4 ms·

The implication, that no other nation-state may use force to assert control of a strategic economic resource, is in contradiction with both history and common s

The implication, that no other nation-state may use force to assert control of a strategic economic resource, is in contradiction with both history and common sense. GP is ipso facto calling out lazy casual racism, but framed constructively because they’re better at it than me.

jacksnipe 6y ago
Uh, no, other countries don’t have 65% of the hashing capacity. The USA could put a gun to miners heads, but it wouldn’t give them 51%, so there’s no point.
- inopinatus 6y ago
  Uh-huh. The agencies of, let’s say, the US federal government, or the Kremlin, or similarly those of governments in the UK, France, Germany, all have no history of overseas intervention or onshore direct action to preserve economic interests. Got it.
  - nyolfen 6y ago
    if 51% of hash power were located in the US, the statement would have been about the US. it is not something special about china that makes this the case, only the fact that it is a sovereign state with the means and will to control activity in its territory, just like every other functioning state. one could also make the case that china might be more likely to intervene in such a way in the economic affairs of its subjects than a liberal democracy, but that is a secondary argument.
    - inopinatus 6y ago
      No, China is not a person with a single will. The assumption/assertion that the mining equipment may as well all be sitting under MSS guard in Beijing is horsecrap.
      - renewiltord 6y ago
        It does have a person that can enforce his single will pretty well, though. In any case, you can follow it like this: * Nations desire to control strategic resources * Bitcoin is one such strategic resource * To control Bitcoin, you need more than 50% of the network * China has 65% of the network * China can control Bitcoin
      - Retric 6y ago
        For small scale miners in China it might be a different story. However, if Xi Jinping decided to crush Bitcoin for whatever reason large scale mining in China, which is well past 50%, would quickly do what he wanted. As such he has de facto control over Bitcoin, though I personally doubt it’s something he would do.
        ruined 6y ago
        why do you expect that? you're talking about tens of thousands of individuals and companies, all themselves invested in bitcoin, being asked (through no existing command or enforcement mechanism) to essentially destroy their own personal wealth. even assuming the chinese state could achieve compliance from 77% of the existing hardware, it would optimistically take several days. the only way around that stumbling block would be to mandate centralized control of the miners, which would be impossible to keep secret and would also inspire some sort of reaction. the idea that every miner in china will jump when xi says is pure fantasy.
        Hasnep 6y ago
        Remember, China is a country with concentration camps, so they (the CCP) clearly have the ability and desire to do extreme things and convince their people it's the right thing or that it's not happening.
        ruined 6y ago
        and america has the largest prison population in the world. we still have plenty of people that don't immediately comply with whatever the president says at any moment. yall act like china is populated entirely by robots. it's a complex society just like anywhere else.
  - solveit 6y ago
    If the US sends an army to China in order to seize their mining rigs, then Bitcoin is the least of our problems.
- c-cube 6y ago
  For all we know, the NSA has a ton of secret miners it could switch on suddenly to launch a 51% attack. Prove me wrong . (ok this is the stuff of conspiracy theories but it's still a possibility, isn't it?)
  - topranks 6y ago
    Well I guess the question is, if the US govt (or any other superpower) felt it was in their interest to take over / destroy the blockchain, would they be able to? It seems to me if Bitcoin got to be of huge strategic importance to global finance, countries like the US would start to build out that power. The idea that the economy of say the US was at the mercy of other foreign governments would probably not sit well. This applies to all large powers just using the US as an example.
eloff 6y ago
Casual racism? The Chinese government has 100% power to do whatever they want. If they want to kill you on an invented charge and send the bill for the bullets to your parents, they can do so (and have done so). Yes Western governments can use force to intervene with private companies and have done so in the past, but it's unusual for them to do that because people and companies have rights and they can contest the action in court. That's nothing compared to what China can do with no recourse, see Alibaba or the Canadian Michael's for a recent example. You cannot pretend that the two are similar situations, and doing so is whataboutism. It has nothing to do with race and everything to do with the difference between a free country and a totalitarian country.
- inopinatus 6y ago
  The Chinese government is not China any more than the US government is America or the Kremlin is Russia. Having a go at authoritarian demagoguery and secret police is one thing, have at it. But doubling down on the casual false equivalence between a people, a country, a government, and a person, just reinforces the point. Oh, and when you find a free country, do let me know. I haven’t seen one yet. So far, from Australia to Zimbabwe, all governments coerce and murder their citizens.
  - eloff 6y ago
    The OP was not taking about the Chinese people, he was taking about China the Chinese government. It was very clear to me reading that, I'm not sure why you're all confused.
    - inopinatus 6y ago
      It is no better an assumption than assuming the OP is a man.
      - eloff 6y ago
        Again with the false equivalence. You're just doubling down on being wrong. I'm out of this conversation.

