4 ms·

Good luck banning or controlling Bitcoin - especially when there is a satellite streaming down blockchain. I understand their motive though. Large sums of money

Good luck banning or controlling Bitcoin - especially when there is a satellite streaming down blockchain. I understand their motive though. Large sums of money can be used for anything. Including regime change or coup.

matt_wulfeck 9y ago
I think you're underestimating China's ability to "ban" something. They don't need to make it technically impossible, they just need to make it very dangerous and burdensome. And they've basically mastered the art of internet surveillance at this point.
- option_greek 9y ago
  I think they have very few options to control or destroy btc: 1) Force chinese miners to perform 51% attack for them 2) Use their own super computers to do so At the worst btc will fall and another might take its place. I would see these developments are exciting because the decentralization part hasn't been tested much. certainly not by a nation state actor. If BTC survives this, it will truly shine.
  - toomuchtodo 9y ago
    > I think they have very few options to control or destroy btc: 1) Force chinese miners to perform 51% attack for them 2) Use their own super computers to do so Or imprison/execute those found participating in cryptocurrencies. China does both fairly often for other crimes. https://xkcd.com/538/ https://xkcd.com/538/
    - option_greek 9y ago
      I agree. That would be the easiest to do. But in a country as big as China, underground will always flourish despite strict penalties. Even then the punishment can be heavy handed if they perceive crypto currencies as an existential threat to the regime. People forget that Chinese government is the largest and probably last such dictatorship in existence today. It is easy to forget with all the capitalism sugar coat on the top :)
prostoalex 9y ago
> especially when there is a satellite streaming down blockchain If a satellite link can bypass government controls, why has it not been used by Google, FB, New York Times and numerous others banned in China?
- jMyles 9y ago
  Do you really think comparing interactive web apps, which require a bunch of complex di-directional traffic, with a blockchain, which just needs to be routinely copied from a uni-directional source, is fair?
  - prostoalex 9y ago
    Fair enough on Google and Facebook, but my traffic with NYT is pretty uni-directional.
    - jMyles 9y ago
      That's what you think. ;-)
- option_greek 9y ago
  Because to verify a blockchain entry, you only need to download it. To use G,FB or NYT, you need two way traffic (actively sending out a request). Verifying independently this way is important because you wouldn't know if the government has forked the chain otherwise.
  - prostoalex 9y ago
    Well, the entity who needs to verify an entry is typically a miner who'd also be interested in contributing their own entries and being compensated for those contributions. What's the incentive for a miner to stay online in a read-only environment?
    - option_greek 9y ago
bdcravens 9y ago
There's really 2 aspects to Bitcoin regulation: 1) the technology itself (hard to regulate, possibly filtered at firewall level however) and 2) the intersection of Bitcoin and fiat (ie, the exchanges). #2 is much easier to regulate, and in the end, far more effective

matt_wulfeck 9y ago

I think you're underestimating China's ability to "ban" something. They don't need to make it technically impossible, they just need to make it very dangerous and burdensome. And they've basically mastered the art of internet surveillance at this point.

option_greek 9y ago
I think they have very few options to control or destroy btc: 1) Force chinese miners to perform 51% attack for them 2) Use their own super computers to do so At the worst btc will fall and another might take its place. I would see these developments are exciting because the decentralization part hasn't been tested much. certainly not by a nation state actor. If BTC survives this, it will truly shine.
- toomuchtodo 9y ago
  > I think they have very few options to control or destroy btc: 1) Force chinese miners to perform 51% attack for them 2) Use their own super computers to do so Or imprison/execute those found participating in cryptocurrencies. China does both fairly often for other crimes. https://xkcd.com/538/ https://xkcd.com/538/
  - option_greek 9y ago
    I agree. That would be the easiest to do. But in a country as big as China, underground will always flourish despite strict penalties. Even then the punishment can be heavy handed if they perceive crypto currencies as an existential threat to the regime. People forget that Chinese government is the largest and probably last such dictatorship in existence today. It is easy to forget with all the capitalism sugar coat on the top :)

prostoalex 9y ago

> especially when there is a satellite streaming down blockchain If a satellite link can bypass government controls, why has it not been used by Google, FB, New York Times and numerous others banned in China?

jMyles 9y ago
Do you really think comparing interactive web apps, which require a bunch of complex di-directional traffic, with a blockchain, which just needs to be routinely copied from a uni-directional source, is fair?
- prostoalex 9y ago
  Fair enough on Google and Facebook, but my traffic with NYT is pretty uni-directional.
  - jMyles 9y ago
    That's what you think. ;-)
option_greek 9y ago
Because to verify a blockchain entry, you only need to download it. To use G,FB or NYT, you need two way traffic (actively sending out a request). Verifying independently this way is important because you wouldn't know if the government has forked the chain otherwise.
- prostoalex 9y ago
  Well, the entity who needs to verify an entry is typically a miner who'd also be interested in contributing their own entries and being compensated for those contributions. What's the incentive for a miner to stay online in a read-only environment?
  - option_greek 9y ago

bdcravens 9y ago

There's really 2 aspects to Bitcoin regulation: 1) the technology itself (hard to regulate, possibly filtered at firewall level however) and 2) the intersection of Bitcoin and fiat (ie, the exchanges). #2 is much easier to regulate, and in the end, far more effective