4 ms·

> Money that works even where traditional systems fail. Just playing devils advocate, but isn’t it’s usage reliant on traditional systems like electricity, ISP

> Money that works even where traditional systems fail. Just playing devils advocate, but isn’t it’s usage reliant on traditional systems like electricity, ISPs, hardware makers, software makers, mining operations, etc? Say you were in California during rolling blackouts, or Florida post hurricane that knocks the power out for weeks, or an authoritative country that has historically turned the internet off on its citizens during protests/uprisings. How would it all work?

porknubbins 5y ago
I believe cell towers in hurricane threatened places like Florida plan for generator backups and flood countermeasures etc. That said I'm sure throughput is squeezed, but I don't think anyone really plans for a catastrophic scenario where large numbers of US residents lose all internet. Kind of like saying "what good is Bitcoin during a hurricane Katrina scenario" but by that point its survival, not money you're worried about.
- parineum 5y ago
  People often buy things with money to survive.
- tolbish 5y ago
  Surely enough, the people at Disaster Radio [0] are passionately working on this very problem. [0] https://disaster.radio/ https://disaster.radio/
killerstorm 5y ago
Well, you need very little to use Bitcoin - basically, just internet access. And, potentially, you only need to smuggle as little as 250 bytes. Banking systems has more choke points. If money is on your bank account and it gets blocked, that's it, nothing can be done about it. With Bitcoin, even if internet in the entire country is blocked, you still have options: you can transmit data by phone. There are many ways to smuggle 250 bytes out of a country. You can also just memorize the mnemonic phrase (so-called brainwallet) and move yourself out. They won't find your bitcoins even if they strip-search you. (But if they know you have them, wrench attack might work, no defense against that if your privacy is compromised.) All the other things are not necessary for using cryptocurrency, they just need to happen somewhere. So the system can route around the damage. Mining is not possible in your country? That's OK, it will work as long as there's at least one country where mining is possible. So Bitcoin resilience is not about working when power is out, obviously. It is about giving people options to route around the damage. If your bank blocks you, you can't go to another bank to get money on your account, since that money resides within a particular bank. But Bitcoin is global - you can access your funds from any computer in any country, as long as you have a private key.
- ineedasername 5y ago
  Banking systems has more choke points Those banking systems are the primary method of turning fiat into bitcoin & vice versa, so those banking choke points are defacto choke points for bitcoin as well.
  - meowkit 5y ago
    Assuming you always have to flow back to fiat? At some point we will have CBDCs which crypto exchanges and banks will support, so legacy bank chokepoints should disappear altogether.
    - ineedasername 5y ago
      Doesn't have to flow back, but it does have to flow in to begin with, and banks are the choke point in either direction.
    - vineyardmike 5y ago
      I don't know how many people want to get paid in crypto yet. I'm sure someone is fine with it.
      - ClumsyPilot 5y ago
        In prague we have bitcoin can machines and I paid for a beer with it in like 2016. Not that beer is worth more than it's wieght in gold
inter_netuser 5y ago
Transactions are very small and can be even sent via HAM radio, or weak satellite link. There are also devices for offline transactions.
- vineyardmike 5y ago
  Not to counter the point you're making, because it's valid. Just tossing in some info: > sent via HAM radio You probably want to transmit your private key in a secure manner. HAM radio is not a good way to do this: http://www.arrl.org/news/fcc-dismisses-encryption-petition http://www.arrl.org/news/fcc-dismisses-encryption-petition
  - dandongus 5y ago
    You don't transmit your private key.
  - inter_netuser 5y ago
    what's being transmitted is a signed transaction, they are not encrypted. They can be safely transmitted on a postcard. You are correct in that technically HAM does not allow for encrypted communications, but that's not an issue here, and probably would be very low on the list of concerns in a situation where your only comms channel is HAM.
- throwaway_kufu 5y ago
  Sure, but The point was how Bitcoin and crypto would “work” when traditional legacy systems fail. Relying on HAM radios and satellite links are both legacy systems and we can’t pretend any significant percentage of the global populace could conduct Bitcoin transactions without centralized 3rd party services subject to the same regulations as the banks, much less use HAM radios, especially the poor and unbanked who always seem to be the goto demographic the proponents of cryptocurrency point to as the people benefiting greatly from cryptocurrency. It’s on par with saying when supply chains fail we have farming, hunting and gathering. Very few people are capable of getting fresh water much less living off the fat of the land. I like the technology and do see it as still in the early stages of adoption, but I liked the freedom of the early internet, unfortunately that didn’t stop SV and VC money from putting a strangle hold on it, making it the shit-hole sandboxes it is today, exploiting people and farming their attention and data for advertising dollars.

