low transaction fees for cryptocurrency. That doesn't seem like something inherent to cryptocurrency and realistically a Visa/Mastercard/Amex could drop their processing fees to match (or a "disruptor" could enter the credit card arena)
Upthread, you say:
A quick google brings us this article:
Oh. Now I see the "blackmail" you are discussing. It's in the article summary posted here, on MetaFilter. On a weblog that with very few restrictions anyone can post to and has never claimed any sort of journalistic integrity or neutrality. (Indeed, if you can go a day reading here without seeing "both sides" used in a derogatory manner, I will buy you a drink.)
I either breezed right through the summary or skipped it entirely having already read the article and was hoping someone would post the story here (Huge thanks, hypnogogue!) before I did, because I largely refrain from commenting on the few FPP I have made here.
So, three questions:
1. Why do you think this post is blackmail?
2. How do you blackmail a currency?
3. For discussion's sake, assume we all agree Lightning Network is more energy efficient than typical credit card processing systems. Why do you think creating Bitcoin is more efficient than "creating" fiat money, especially considering the same person will still have to get on the bus to buy the potato which will have the potato farmer have to buy gas for their tractor, etc. regardless of payment method?
I am genuinely curious to hear your replies. I think I will probably still disagree, but maybe not and if not, I will have learned something, which is cool.
posted by a non mouse, a cow herd at 7:33 AM on March 20, 2021 [5 favorites]
But, since you bring it up, it sounds like you're argument for the benefits of micropayments is low transaction fees for cryptocurrency. That doesn't seem like something inherent to cryptocurrency and realistically a Visa/Mastercard/Amex could drop their processing fees to match (or a "disruptor" could enter the credit card arena)
Upthread, you say:
BTC Requires no underground bunkers with armed guards to protect physical money from thieves. It is difficult to steal and counterfeit.And, now, you say:
This is currently one big drawback of all cryptocurrencies, there is a lot of scammers and fraudsters. Many users have had their funds stolen or scammed awaySo, it's difficult to steal only when it isn't? (And, really, underground bunkers? The gold standard for US/UK was done away with ~90 years ago! Fort Knox could disappear tomorrow and would not cause a hiccup in our economy.)
A quick google brings us this article:
The Bitcoin algorithm demands increasing amounts of computational power to validate transactions. If it were a country, its annualized estimated carbon footprint would be comparable to New Zealand at about 37 million tons of carbon dioxide. One Bitcoin transaction would generate the CO2 equivalent to 706,765 swipes of a Visa credit cardThrow in all the saved bus rides or whatever else you want. It's really hard to believe that somehow Bitcoin (or any comparable cryptocurrency) is a net-negative for energy usage.
Oh. Now I see the "blackmail" you are discussing. It's in the article summary posted here, on MetaFilter. On a weblog that with very few restrictions anyone can post to and has never claimed any sort of journalistic integrity or neutrality. (Indeed, if you can go a day reading here without seeing "both sides" used in a derogatory manner, I will buy you a drink.)
I either breezed right through the summary or skipped it entirely having already read the article and was hoping someone would post the story here (Huge thanks, hypnogogue!) before I did, because I largely refrain from commenting on the few FPP I have made here.
So, three questions:
1. Why do you think this post is blackmail?
2. How do you blackmail a currency?
3. For discussion's sake, assume we all agree Lightning Network is more energy efficient than typical credit card processing systems. Why do you think creating Bitcoin is more efficient than "creating" fiat money, especially considering the same person will still have to get on the bus to buy the potato which will have the potato farmer have to buy gas for their tractor, etc. regardless of payment method?
I am genuinely curious to hear your replies. I think I will probably still disagree, but maybe not and if not, I will have learned something, which is cool.
posted by a non mouse, a cow herd at 7:33 AM on March 20, 2021 [5 favorites]
thanks for your posts here costello, they're very refreshing compared to some of the claims in this thread.
bitcoin is a technology and like any rapidly proliferating technology it can't be opposed with ideology; it should probably be harnessed. i see a lot of parallels between the discussions around crypto and nuclear power, which is ironic because if we had widely available nuclear power then the ecological accusations against crypto wouldn't mean a thing.
right now i see people on one side who say, with an apparently straight face, that by using bitcoin you probably support child pornography, and on the other side i see people who don't care about the opinions of the former camp and are rapidly turning this into the future of the global monetary system. if anyone wants a hand in that future, and in making that future an equitable one, it's time to start getting involved. bitcoin, and crypto at large, has a lot of terrifying implementation potential (imagine, for a second, "welfarecoin," which can only be spent at participating grocery stores and NOT on cigarettes or liquor, for example) and i guarantee you that calling it a pyramid scheme isn't going to stop it from existing.
crypto's environmental concerns are also wildly overblown. i work in ecological restoration and i can think of 5 or 6 things i'd wish people would stop doing before using electricity. i hope no one in this thread took more than a couple flights in their lifetime before covid. and going to bat for gold mining? gold mining???? GOLD MINING????????
there are tons of valuable, meaningful, and important criticisms of cryptocurrency. accusing it of being a "techbro wank fantasy" is not one of them. at one time telephones were a techbro wank fantasy. paper money; techbro wank fantasy. electricity; techbro wank fantasy. it's here to stay and i hope that equity-minded people start to get their heads around its implementations and uses, and strengths and weaknesses, before the other side does.
posted by Cpt. The Mango at 10:18 PM on March 21, 2021 [1 favorite]
bitcoin is a technology and like any rapidly proliferating technology it can't be opposed with ideology; it should probably be harnessed. i see a lot of parallels between the discussions around crypto and nuclear power, which is ironic because if we had widely available nuclear power then the ecological accusations against crypto wouldn't mean a thing.
right now i see people on one side who say, with an apparently straight face, that by using bitcoin you probably support child pornography, and on the other side i see people who don't care about the opinions of the former camp and are rapidly turning this into the future of the global monetary system. if anyone wants a hand in that future, and in making that future an equitable one, it's time to start getting involved. bitcoin, and crypto at large, has a lot of terrifying implementation potential (imagine, for a second, "welfarecoin," which can only be spent at participating grocery stores and NOT on cigarettes or liquor, for example) and i guarantee you that calling it a pyramid scheme isn't going to stop it from existing.
crypto's environmental concerns are also wildly overblown. i work in ecological restoration and i can think of 5 or 6 things i'd wish people would stop doing before using electricity. i hope no one in this thread took more than a couple flights in their lifetime before covid. and going to bat for gold mining? gold mining???? GOLD MINING????????
there are tons of valuable, meaningful, and important criticisms of cryptocurrency. accusing it of being a "techbro wank fantasy" is not one of them. at one time telephones were a techbro wank fantasy. paper money; techbro wank fantasy. electricity; techbro wank fantasy. it's here to stay and i hope that equity-minded people start to get their heads around its implementations and uses, and strengths and weaknesses, before the other side does.
posted by Cpt. The Mango at 10:18 PM on March 21, 2021 [1 favorite]
« Older Building a log cabin | The Original Nerdy-Sexy-Commie-Girl Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by wenestvedt at 8:20 AM on March 17, 2021 [31 favorites]