4 ms·

A bank account balance is representative value of dollars that bank owes you. If someone tries to steal it by pretending to be you even if they just steal your

A bank account balance is representative value of dollars that bank owes you. If someone tries to steal it by pretending to be you even if they just steal your PIN, they are committing fraud. If someone steals a private key by committing another crime like stealing a laptop, that is a crime because you own the laptop. If they learn of your private key without committing a crime, that is not theft. You don't own 'space on the blockchain.' I have no idea what that even means. You do need to understand elliptic curve cryptography to have confidence (not faith) in bitcoin because you make the transactions in bitcoin. You are responsible, not some third party. People understand the dollar because it is physical and you can get them on demand and they originally got their value from Gold, not some abstraction like proof of spent energy one time awhile back.

modeless 5y ago
The bank PIN is just a number. Your bank account balance is just a number in a database. Your private key is just a number. Your bitcoin balance is just a number in a database (a blockchain is a kind of database). There is no distinction that makes stealing dollars using a bank PIN fraud but stealing bitcoin using a private key not fraud somehow.
- runbathtime 5y ago
  Bank deposits are securities. You have a claim on your bank when you make a deposit. If you think there is no difference between a bank account and a bitcoin private public key pair then bitcoin is a security. You are making the argument bitcoin is a security. Who is the issuer? I would say the miners are selling securities and you give them money (like a deposit) in exchange for the miners continuing to mine in the future, so when you decide to spend your bitcoin, bitcoin will still be running. If bitcoin is a security issued by the miners then yes bitcoin becomes more than just a number.
  - modeless 5y ago
    If bank deposits were securities governed by securities law then they would be regulated by the SEC. They are not. It doesn't matter anyway because Bitcoin is not a bank deposit, nor is it a security. Under the law it is generally treated as property. It's still a crime to steal property. My point is that the fact that it's all numbers in a computer does not make it somehow legal to steal it. What you own is not the abstract number of your private key, but the concrete database entries in a specific blockchain database. While not relevant, it's also not even true in a pedantic sense that you "can't legally own a number". All digital files are simply long numbers, and copyright assigns ownership of those numbers to people. Also, the DeCSS case established de facto ownership of a private key, making it illegal to copy, so yes you can actually have a kind of ownership even of just a private key under the law. Again, not relevant or necessary for Bitcoin, but interesting.
    - runbathtime 5y ago
      You are incorrect. Deposits in banks are securities, I suggest you read this section titled "Every security that is issued must be held by someone until it is retired" here: https://www.hussmanfunds.com/comment/mc210614/ https://www.hussmanfunds.com/comment/mc210614/ Copyright doesn't cover the computer reference machine code number, it covers actual intellectual content. Just like it is not settled whether Ethereum or Bitcoin is a security- thoughts on this can and will change, new regulators get elected... neither is settled whether you can actually say that you own a number. The community has misplaced confidence imo.
      - modeless 5y ago
        We're talking about the law, not some guy's blog. If you believe that bank accounts and Bitcoin are securities under the law, then you are incorrect. It doesn't matter whether some guy calls bank accounts securities on his blog. That doesn't change the law. Saying the law could change is literally always true, it means nothing. Will it change? You could make an argument for Ethereum, and I tend to agree that the community is overconfident about the regulations around Ethereum and other coins. However for Bitcoin specifically the SEC has been very clear and consistent in stating that it is not and has never been a security. Their justifications are sound. So no, it almost certainly won't change for Bitcoin. Copyright covers the specific number in addition to the general intellectual content of the number. You could say it covers a family of related numbers. That's stronger than just covering a single number.

modeless 5y ago

The bank PIN is just a number. Your bank account balance is just a number in a database. Your private key is just a number. Your bitcoin balance is just a number in a database (a blockchain is a kind of database). There is no distinction that makes stealing dollars using a bank PIN fraud but stealing bitcoin using a private key not fraud somehow.

runbathtime 5y ago
Bank deposits are securities. You have a claim on your bank when you make a deposit. If you think there is no difference between a bank account and a bitcoin private public key pair then bitcoin is a security. You are making the argument bitcoin is a security. Who is the issuer? I would say the miners are selling securities and you give them money (like a deposit) in exchange for the miners continuing to mine in the future, so when you decide to spend your bitcoin, bitcoin will still be running. If bitcoin is a security issued by the miners then yes bitcoin becomes more than just a number.
- modeless 5y ago
  If bank deposits were securities governed by securities law then they would be regulated by the SEC. They are not. It doesn't matter anyway because Bitcoin is not a bank deposit, nor is it a security. Under the law it is generally treated as property. It's still a crime to steal property. My point is that the fact that it's all numbers in a computer does not make it somehow legal to steal it. What you own is not the abstract number of your private key, but the concrete database entries in a specific blockchain database. While not relevant, it's also not even true in a pedantic sense that you "can't legally own a number". All digital files are simply long numbers, and copyright assigns ownership of those numbers to people. Also, the DeCSS case established de facto ownership of a private key, making it illegal to copy, so yes you can actually have a kind of ownership even of just a private key under the law. Again, not relevant or necessary for Bitcoin, but interesting.
  - runbathtime 5y ago
    You are incorrect. Deposits in banks are securities, I suggest you read this section titled "Every security that is issued must be held by someone until it is retired" here: https://www.hussmanfunds.com/comment/mc210614/ https://www.hussmanfunds.com/comment/mc210614/ Copyright doesn't cover the computer reference machine code number, it covers actual intellectual content. Just like it is not settled whether Ethereum or Bitcoin is a security- thoughts on this can and will change, new regulators get elected... neither is settled whether you can actually say that you own a number. The community has misplaced confidence imo.
    - modeless 5y ago
      We're talking about the law, not some guy's blog. If you believe that bank accounts and Bitcoin are securities under the law, then you are incorrect. It doesn't matter whether some guy calls bank accounts securities on his blog. That doesn't change the law. Saying the law could change is literally always true, it means nothing. Will it change? You could make an argument for Ethereum, and I tend to agree that the community is overconfident about the regulations around Ethereum and other coins. However for Bitcoin specifically the SEC has been very clear and consistent in stating that it is not and has never been a security. Their justifications are sound. So no, it almost certainly won't change for Bitcoin. Copyright covers the specific number in addition to the general intellectual content of the number. You could say it covers a family of related numbers. That's stronger than just covering a single number.