> Bruce's take can be summarized like this: with a blockchain, you're choosing to trust code and cryptography instead of a person. And when immutable code does

> Bruce's take can be summarized like this: with a blockchain, you're choosing to trust code and cryptography instead of a person. And when immutable code does the wrong thing, you can't trust them to fix it like you could a person. Maybe Bruce hasn't heard of the Ethernum DAO fork [0], or the two subsequent forks. The immutable block chain seals a bad decision, then suddenly it wasn't so immutable any more. Just like someone paying you via direct bank transfer is irreversible, right up the money they are transferring was stolen from the bank - then it turns out it's real easy to reverse. Crypto currencies are the tools of people, not the other way round. If we, or in the particular case the miners decide they want the block chain to be mutable, then that is what happens. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethereum#The_DAO_event https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethereum#The_DAO_event