jacksnipe 6y ago

Uh, no, other countries don’t have 65% of the hashing capacity. The USA could put a gun to miners heads, but it wouldn’t give them 51%, so there’s no point.

inopinatus 6y ago
Uh-huh. The agencies of, let’s say, the US federal government, or the Kremlin, or similarly those of governments in the UK, France, Germany, all have no history of overseas intervention or onshore direct action to preserve economic interests. Got it.
- nyolfen 6y ago
  if 51% of hash power were located in the US, the statement would have been about the US. it is not something special about china that makes this the case, only the fact that it is a sovereign state with the means and will to control activity in its territory, just like every other functioning state. one could also make the case that china might be more likely to intervene in such a way in the economic affairs of its subjects than a liberal democracy, but that is a secondary argument.
  - inopinatus 6y ago
    No, China is not a person with a single will. The assumption/assertion that the mining equipment may as well all be sitting under MSS guard in Beijing is horsecrap.
    - renewiltord 6y ago
      It does have a person that can enforce his single will pretty well, though. In any case, you can follow it like this: * Nations desire to control strategic resources * Bitcoin is one such strategic resource * To control Bitcoin, you need more than 50% of the network * China has 65% of the network * China can control Bitcoin
    - Retric 6y ago
      For small scale miners in China it might be a different story. However, if Xi Jinping decided to crush Bitcoin for whatever reason large scale mining in China, which is well past 50%, would quickly do what he wanted. As such he has de facto control over Bitcoin, though I personally doubt it’s something he would do.
      - ruined 6y ago
        why do you expect that? you're talking about tens of thousands of individuals and companies, all themselves invested in bitcoin, being asked (through no existing command or enforcement mechanism) to essentially destroy their own personal wealth. even assuming the chinese state could achieve compliance from 77% of the existing hardware, it would optimistically take several days. the only way around that stumbling block would be to mandate centralized control of the miners, which would be impossible to keep secret and would also inspire some sort of reaction. the idea that every miner in china will jump when xi says is pure fantasy.
        Hasnep 6y ago
        Remember, China is a country with concentration camps, so they (the CCP) clearly have the ability and desire to do extreme things and convince their people it's the right thing or that it's not happening.
        ruined 6y ago
        and america has the largest prison population in the world. we still have plenty of people that don't immediately comply with whatever the president says at any moment. yall act like china is populated entirely by robots. it's a complex society just like anywhere else.
- solveit 6y ago
  If the US sends an army to China in order to seize their mining rigs, then Bitcoin is the least of our problems.
c-cube 6y ago
For all we know, the NSA has a ton of secret miners it could switch on suddenly to launch a 51% attack. Prove me wrong . (ok this is the stuff of conspiracy theories but it's still a possibility, isn't it?)
- topranks 6y ago
  Well I guess the question is, if the US govt (or any other superpower) felt it was in their interest to take over / destroy the blockchain, would they be able to? It seems to me if Bitcoin got to be of huge strategic importance to global finance, countries like the US would start to build out that power. The idea that the economy of say the US was at the mercy of other foreign governments would probably not sit well. This applies to all large powers just using the US as an example.

eloff 6y ago

Casual racism? The Chinese government has 100% power to do whatever they want. If they want to kill you on an invented charge and send the bill for the bullets to your parents, they can do so (and have done so). Yes Western governments can use force to intervene with private companies and have done so in the past, but it's unusual for them to do that because people and companies have rights and they can contest the action in court. That's nothing compared to what China can do with no recourse, see Alibaba or the Canadian Michael's for a recent example. You cannot pretend that the two are similar situations, and doing so is whataboutism. It has nothing to do with race and everything to do with the difference between a free country and a totalitarian country.

inopinatus 6y ago
The Chinese government is not China any more than the US government is America or the Kremlin is Russia. Having a go at authoritarian demagoguery and secret police is one thing, have at it. But doubling down on the casual false equivalence between a people, a country, a government, and a person, just reinforces the point. Oh, and when you find a free country, do let me know. I haven’t seen one yet. So far, from Australia to Zimbabwe, all governments coerce and murder their citizens.
- eloff 6y ago
  The OP was not taking about the Chinese people, he was taking about China the Chinese government. It was very clear to me reading that, I'm not sure why you're all confused.
  - inopinatus 6y ago
    It is no better an assumption than assuming the OP is a man.
    - eloff 6y ago
      Again with the false equivalence. You're just doubling down on being wrong. I'm out of this conversation.