porknubbins 5y ago

I believe cell towers in hurricane threatened places like Florida plan for generator backups and flood countermeasures etc. That said I'm sure throughput is squeezed, but I don't think anyone really plans for a catastrophic scenario where large numbers of US residents lose all internet. Kind of like saying "what good is Bitcoin during a hurricane Katrina scenario" but by that point its survival, not money you're worried about.

parineum 5y ago
People often buy things with money to survive.
tolbish 5y ago
Surely enough, the people at Disaster Radio [0] are passionately working on this very problem. [0] https://disaster.radio/ https://disaster.radio/

killerstorm 5y ago

Well, you need very little to use Bitcoin - basically, just internet access. And, potentially, you only need to smuggle as little as 250 bytes. Banking systems has more choke points. If money is on your bank account and it gets blocked, that's it, nothing can be done about it. With Bitcoin, even if internet in the entire country is blocked, you still have options: you can transmit data by phone. There are many ways to smuggle 250 bytes out of a country. You can also just memorize the mnemonic phrase (so-called brainwallet) and move yourself out. They won't find your bitcoins even if they strip-search you. (But if they know you have them, wrench attack might work, no defense against that if your privacy is compromised.) All the other things are not necessary for using cryptocurrency, they just need to happen somewhere. So the system can route around the damage. Mining is not possible in your country? That's OK, it will work as long as there's at least one country where mining is possible. So Bitcoin resilience is not about working when power is out, obviously. It is about giving people options to route around the damage. If your bank blocks you, you can't go to another bank to get money on your account, since that money resides within a particular bank. But Bitcoin is global - you can access your funds from any computer in any country, as long as you have a private key.

ineedasername 5y ago
Banking systems has more choke points Those banking systems are the primary method of turning fiat into bitcoin & vice versa, so those banking choke points are defacto choke points for bitcoin as well.
- meowkit 5y ago
  Assuming you always have to flow back to fiat? At some point we will have CBDCs which crypto exchanges and banks will support, so legacy bank chokepoints should disappear altogether.
  - ineedasername 5y ago
    Doesn't have to flow back, but it does have to flow in to begin with, and banks are the choke point in either direction.
  - vineyardmike 5y ago
    I don't know how many people want to get paid in crypto yet. I'm sure someone is fine with it.
    - ClumsyPilot 5y ago
      In prague we have bitcoin can machines and I paid for a beer with it in like 2016. Not that beer is worth more than it's wieght in gold

inter_netuser 5y ago

Transactions are very small and can be even sent via HAM radio, or weak satellite link. There are also devices for offline transactions.

vineyardmike 5y ago
Not to counter the point you're making, because it's valid. Just tossing in some info: > sent via HAM radio You probably want to transmit your private key in a secure manner. HAM radio is not a good way to do this: http://www.arrl.org/news/fcc-dismisses-encryption-petition http://www.arrl.org/news/fcc-dismisses-encryption-petition
- dandongus 5y ago
  You don't transmit your private key.
- inter_netuser 5y ago
  what's being transmitted is a signed transaction, they are not encrypted. They can be safely transmitted on a postcard. You are correct in that technically HAM does not allow for encrypted communications, but that's not an issue here, and probably would be very low on the list of concerns in a situation where your only comms channel is HAM.
throwaway_kufu 5y ago
Sure, but The point was how Bitcoin and crypto would “work” when traditional legacy systems fail. Relying on HAM radios and satellite links are both legacy systems and we can’t pretend any significant percentage of the global populace could conduct Bitcoin transactions without centralized 3rd party services subject to the same regulations as the banks, much less use HAM radios, especially the poor and unbanked who always seem to be the goto demographic the proponents of cryptocurrency point to as the people benefiting greatly from cryptocurrency. It’s on par with saying when supply chains fail we have farming, hunting and gathering. Very few people are capable of getting fresh water much less living off the fat of the land. I like the technology and do see it as still in the early stages of adoption, but I liked the freedom of the early internet, unfortunately that didn’t stop SV and VC money from putting a strangle hold on it, making it the shit-hole sandboxes it is today, exploiting people and farming their attention and data for advertising dollars.